Possible Low-Cost Conventional Fusion

In future the cold fusion and hot fusion processes undoubtedly converge (for example Lipinski fusion of Unified Gravity has many things in common with hot fusion).
But the production of neutrons will make hot fusion always prohibitive, not to say about energy waste.

Quote from Lou Pagnucco

conventional D-D fusion

In fact, at the experiment with NVD with deuterated Pd anode we have PW depth ' ≈ 50 kV

namely for deuterons,

deuterons = D+..

The authors state somewhere that 50kV PW enables collisional D-D fusion.

Although there are neutrons... the 50keV sounds too low to overcome a conventional Coulomb barrier..

for me at least

This looks to be LENR

Quote from RobertBryant

In fact, at the experiment with NVD with deuterated Pd anode we have PW depth ' ≈ 50 kV

namely for deuterons,

deuterons = D+..

The authors state somewhere that 50kV PW enables collisional D-D fusion.

Although there are neutrons... the 50keV sounds too low to overcome a conventional Coulomb barrier..

for me at least

This looks to be LENR

Display More

The paper is all about whether the 1998 idea of POPS (periodically oscillating plasma spheres, from his references [10,11]) could possibly achieve break-even. And those are partly in thermal equilibrium - at which 50keV gives cross-section 1% of peak over all energies. The experiments here are in line with simulation results: and AFAIK current simulations do not incorporate LENR.

The history of unconventional hot fusion has been many attempts to overcome the different limits of thermal and non-thermal plasma distributions. For thermal, you have all the classic problems of maintenance at high density/temperature. For non-thermal, you have the problem that (as that paper puts it) the Coulomb scattering cross-section is higher than the fusion cross-section which makes it expensive in energy to maintain a non-equilibrium distribution.

It is natural to hope that some plasma phenomena can somehow bring together the benefits of both, hence the idea of POPS where pulsating plasmas achieve higher fusion than possible in equilibrium.

Anyway, I don't see this is that likely to achieve useful fusion gain, but it is interesting in having completely different scaling constraints from classic schemes, and the pay-off if it worked is so high that it is worth exploring even unlikely possibilities: there is always the chance of some unexpected synergy that will make things possible. (like those that Hora claims, but does not yet have very strong evidence of, in H-B laser-based non-thermal fusion).

[10] Nebel R A and Barnes D C 1998 Fusion Technol. 38 28–45
[11] Barnes D C and Nebel R A 1998 Phys. Plasmas 5 2498–504

Quote from AlainCo

The core of LENR weirdness is not overcoming the coulomb barrier,

Thanks Alain for clarifying that LENR is not just a way of using low energy some way to overcome a high Coulomb barrier

I read somewhere in Wyttenbach's stuff that the high transient and aligned magnetic fluxes during the

4d/3D transitions perturb the charge fields so that the Coulomb barriers are not operating uniformly

but perhaps I misunderstood that.

In LENR-(low energy nuclear reaction)- the low energy is really a misnomer-

since these magnetic fluxes can be high energy as 24 MEV

which are divided out into smaller and smaller magnetic fluxes with lower and lower energies

to appear mainly as heat by induction heating of electron clouds.

.. well that's my amathematical KISS understanding of stoff.

Quote from RobertBryant

In LENR-(low energy nuclear reaction)- the low energy is really a misnomer-

since these magnetic fluxes can be high energy as 24 MEV

Something is wrong here. Magnetic flux is measured in webers or volt-seconds, not in energy units like electron volts.

This is like saying that you weigh 2 meters.

Magnetic energy?

Potential energy can be associated with a field, like a ball on top of a hill in a gravitational field.

Or you can have potential energy associated with a magnetic field, like a ferrous object at a distance from a magnet.

The force from the field does work to accelerate the object and change the potential energy into kinetic energy.

But the field itself cannot be measured in energy units.

Quote from Robert Horst

But the field itself cannot be measured in energy units.

This is true.. but at the electron level and

baryon level we are no longer in Kansas..

we are in Pennsylvania or Switzerland..

Perhaps the fluxon energy is stored in the rotation/spin

of ...

arghh!

that Millsian headache is coming on again!... damn

My attempt was to call it the Coriolis effect, As always it got quiet~

Quote from DnG

My attempt was to call it the Coriolis effect

The Coriolis effect in 4D is uber-Millsian...and not Pennsylvanian

3.2.1 Magnetic flux compression in 1;2;3 Dimensions.

Basically long time stable flux reduction(compression)

is only possible between proton and neutrons.

Key for the n-p binding is the split nature of the neutron that can give or accept flux.

The term bond is wrong ....as in reality the magnetic flux is unidirectional.

Thus here double arrows are only illustrative. If we, in the following text,

talk of a 3D/4D wave, then we mean a wave,

that is “equivalent” to a 3D mass, but traveling/rotating along a 4D surface in 4D space!

In 4D space most energy is stored in flux, .. a synonym for compressed magnetic field lines.

3D/4D flux is a bundle of magnetic field lines with 3 rotations that stays in 4D space.

4D flux makes 4 rotations and 2D/4D ( +,-) flux-potential seems to (radially?) balance the first two.

The base particle electron makes only two full rotations,

because a large part of the disposable energy is stored in the radial field.

The proton mass has a “large” (compared to electron) excess mass that needs a third dimension to flow in.

in the 4D world, radial energy is converted into rotational mass/energy or will be disposed.

https://www.researchgate.net/p…r-and-particle-physics-20

After adding the extra axis and get the fight going , its the "what to do with it" frustrating part.. hacking photons for computers i don't think will help us.

Quote from Robert Horst

The force from the field does work to accelerate the object and change the potential energy into kinetic energy.

This is true if you induce a magnetic flux with 4000 Amps and then do flux compression the KE is large.

““I designed the iron housing to endure against about 700 T,”

. That was about 60 percent of what it actually delivered. “I didn’t expect it to be so high.” OOPS!!

A peak field of 1200 T was generated by the electromagnetic flux-compression (EMFC) technique with a newly developed megagauss generator system.

The performance was analyzed and compared with data obtained by the preceding EMFC experiments

to show a significant increase in the liner imploding speed of up to 5 km/s.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/nano…et-with-a-bang-1200-tesla