Alan Smith Shane D. David Nygren
Not sure where to put this.
Has Nathaniel been discussed here? This is LCF cold hot fusion CMNS plasma REGINALD Little concepts
They reference#8#9 Jones89et.al. not Pons Fleischmann
Thanks
Gregory
Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory is a United States Department of Energy national laboratory for plasma physics and nuclear fusion science. Its primary mission is research into and development of fusion as an energy source
https://w3.pppl.gov/~fisch/fischpapers/Son_Chain_react.pdf
Pycnonuclear reaction and possible chain reactions in an ultra-dense DT plasma
Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, Princeton University
- April 2005
Acknowledgements
The authors thank R. Kulsrud, G. Hammett, S. Ichimaru, and S. Cohen for useful discussions. This work was supported by a US DOE under contract AC02-76CH0-3073.R
Quote (pg 2/11)
The electrostatic effects still can be, if large, expressed as a multiplicative factor [6,7].
However, in an ultra dense plasma, even the reacting nuclei are bound in a Coulomb lattice.
To obtain the fusion reaction rate in this regime, quite different methods must be used.
While the so-called cold fusion reactions [8,9] also have employed this pycnonuclear fusion concept,...
....it must be emphasized that the pycnonuclear fusion reaction itself is generally accepted theory [1], even if general acceptance has not been accorded to all the effects to which it has been associated.
A prominent feature of the pycnonuclear reactions....is that the fusion rate is extremely sensitive to the density,...but almost independent of the temperature.
7. Conclusion
We show that, in an ultra dense D–T plasma with ρ = 106 (g cm−3), the pycnonuclear reaction might
be observable in the laboratory although it is not yet clear whether such a dense and cold condition can be achieved. We also show that the local field correction and relativistic correction increase the rate by 40%. We also predict a chain reaction regime.
References
[1] A.G.W. Cameron, Astrophys. J. 130 (1959) 916.
[2] H. Kitamura, Astrophys. J. 539 (2000) 888.
[3] S. Ichimaru, H. Kitamura, Phys. Plasmas 6 (1999) 2649.
[4] E.E. Salpeter, Aust. J. Phys. 7 (1954) 373.
[5] A.V. Gruzinov, J.N. Bahcall, Astrophys. J. 504 (1998) 996.
[6] S. Ichimaru, Rev. Mod. Phys. 65 (1993) 255.
[7] H.E. Dewitt, H.C. Graboske, Astrophys. J. 181 (1973) 439.
[8] S.E. Jones, Nature 338 (1989) 737.
[9] S.E. Jones, D.L. Decker, H.D.
Tolley, Nature 343 (1990) 703.
[10] E.E. Salpeter, H.M. Van Horn, Astrophys. J. 155 (1969) 183.
[11] H.M. Van Horn, Astrophys. J. 151 (1968) 227.
[12] C.J. Horowitz, Astrophys. J. 367 (1991) 288.
[13] S. Ichimaru, H. Kitamura, Phys. Plasmas 7 (2000) 3482.
[14] S. Ichimaru, Phys. Plasmas 8 (2001) 4284.
[15] H. Kitamura, S. Ichimaru, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 65 (1996) 1250.
[16] N.J. Fisch, J.M. Rax, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68 (1992) 612.
[17] N.J. Fisch, M.C. Herrmann, Nucl. Fusion 34 (1994) 1541.
[18] S. Ichimaru, S. Mitake, S. Tanaka, X. Yan, Phys. Rev. A 32
(1985) 1768.
[19] S. Ichimaru, K. Utsumi, Astrophys. J. 269 (1983) L51.
[20] B. Jancovici, Nuovo Cimento 26 (1962) 428.
[21] W.B. Hubbard, T. Guillot, J.I. Lunine, Phys. Plasmas 4 (1997)
2011.
[22] D.H.E. Dubin, T.M. O’Neil, Rev. Mod. Phys. 71 (1999) 87.
[23] H.K. Mao, R.J. Hemley, Science 244 (1990) 4911.
[24] D. Bohm, D. Pines, Phys. Rev. 92 (1953) 609.
[25] J. Lindhard, K. Dan. Vidensk. Selsk. Mat. Fys. Medd. 28 (8)
(1954).
[26] K.S. Singwi, Phys. Rev. 176 (1968) 589.
[27] S. Ichimaru, Rev. Mod. Phys. 54 (1982) 1017.
[28] B. Jancovici, J. Stat. Phys. 17 (1977) 357.
[29] I. Nagy, J. Laszlo, J. Giber, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res.
B 27 (1987) 276.
[30] G. Maynard, C. Deutsch, Phys. Rev. A 26 (1982) 665.
[31] G. Gouedaid, C. Deutsch, J. Math. Phys. 19 (1978) 32.
[32] C. Deutsch, G. Maynard, J. Physique 46 (1985) 1113.
[33] I. Nagy, A. Arnau, P.M. Echenique, Phys. Rev. B 40 (1989)
11983.
[34] I. Nagy, Phys. Rev. B 62 (2000) 5270.
[35] I. Nagy, A. Arnau, P.M. Enchenique, Phys. Rev. A 43 (1991)
6038.
[36] E. Fermi, E. Teller, Phys. Rev. 72 (1947) 399.
[37] M. Tabak, J. Hammer, M.E. Glinsky, W.L. Kruer, S.C. Wilks,
J. Woodworth, E.M. Campbell, M.D. Perry, R.J. Mason, Phys.
Plasmas 1 (1994) 1626.
[38] D.H.E. Dubin, Phys. Rev. E 53 (1996) 5249.
[39] R.E. Kidder, Nucl. Fusion 19 (1979) 223.
[40] M.D. Rosen, Phys. Plasmas 6 (1999) 1690.
[41] L.D. Landau, E.M. Lifshitz, Statistical Physics, Pergamon,
Elmsford, 1980.
[42] J. Dawson, Fusion, vol. 2, Academic Press, New York, 1981.
[43] S. Eliezer, J.M. Martinez-Val, Laser and Particle Beams 16
(1998) 581.
[44] T. Honda, Y. Nakao, Y. Honda, K. Kudo, Nucl. Fusion 31
(1991) 851.
[45] Y. Nakao, T. Honda, K. Kudo, Nucl. Fusion 30 (1990) 143.
[46] S. Son, N.J. Fisch, Phys. Lett. A 329 (2004) 76.
[47] P.C. Gibbons, Phys. Rev. B 13 (1976) 2451.
[48] M. Buttiker, R. Landauer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49 (1982) 1739.
[49] T. Tanizawa, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 65 (1996) 3157.
Nathaniel has been busy
The Rotamak is a proposed thermonuclear fusion device which employs rotating magnetic fields (RMF) to generate an azimuthal current to produce a field-reversed configuration. The efficiency of the currents that produce the field reversal by RMFs was debated some 40 years ago. The debate revolved around whether the currents would incur dissipation by the conventional Spitzer perpendicular resistivity, or whether some other relation between current and dissipation would be more appropriate. By employing an electron–ion pitch-angle scattering model, we find that the dissipation is non-Spitzer in nature.
However, curiously, there appears to exist a regime where the power dissipated to maintain the current becomes vanishingly small.