NASA’s Lattice Confined Fusion (LCF)

"against Ahlfors will"

not at all - move my posts ad libitum. but don't blame me [see #451 Curbina] for the moving.

Fusion 3.0: Uncovering NASA's Nuclear Breakthrough - YouTube

CMNS is established as a legitimate branch of science.

The experiments of Pons and Fleischmann was CMNS research, though no one thought to call it that.

It became popularized in the press as Cold Fusion.

LCF is dry cell CMNS COLD and Hot Fusion as Forsley et al at NASA GRC clearly state.

Yes it is good news that classes are offered.

More than that this year I expect...

We shall see 👀

WRT Curbina's recent post #463, are there any technical reasons that you think that LCF is promising??

The video in post #462 indicates a number of technical issues will need to be solved, such as power required by the electron accelerator. Can you give one technical reason in support of the LCF concept?

I’m hesitant to add anything here, because my grasp of the science is that of a lay person, but below is my interpretation, for whatever it's worth.

The reactor that GEC / NASA are working on is a two step design - the first step is a more or less standard Pd-D codep cell. They wrap this cell around deuterated thorium / uranium and use the charged particles that the codep creates to drive a secondary reaction inside the deuterated thorium / uranium.

So when NASA talks about LCF, I read this as them explicitly trying to get a handle on the second step in this process. When they say it’s ‘not cold fusion’, they’re being sincere.

LENR reaction -> LCF reaction -> Heat

Understood this way, one way to interpret the purpose of the LCF work is that it isn’t being done to develop their current LCF experiments into a working reactor. It’s being done to understand (and presumably optimise), elucidate and gain acceptance for a theory of what’s going on in the second part of their reactor design - charged particles hitting deuterated thorium / uranium - without freighting the work with an association to Pd-D codep that might vitiate its reception.

Debating whether or not it’s cold fusion, or whether or not it’s ever going to be useful, perhaps misses the point of why they’re doing the work.

Regarding the last two posts by curbina and orsova, please note difficulty due to a very low probability of fusion occurring, which is believed to be about 0.00001 barn (see “NASA GRC Hosts Lattice Confinement Fusion Virtual Workshop,” by Theresa L. Benyo et al.)

Quote from NEPS*NewEnergy

see “NASA GRC Hosts Lattice Confinement Fusion Virtual Workshop,” by Theresa L. Benyo et al.)

"

Another path could be to set a pragmatic engineering goal for a realizable power
system using lattice confinement fusion in a hybrid capacity with conventional nuclear engineering methods. Dr. Forsbacka opined that the latter path is the quickest way to get lattice confinement fusion off the
lab bench and speed integration into power solutions of relevance to NASA missions and eventually to
other use"

from a fission based POV with an aversion to cold fusion this 'hybrid' approach is reasonable

Forsbacka, Matt | Maryland Applied Graduate Engineering

Above comment indicated "Dr. Forsbacka opined that the latter path is the quickest way to get lattice confinement fusion off the lab bench and speed integration into power solutions of relevance to NASA missions and eventually to other use." Would it be possible to ask him first to go through the probability calculations seriously for each of the two LCF steps to see if he really believes that LCF will work?

Quote from NEPS*NewEnergy

Would it be possible to ask him first to go through the probability calculations seriously for each of the two LCF steps to see if he really believes that LCF will work?

A question foremost in my mind, ask him to go through the probability calculations seriously for each of the market entry claims made by GEC, "Dr. Forsbacka will the Space Power System, the EV Trickle Charger, or the GeNie (SMG) soon "speed integration into power solutions of relevance to NASA missions and eventually to other use".

I believe the claims made by GEC are of relevance to this thread. My probability calculations are high, they have fully developed this technology to a level that supports their claims. Applied engineering to utilize these energetics is progressing in depth. Market entry permission not far off.

In the above post #473, Gregory Byron Smith, or Dr. Forsbacka, has indicated that, while their probability calculations are high, GEC has developed the technology to an advanced degree. Thus, the value of the cross section for (d,d) fusion needs to be looked at in greater detail. The cross section for fusion from 120 keV deuterons (10^-5 barn or 10^-29 cm²) mentioned in post 470 above and posts 304-305 in another thread came from a graph in the paper, “NASA GRC Hosts Lattice Confinement Fusion Virtual Workshop”. But, this value appears to be too low. Cross section graphs, e.g., for hot fusion, indicate that the cross section for fusion from 120 keV deuterons should probably be between 0.02 and 0.5 barn (ref. pgs. 19-20 in "Plasmas and Controlled Fusion," by Rose and Clark, MIT, 1961 and pg. 21 in "Fusion Energy Conversion" by Miley, ANS, 1976).

Assume that the cross section for the second LCF step involving d,d fusion is 0.02-0.5 barn, or about 10^-25 cm² . In the second step of the process, about half of the neutrons, therefore, might be expected to be able to cause fusion. A 100 watt/cm³ system would need to produce about 1.8x10¹⁴ fusion reactions/sec/cm³. The number of neutrons that would be required for the second step is expected to be twice this, or 4 x 10¹⁴ neutrons. The number of gamma rays required for the first step of the LCF process is expected to be 10⁴ times this, or 4 x 10¹⁸ gamma rays, each greater than 2.22 MeV. A 10 kW system would need to have a cathode composed of 100 cm³.

Which LCF thread or GEC thread holds this?

https://indico.jlab.org › eventPPT

Recommender Systems - Jefferson Lab Indico (Indico)

The underlying physics theories that govern the production of particles in a given reaction; Femto-scale physics. Computation.

https://books.google.com › books

In Memory Of D Allan Bromley -- Nuclear Scientist And Policy ...

Paul A Fleury, Francesco Iachello — 2006 · Science

Correlations between the femto-scale physics of nuclei, the nano-scale world of manybody physics, and the cosmos. Figure 5. Comparison of the E(5/4) ...

Quote from NEPS*NewEnergy

you think that LCF is promising??

Yes

Likely 10 years further advanced than presently disclosed.

So [email protected]

stated years ago at ICCF22

OR wait

Was it ICCF23?

Are the claims still standing, made by GEC, ludicrous... or believable???

https://www.degruyter.com › html

Optical generation of strong-field terahertz radiation and its application in nonlinear terahertz metasurfaces - De Gruyter

by Z Ma · 2022 — OR in lithium niobate for high field THz generation has become ubiquitous in low-frequency applications. What's more, in 2021, lithium niobate ...

THz frequencies correspond to the intrinsic phonon and magnon vibrations of a large number of strongly correlated systems. Thus, intense THz fields at a certain frequency can stimulate lattice resonance coherently and resonantly, thereby inducing novel electronic structures, discovering new physics, and obtaining new states. It has spawned a new field of research known as lightwave quantum electronics

Quote from Gregory Byron Goble

lightwave quantum electronics