The atmosphere in the fusor is only about 40 microns of D2 gas. Only the small central, vanishingly small dot in the center of the fusor has higher concentration of D2. You would be better off just bringing the muon source nearby a high pressure lecture bottle of D2 gas. Forget the fusor. You could use the lecture bottle of D2 as a test of whether muons are being produced. If it gets hot close by, then muons may be indicated. If it gets hot only on the side of the lecture bottle facing the muons, then some other particle may be indicated. It will depend on the energy of the muons. They may need to be moderated before MCF will occur in D2 gas. In the case of the lecture bottle, they would need to have enough energy to go through the steel wall, but not so much energy that they have a low cross-section for MCF.
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 8:59 AM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > Bob, > > The Holmlid device with its massive output (claimed) needs only to be > nearby, so that some of its muon production ends up in the Fusor. It need > not be attached at all. In fact, the risk would be too many muons. > > Presumably the muons would go through the walls of the Fusor so even a > thru-port is not needed. > > Obviously, the muon production is the big mystery of the Holmlid device to > be solved, but in general a Fusor could be the easiest and perhaps the > cheapest way to confirm muons. > Bob Higgins wrote: > > The reasons that fusor's work is that they produce a near singularity in > energy density/confinement in the center of the device. If you put > anything anywhere near the center of the fusor, it would screw up the 3D > radial symmetry of the fields and the singularity-like confinement may not > occur. I think it may be a significantly different design to incorporate > Holmlid's metal onto which his UHD accumulates. > > > >> On a slightly different slant -- further thinking about "the borderline" >> between hot and cold fusion, in the context of the Holmlid device (being a >> little of both), brings up another overlooked approach. Or maybe I have >> missed it and Holmlid will be doing this as his next hat trick. >> >> A streamlined Holmlid laser unit could be combined in the role as hot >> fusion driver for MCF (muon catalyzed fusion) but that normally would >> involve a huge expense - maybe a Tokomak. Yet a quicker pathway to >> small-scale hot fusion is almost too obvious, thanks to Philo. >> >> The goal would be to convert the Farnsworth Fusor into a muon catalyzed >> fusion device by placing a Holmlid laser subsystem nearby (in order to feed >> muons into the convergence zone of the Fusor). This could actually be tried >> on almost any existing Fusor... even without a thru-port... in order to >> test the concept. >> >> If it works, more lasers could be used, placed around the circumference >> in an optimized way. It is assumed that most muons would not be absorbed >> but even a few should be noticeable ... since actual deuterium fusion is >> already taking place at a low rate in the Fusor. If this rate is multiplied >> then viola ... we have made a giant step with little expense. >> >> There is a thread on Fusor.net on "muon injection", but it does not seem >> to mention Holmlid's easy path to making muons (claimed). Other threads >> mention Holmlid, but not the obvious tactic of using the two kinds of >> devices together. How could they miss this? >> >> http://www.fusor.net/board/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=5061 >> >> The Fusor is the most compact way ever devised to produce hot fusion and >> they are inexpensive to build - but below breakeven by a large factor and >> do not scale up. Holmlid believes that he is already seeing thermal gain >> This is a great match with instant scale up. >> >> A Fusor could be equipped with one or more Holmlid laser setups could >> show massive synergy if the claims of muons are accurate - and best of all, >> the increased rate of neutron production would be instant proof of concept. >> In fact this could be the cheapest way to confirm Holmlid and push the >> technology forward at the same time. >> >> Caveat. Even school-boy- built Fusors have produced dangerous levels of >> neutrons. Shielding would be necessary ... but Borax is cheap. >> >> > >
