Fusion is easy

Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:42:56 -0800

A message on another forum got me to thinking about a possible cross-over regime between LENR, particularly Mizuno-type glow discharge, and the seemingly unrelated IEC warm fusion (Farnsworth Fusor).
 
Check out this "Homemade Amateur Nuclear Fusion Reactor" :
 
Jon Rosenstiel's Fusor (shown here): This small fusor currently holds the amateur record with a fusion output of 10^7 (100 million") fusion reactions per second. This is rock-solid robust fusion, but there is little scale-up potential for the Fusor (in contrast to CF) because the tiny central "convergence reaction zone" gets less-efficient, the larger it is.
 
Although this reaction rate of 10^7 is quite impressive in terms of neutrons, especially compared to LENR reactions, it is actually farther from energy breakeven than is CF in terms of P-in to P-out, but it does have *striking QM implications,* and may point the way towards an enhancement technique for hybrid-LENR (unfortunately in a relatively complicated experiment.)
 
Many observers nowadays (R. Mills in particular) are trying to re-write Quantum Mechanics in keeping with new discoveries. I will leave that subject of the experts, but for the purposes of this idea, let us assume that there is a QM "probability distribution curve" for tunneling fusion, which curve can be enhanced merely by proximity to ongoing reactions of the same type.
 
This is an off-shoot of quantum entanglement, which is a proven phenomenon, to some degree. There are Russian experiments which claim this kind of enhancement, and some older work in CF also claims to benefit this (Nelson Ying) but his work was flawed from the start and never reproduced. Not surprising, in retrospect.
 
I think the reason that the Ying experiment was not reproduced is clear now. He was thinking, and wrongly asserting, that "any kind" of external gamma source would raise the QM probability for CF, a glaring error ! ...which error was made all the more unfortunate, because he may have been 'half-right' insofar as the single issue of entanglement is concerned. BUT because he tried to 'cut corners' with the specific way in which entanglement is applied, he ended up 'poisoning' what would have been a great underlying idea with a badly-conceived implementation.
 
The clear consequence of the QM entanglement-theory is that the correlation is very specific as to cross-identity, and is not related to simply any gamma emission, per se. There is also the related A-B effect, which might have some application to cold fusion, in that the magnetic vector potential of *specific* gamma radiation, may end up being the transfer medium for entanglement (in the broadest sense). I am trying to find some online references for just the 'entanglement part' of the equation - from other related fields, but for now - this is just a rough hypothesis.
 
Here is a college physics lecture by Ludwik Kowalski which offers some background concerning QM probability and tunneling
He stops short of the treatment of Quantum entanglement, which is a quantum mechanical phenomenon in which the quantum states of two or more proximate objects must be described with mutual reference to each other, even though the individual objects may be spatially separated.
 
This leads to "strange" correlations between observable physical properties of the systems. For example, it is possible to prepare two particles in a single quantum state such that when one is observed to be spin-up, the other one will always be observed to be spin-down - and vice versa. This despite the fact that it is impossible to predict, using quantum mechanics, which set of measurements will be observed. The A-B (or Aharonov-Bohm) effect is connected to entanglement and violation of Bell Inequality and one suspects that the modality is the magnetic vector potential of whatever radiation is present.
 
Using that as a jumping-off point, (and it is admittedly a big leap) there is this anecdotal evidence that the QM probability in cold fusion is enhanced by proximity to ongoing reactions of the same type, because of quantum entanglement. IOW in looking at reaction rates, there are classical and QM probability distribution curves - which do vary significantly - by many orders of magnitude. But then there is also this enhanced QM probability curve based upon proximity to ongoing reactions of the same kind, which might be orders of magnitude higher yet.
 
IF this were true, then a combined Fusor/LENR device might possess enough **synergy** (derived from QM entanglement) to push it over the top, in terms of energy breakeven. 
 
Actually if you can get any small device to produce 10^11 neutrons per second (about 10,000 times more than the Fusor mentioned above but still less than net breakeven) then voila, you have essentially created the "enabling technology" for the small subcritical natural uranium reactor, the Gaia reactor, which is potentially "cleaner" and safer than burning coal. But that is another story.
 
Back to the combined Fusor/glow discharge hybrid. I envision this as a small grapefruit sized Fusor, layered in another sphere, the external surface of the Fusor (composed of nickel or titanium) which surface also doubles as the glow discharge electrode of a Mizuno-type LENR cell. This might entail some changes in operation of the Fusor, but these changes are common across the range of design for this device. The beauty of this hybrid is that you have a low-density plasma inside, which is robust but which is severely limited in terms of scale-up potential BUT you also have this high density surrounding layer, which essentially unlimited as to scale-up potential, but which is NOT robust. As with all synergy, one tries to combine strength with strength to eliminate both weaknesses.
 
BTW, for this envisioned application, you want to AVOID the D+D --> 4He reaction, in favor of the 3He plus neutron reaction (the 3H reaction also ends up in an immediate secondary reaction and a higher energy neutron. This concept is probably most valuable as a pure high flux neutron source, and I don't mind saying at first glance it seems to be one of my better uses of two hours of tossing around a flash of inspiration in the "grey lab".
 
There are lots of geometry and other constraints operating here, but the combination should work to the benefit of both reactions IF there really is an enhanced probability in the sense of QM entanglement operating to alter the likelihood of tunneling in the LENR case, and then that reaction operating in the reverse, on the kinetic side (which is also a tunneling reaction, but one limited by focusing geometry).
 
Now the sad realization.
 
This is just one more (of many examples ) of possible promising lines for experimental work, which is indicative of the broad range of unexplored avenues which exist now in the field of LENR.... BUT... which will never get much more than this kind of casual mention, without a large influx of R&D funding from government. This is too way too risky and hypothetical for the normal capitalist system of financing R&D.
 
One can only suspect that a viable answer to "energy independence" is out there now, and is even close-by, and has probably been mentioned here before... but with the present intransigence of the DoE, which is still 15 years behind-the-curve, and with a paucity of other funding sources, some of these potentially good ideas will wither away... while men dressed in keffiyehs stand in line to deposit billions of hard-earned American dollars in Swiss banks.
 
Jones

Reply via email to