Re: [Vo]:Spacecraft of the Future Could Be Powered By Lattice Confinement Fusion
Hi, Consider this, to split a deuteron costs 2.2 MeV. Hot fusion of two deuterons yields about 4 MeV. At best this would never yield more than about a factor of 2and that's not taking into account any of the losses. And those losses will be very significant. 1) Maybe 1% of the electrons will create significant x-rays, of which only a fraction will have the requisite minimum energy of 2.2 MeV. => most of the electron energy ends up as heat. 2) Only a fraction of the 2.2 MeV or greater x-rays will split a deuteron (1%?). The rest just ionize atoms and end up as heat. 3) Of the split deuterons, only a fraction will produce neutrons with even the minimal energy required to fuse two deuterons (5 keV? - but the more the better). 4) Of those neutrons, only a fraction will actually accelerate a deuteron resulting in a fusion reaction. 5) A fusion reaction will primarily create two energetic particles, both of which can further accelerate other deuterons, however only a tiny fraction of them will actually do so. Most will simply lose energy ionizing surrounding atoms, and end up as heat. In all, I think they would be lucky to get even one part in a million of the electron beam energy out as fusion energy, if the proposed method were actually an accurate description of what happens in their reactor.
Re: [Vo]:Spacecraft of the Future Could Be Powered By Lattice Confinement Fusion
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 6 Aug 2020 02:58:16 + (UTC): Hi, [snip] > Ha! The new and improved new wording is interesting in a semantic sense... > but get real... > >Of course it is the demon cold fusion, but now we can pivot around that stigma >and instead present it all in on a different geometry... very little changes >but the word salad. The difference is the energetic electron beam. They are now getting dangerously close to my invention, or at least the version of it that I dropped 10 years ago. :) I doubt they will have much luck increasing the efficiency. Too many different ways for a fast neutron to avoid colliding with and accelerating a deuteron. Also too many ways for the x-rays to avoid splitting a deuteron. Also too few bremsstrahlung x-rays with enough energy to split a deuteron (2.2 MeV). All loss paths lead to inefficiency.
Re: [Vo]:Spacecraft of the Future Could Be Powered By Lattice Confinement Fusion
In reply to Jack Cole's message of Wed, 5 Aug 2020 21:28:45 -0500: Hi, [snip] >They are careful to say it's not CF. Sure seems like it originated in CF ...sounds a bit like Let Us Confuse You. ;) >methods. > >https://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/energy/nuclear/nuclear-fusiontokamak-not-included
Re: [Vo]:Spacecraft of the Future Could Be Powered By Lattice Confinement Fusion
Ha! The new and improved new wording is interesting in a semantic sense... but get real... Of course it is the demon cold fusion, but now we can pivot around that stigma and instead present it all in on a different geometry... very little changes but the word salad. IOW it is the same old cold fusion (of P/F) that we know and lover ... no substantial difference at all... but now we differentiate so that it is very hot at the femtoscale and warm everywhere else... exactly like it has been for the past 31 years when the perspective is the much larger dimensional frame of reference. I think Larry Forsley must be getting a big laugh out of this :-) On Wednesday, August 5, 2020, 7:31:16 PM PDT, Jack Cole wrote: They are careful to say it's not CF. Sure seems like it originated in CF methods. https://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/energy/nuclear/nuclear-fusiontokamak-not-included
[Vo]:Spacecraft of the Future Could Be Powered By Lattice Confinement Fusion
They are careful to say it's not CF. Sure seems like it originated in CF methods. https://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/energy/nuclear/nuclear-fusiontokamak-not-included
Re: [Vo]:[EE] Wireless power transmission
On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 4:28 PM Michael Foster wrote: ... > Similar methods have been proposed to send power to earth from orbiting solar cell arrays, and probably just as impractical. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/9/x-37b-space-planes-microwave-power-beam-experiment-is-a-way-bigger-deal-than-it-seems
Re: [Vo]:[EE] Wireless power transmission
I see what you mean. I was unaware of their focused beam method. OTOH, Tesla did invent radio as we know it , but no one seems to know that.. I'm not a slavish Tesla fan, but the history is reasonably clear. This system wouldn't solve the power distribution problem either, since the lack of enough copper happens at the lower voltage distribution level. Similar methods have been proposed to send power to earth from orbiting solar cell arrays, and probably just as impractical. Visions of birds and small aircraft being vaporized if they accidentally cross the beam come to mind. On Wednesday, August 5, 2020, 07:42:44 PM UTC, Robin wrote: In reply to Michael Foster's message of Wed, 5 Aug 2020 18:13:13 + (UTC): Hi, [snip] >I read this article. Don't you find it more than a little annoying that Mr. >Tesla is nowhere mentioned? There's a good reason for that. The two technologies have nothing in common. Tesla used the Earth as a capacitor so that everyone was "in" the capacitor, and attached to one of the plates. This company is using conventional wireless, but in a tight beam. > >This is important. No doubt everyone other than auto mechanics and people who >like the hear the vroom-vroom would like to switch to electric cars. The >problem is there doesn't seem to be enough copper wire to carry all the >current required to charge all the batteries in all the electric cars. Last >time I did some rough figuring, it seemed as if the maximum number of electric >cars would be about 10% of all vehicles before the power grid was over taxed. >Look at what happens when there are brown-outs on hot days. Those air >conditioners don't draw anywhere near the current required to charge a 100% >electric car fleet. I doubt mobile applications of this technology would be possible, if there were that many targets that had to be followed with a tight beam. Besides, the beam is dangerous. Worse than sitting in a microwave oven. That's why they talk about remote areas, and a laser curtain to detect intrusion into the beam. It wouldn't be suitable for use within an urban environment. It could however be used to transport power from a remote power plant to the top of a tall construction on the outskirts of a city, although it would be difficult to keep light aircraft from crossing the beam I should imagine. [snip]
Re: [Vo]:[EE] Wireless power transmission
In reply to Michael Foster's message of Wed, 5 Aug 2020 18:13:13 + (UTC): Hi, [snip] >I read this article. Don't you find it more than a little annoying that Mr. >Tesla is nowhere mentioned? There's a good reason for that. The two technologies have nothing in common. Tesla used the Earth as a capacitor so that everyone was "in" the capacitor, and attached to one of the plates. This company is using conventional wireless, but in a tight beam. > >This is important. No doubt everyone other than auto mechanics and people who >like the hear the vroom-vroom would like to switch to electric cars. The >problem is there doesn't seem to be enough copper wire to carry all the >current required to charge all the batteries in all the electric cars. Last >time I did some rough figuring, it seemed as if the maximum number of electric >cars would be about 10% of all vehicles before the power grid was over taxed. >Look at what happens when there are brown-outs on hot days. Those air >conditioners don't draw anywhere near the current required to charge a 100% >electric car fleet. I doubt mobile applications of this technology would be possible, if there were that many targets that had to be followed with a tight beam. Besides, the beam is dangerous. Worse than sitting in a microwave oven. That's why they talk about remote areas, and a laser curtain to detect intrusion into the beam. It wouldn't be suitable for use within an urban environment. It could however be used to transport power from a remote power plant to the top of a tall construction on the outskirts of a city, although it would be difficult to keep light aircraft from crossing the beam I should imagine. [snip]
Re: [Vo]:[EE] Wireless power transmission
On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 2:13 PM Michael Foster wrote: > I read this article. Don't you find it more than a little annoying that > Mr. Tesla is nowhere mentioned? > Hell yes! I bet they can't even spell Wardencliff! Don't need copper if everyone roofed their house with solar shingles! Cheers!
Re: [Vo]:[EE] Wireless power transmission
I read it but it seemed flakey. This could be closer to scam than to reality. No one really knows the loss-rate of wireless for high power uses or the dangers involved. There is not much reason to suspect that there is a breakthrough here nor that this makes either scientific or economic sense, other than the mention of Tesla, but since they apparently are not using Tesla as a reference - where is their data? On Wednesday, August 5, 2020, 11:13:24 AM PDT, Michael Foster wrote: I read this article. Don't you find it more than a little annoying that Mr. Tesla is nowhere mentioned? This is important. No doubt everyone other than auto mechanics and people who like the hear the vroom-vroom would like to switch to electric cars. The problem is there doesn't seem to be enough copper wire to carry all the current required to charge all the batteries in all the electric cars. Last time I did some rough figuring, it seemed as if the maximum number of electric cars would be about 10% of all vehicles before the power grid was over taxed. Look at what happens when there are brown-outs on hot days. Those air conditioners don't draw anywhere near the current required to charge a 100% electric car fleet. Wireless power transmission, if really workable, would solve this problem. Autos themselves could be set up to receive the power transmission, thereby eliminating the requirement for such large batteries. On Wednesday, August 5, 2020, 02:50:34 AM UTC, MJ wrote: https://emrod.energy/press-release-nz-start-up-launches-world-first-long-range-wireless-power-transmission/
Re: [Vo]:[EE] Wireless power transmission
I read this article. Don't you find it more than a little annoying that Mr. Tesla is nowhere mentioned? This is important. No doubt everyone other than auto mechanics and people who like the hear the vroom-vroom would like to switch to electric cars. The problem is there doesn't seem to be enough copper wire to carry all the current required to charge all the batteries in all the electric cars. Last time I did some rough figuring, it seemed as if the maximum number of electric cars would be about 10% of all vehicles before the power grid was over taxed. Look at what happens when there are brown-outs on hot days. Those air conditioners don't draw anywhere near the current required to charge a 100% electric car fleet. Wireless power transmission, if really workable, would solve this problem. Autos themselves could be set up to receive the power transmission, thereby eliminating the requirement for such large batteries. On Wednesday, August 5, 2020, 02:50:34 AM UTC, MJ wrote: https://emrod.energy/press-release-nz-start-up-launches-world-first-long-range-wireless-power-transmission/
