This is a very good idea. It will shield muon release and optimize energy production through fission which will yield 200 MeV per fission.
A liquid molten salt blanket will allow easy extraction of heat using a molten salt to CO2 heat exchanger. A few corrections No laser => no proton decay => no muons => no fission. On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:33 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 25 Jan 2017 12:31:15 -0800: > Hi, > > You would get a far greater yield from your muons, if you use muon > catalyzed T-D > fusion to create 14 MeV neutrons that directly fission a Thorium blanket. > This is because each muon can catalyze about 100 fusion reactions, which > means > about 100 fast neutrons per muon. 14 MeV neutrons are more than fast > enough to > fission Th (or any Actinide for that matter, including U238) directly > without > conversion to a fissile isotope. (See nuclear weapon design). > Furthermore a few of those fission reactions will also create neutrons fast > enough to fission other nuclei. > > Just build a cylindrical blanket of thorium with a D-T mix along the axis. > Then > shoot the muons down the length of the axis. > Or in Holmlid's case, fire a laser beam along the axis. > The thermal output of the reactor is easily regulated by controlling the > pulse > frequency of the laser. > No laser => no fusion => no neutrons => no fission. > > "Runaway" not possible, because the fuel isn't fissile anyway. > > >Thirty to forty years ago, *muon-induced fission* was a hot topic. > > > >Most of the radioactive heavy metal actinides were found to undergo > >prompt or delayed fission when placed in a muon flux. This includes > >thorium. The coupling is not huge but it is significant. > > > >However, at that time the economics of producing large numbers of muons > >was prohibitive and the field of inquiry dried up. Here is an old paper. > > > >http://www.iaea.org/inis/collection/NCLCollectionStore/ > _Public/12/609/12609441.pdf > > > >Muons were produced in a beam line for most of these studies. There is > >no possibility of a self-sustaining chain reaction, as with neutron > >mediated fission, although fission does produce some additional muons. > >Thus, a high flux must be maintained. > > > >But... fast forward forty years to Holmlid, and reassess the situation > >... What if muons can be produced millions of time easier and cheaper, > >using UDD and the Holmlid effect? > > > >If he is correct, a heavy flux of muons is produced via laser instead of > >beam line, meaning that size can be reduced greatly and cost and form > >factor minimized. When thorium is the target for muon induced fission, > >it becomes useful without adding fissile material and it is far more > >plentiful than uranium and the proliferation risk disappears as well as > >90% of the cost of dealing with neutrons and critical mass. > > > >Win, win, win, win. > > > >This is a paradigm shift in assumptions, leading to something > >unexpected. "Small-scale fission courtesy of cold fusion." > > > >Even Holmlid has overlooked the possibility of muon-induced fission of > >thorium (at least it does not turn up in a search of his papers. > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html > >
