Slashdot Mirror

Applies to: "the fabled 'breakeven point' of nuclear fusion....unless you're the Sun, we don't have a way to ignite and sustain that reaction", as though that were the only approach to fusion.

For example, LPP uses the inherent instability of plasma to its advantage. They do not require contained, sustained fusion reactions.

http://lawrencevilleplasmaphys...

> The initial release of energy and burst of gamma rays

If we manage to get to aneutronic fusion (much more difficult than most of the fusion reactions being examined currently), then the reactor theoretically could run for a very long time without having to have parts replaced. Lawrenceville Plasma Physics is trying to attain proton-boron fusion in a dense plasma focus machine, but most people think they're being a bit optimistic. I'm rooting for them, nevertheless.

My impression was that the major problem with fusion which produces neutrons isn't the radioactive waste products themselves (at least compared with fission), it's that the nuclear reactions with the neutrons undermines the structural integrity of the reactor, requiring frequent part replacement.

I'm pinning all my hopes on this project.

From the updates:

In a July 23 editorial, Nature magazine has joined the calls to redirect fusion funding to aneutronic fusion—fusion that produces no radioactive waste. Speaking of the difficulties facing the ITER tokamak program, the editorial urged that, “Given these realities, the prudent course for the world’s funding agencies would be to support research into alternative fusion fuels, such as deuterium-helium-3, or proton-boron-11—which require higher temperatures to ignite, but produce very few neutrons—as well as alternative reactor designs that would be simpler, cheaper and more in line with the kind of plant that power companies might buy.”

Nature specifically urged that one of the projects that should be considered for government funding is “Lawrenceville Plasma Physics in Middlesex, New Jersey, which is trying to exploit a configuration known as a dense plasma focus to build an extremely compact reactor that does not emit neutrons.” Read more here.

"... The fact that they have convinced no reputable scientist and have no peer-review scientific output, but have already embarked on a commercial venture should be a huge red sign, this is not some smart gadget you can patent and make a fortune on, it's hard science where theoretical results are typically decades ahead practical applications." ?!?! I don't know where are you getting your facts but the review committee comprised of top recognized fusion scientists (see below) had concluded that: "While a number of near-term physics issues remain to be resolved, it is likely that with adequate financial support these matters could be addressed in a relatively short period of time, e.g. a few years.Ã If these issues are addressed, Ãoethe committee does not see any fundamental roadblock to power system viability.Ã In other words, a functioning, economical and clean new source of energy may soon become reality. Committee: Dr. Robert Hirsch, a former director of fusion research for the US Atomic Energy Commission and the Energy Research and Development Agency; Dr. Stephen O. Dean, President of Fusion Power Associates and former director of fusion Magnetic Confinement Systems for the Department of Energy; Professor Gerald L. Kulcinski, Associate Dean for Research, College of Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison; and Professor Dennis Papadopoulos, Professor of Physics, University of Maryland. (see here http://lawrencevilleplasmaphys...) Also, the chief fusion researcher has a peer reviewed article just published recently: http://www.worldscientific.com... Last but not least lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com holds a number of patents regarding its Focus Fusion over several continents... This project continues to get both private investments and crowdfunding donations as it should based on cutting edge science, experiments and results observed so far.

Your comment is moderated 2, on a more intelligent 0 statement. I will explain. Koch brothers energy company makes money selling fossil fuels, Global Warning activism is a threat to that, therefore large amount of money are used as reality distortion field to suppress scientifically respectable Global Warming hypotheses. So think analogously with Big Bang replacing Global Warming.

Curiously, the author of non-consensus "The Big Bang Never Happened", Eric Lerner, has his own fusion energy research company. He put his effort where his mouth is. lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com

My comment is actually a question asking for some clarifications. Rationale - the original comment (with my emphasis):

If the Koch brothers find out a way to make money out of SOMETHING ELSE ...

may be interpreted as suggesting that Koch brothers make money on the base of Big Bang.
An ambiguity I wanted clarified and, if no metaphor/forced analogy was involved, I was curious about how.

Your comment is moderated 2, on a more intelligent 0 statement. I will explain. Koch brothers energy company makes money selling fossil fuels, Global Warning activism is a threat to that, therefore large amount of money are used as reality distortion field to suppress scientifically respectable Global Warming hypotheses. So think analogously with Big Bang replacing Global Warming.

Curiously, the author of non-consensus "The Big Bang Never Happened", Eric Lerner, has his own fusion energy research company. He put his effort where his mouth is. lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com

In case you haven't seen it

http://lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=62&Itemid=80

Thanks for pointing out the need to be published :

Dense Plasma Focus in the journal "Physics of Plasmas"

It's a start...

Mainline: The information in this post is not correct.

The correct link to Eric Lerner's company is http://www.lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/ . The page referred in this post is an old copy of Lawrenceville Plasma Physics' site. Why it landed on http://photoman.bizland.com/ I do not know, and I suspect there is no relationship between those two sites.

Actually CMEF was not able to collect the required USD 600000, only a fraction could be transfered. Eric Lerner is therefore still looking for further investors.

But an unnamed private investor invested USD 200000 for a simulation project. See http://www.lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/index.php?pr=Investors and http://focusfusion.org/log/index.php/site/article/large_scale_computer_simulation_work_initiated/

But it's nice to see it discussed here again. ;-)

Cheers,

Henning

Mainline: The information in this post is not correct.

The correct link to Eric Lerner's company is http://www.lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/ . The page referred in this post is an old copy of Lawrenceville Plasma Physics' site. Why it landed on http://photoman.bizland.com/ I do not know, and I suspect there is no relationship between those two sites.

Actually CMEF was not able to collect the required USD 600000, only a fraction could be transfered. Eric Lerner is therefore still looking for further investors.

But an unnamed private investor invested USD 200000 for a simulation project. See http://www.lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/index.php?pr=Investors and http://focusfusion.org/log/index.php/site/article/large_scale_computer_simulation_work_initiated/

But it's nice to see it discussed here again. ;-)

Cheers,

Henning

Implications for Focus Fusion?