Skip to comments.
A Spark of Hope for Fusion - A new device clears an obstacle to a type of fusion power plant.
www.technologyreview.com ^
| 05/01/2007
| Staff
Posted on 05/30/2007 11:56:45 AM PDT by Red Badger
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-57 last
To: Sherman Logan
A static generator isn't much good for powering a home, but you can try if you have a mind to. There are already plenty of scam artists on the internet willing to sell you "a piece of the action" of there compact, over-unity self running home genrators that just need a little more money to get it on the market. (Like Tom Bearden's Meg generator). No room on that market for my inventions. I can show you how to put together a home power system and build a windmill(or two) however.
otherpower.com What it costs is determined by what your want, what your needs are, and how much you can do yourself- and if you can even attempt such a thing in your location.
To: Sherman Logan
"I'm curious. How has the government suppressed this? It's right there on the website." I guess you'll have to read that lunatics web site and figure that out. :o)
To: Red Badger
I’m curious what they will use to contain the enormous heat that they need as the catalyst to a fusion reaction. In theory the electrical impulses together can achieve it, but how do they contain that kind of heat? Releasing from 100 million to several hundred million electron volts of energy would produce in excess of 1000 degrees C. There is a reason the sun is hot! I think this article is a little more than premature. Good post though. Thanks.
43
posted on
05/30/2007 1:59:53 PM PDT
by
DanielLongo
(Don't tread on me)
To: DanielLongo
The theory (one of them, anyway) is that magnetic fields will contain the plasma and keep it from coming into direct contact with containment materials. I believe there is no known material that wouldn’t melt at such temperatures.
‘
44
posted on
05/30/2007 2:10:27 PM PDT
by
Sherman Logan
(I didn't claw my way to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian.)
To: Nathan Zachary
Even a small naval reactor cannot supply the instantaneous power demands of a full sized railgun. You have to discharge 40-60 Megajoules of power into the device in a couple of milliseconds or less. That is why you need a massive capacitor bank to add the needed surge capacity
That device would make a great power supply for a rapid-fire rail gun.
No it wouldn't. A nuclear powerplant in a aircraft carrier is much smaller and actually produces useable power (More than enough for several rail guns of enormous size) to light up a city. This device produces nothing useable at all. I can produce short bursts of power here at home as well (millions of volts) with just a few large magnets and lots of copper wire. Like lightning, it isn't of much use however.
To: Vinnie_Vidi_Vici
"Even a small naval reactor cannot supply the instantaneous power demands of a full sized railgun. You have to discharge 40-60 Megajoules of power into the device in a couple of milliseconds or less. That is why you need a massive capacitor bank to add the needed surge capacity" Sure it does. A rail gun uses a massive capacitor bank doesn't it? It's rate of repeat firings depends on how long it takes the capacitors to charge back up- among other things. like how long it takes coils to cool down. A navel nuclear reactor would have no problem charging up those capacitors- extremely fast.
To: FormerLib
You should have seen me jump when I started reading this headline! I thought for sure someone had nuked Belgrade!The earth trembles!
47
posted on
05/30/2007 2:49:37 PM PDT
by
F-117A
(Mr. Ahtisaari, give Sapmi it's independence! Free the Sami!!!)
To: Nathan Zachary
“Even a small naval reactor cannot supply the instantaneous power demands of a full sized railgun. You have to discharge 40-60 Megajoules of power into the device in a couple of milliseconds or less. That is why you need a massive capacitor bank to add the needed surge capacity”
“Sure it does. A rail gun uses a massive capacitor bank doesn’t it? It’s rate of repeat firings depends on how long it takes the capacitors to charge back up- among other things. like how long it takes coils to cool down. A navel nuclear reactor would have no problem charging up those capacitors- extremely fast.”
If you consider a little bit, you will see that you are agreeing with us. This devise *is* essentially the “massive capacitor bank” that you mention, that is used to power the rail gun. Rail gun development has been held up because we have had a difficult time figuring out how to have the “massive capacitor bank” rapid fire fast enough. The nuclear reactor is a great power source.. to supply the rail gun power supply, just as the electric grid is the power source for the power supply of your computer.
To: DanielLongo
There is a lot of heat, which is the purpose of the reactor. The heat is drawn off, hopefully continuously, but even so the materials in the structure take a beating.
49
posted on
05/30/2007 4:26:05 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Repeal the Treaty)
To: F-117A
50
posted on
05/30/2007 4:34:31 PM PDT
by
EternalVigilance
(The Reds went Green, but the goal remains the same.)
To: Nathan Zachary
Yes, but not instantaneous, hence my point! The reactor cannot sustain fire directly,
To: Sherman Logan; RightWhale
I don’t want to be the one holding the marshmallow when they try it.
52
posted on
05/30/2007 6:09:01 PM PDT
by
DanielLongo
(Don't tread on me)
To: EternalVigilance
53
posted on
05/30/2007 11:54:30 PM PDT
by
Ernest_at_the_Beach
(The DemonicRATS believe ....that the best decisions are always made after the fact.)
Comment #54 Removed by Moderator
To: Red Badger
Dr Robert Bussard already achieved Fusion with no radioactive byproducts. It doesn’t need to wait 30 years, it doesn’t need superconductors or any other such things that make it unfeasible or unwieldy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywell
55
posted on
05/31/2007 5:35:02 AM PDT
by
Malsua
To: Malsua
56
posted on
05/31/2007 5:42:46 AM PDT
by
Red Badger
(Bite your tongue. It tastes a lot better than crow................)
To: F-117A
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-57 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson