From: g_d_pusch_remove_underscores@xnet.com   
   Copy: zoltanccc@aol.com   
      
   zoltanccc@aol.com (Zoltan Szakaly) writes:   
      
   > The conventional fusors loose energy because of the collisions with   
   > the grid wires.   
      
   That is only one of the many, MANY different ways a "fusor" loses energy.   
   Even if "grid losses" could be brought to zero, the ions will still   
   lose energy to collisions and charge-exchange reactions with the   
   zillions of residual neutral gas molecules that still fill the chamber   
   at even the best vacuum we can achieve in a laboratory. Furthermore,   
   even if losses to background gas could be completely eliminated,   
   because the ion thermalization timescale is many, many orders of   
   magnitude shorter than the mean time between fusion reactions,   
   there will be constant losses due to ions in the thermal tail   
   being upscattered until they have enough energy to reach the cathode   
   of the electron gun, or some other negatively-charged electrode.   
   Since charge is conserved, at equilibrium, the ion current must equal   
   the electron current, so _some_ part of the chamber must necessarily be   
   being bombarded by tens of amperes of ion current, heating it to high   
   temperatures and sputtering it to death.   
      
      
   > Bussards new concept has magnetic fields preventing such collisions.   
      
   Sorry, but Liouville's Theorem makes that physically impossible.   
   If the electrons can get _into_ the chamber, it necessarily follows   
   that the ions must also be able to get _out_ of the chamber, to bombard   
   that same electrode.   
      
      
   > I have read somewhere that they got 1e14 reactions per second and got   
   > better than breakeven performance. I can't remember where I read this.   
      
   That is probably because what you think you have read is not true.   
   Reality check time: With each D-D fusion reaction releasing an average of   
   about 3.7 MeV (5.9e-13 Joule), the _MAXIMUM_ possible power output that   
   could be obtained even with your outrageously high alleged claim of 1e14   
   reactions per second would be about 60 Watts. Since the electron beam   
   current is many amperes, at tens of kilovolts of energy, the _MINIMUM_   
   possible  power consumption for the device must be on the order of many   
   tens of kilowatts. Conclusion: There is _NO WAY_ this device can break even   
   at a mere 1e14 reactions per second --- and in point of fact, the best   
   performance anyone has ever gotten from one of these devices is still   
   _TEN BILLION TIMES SMALLER THAN BREAKEVEN_.   
      
      
   > Bussard's reactor also uses electron injection to reduce the effect of   
   > the positive space charges. There is an electron cloud in the center kept   
   > there by the magnetic fields.   
      
   On the contrary: In Bussard's concept, the center of the chamber must be a   
   magnetic null. Furthermore, the electrons are not "kept" there at all;   
   they simply vacillate there briefly due to their (small) inertia as they   
   are slowed by the electrostatic potential created by their large collective   
   negative space-charge density, before being repelled back outward and   
   collected by the anodes of the electron guns. The resulting electron density   
   peak is known as a "virtual cathode;" the effect and its nature have been   
   well understood since the early days of vacuum tubes.   
      
   You really _should_ try looking this stuff up before posting on it.  Patent   
   applications don't count: Their contents are always as vague and as general   
   as possible, in an attempt to establish legal priority against as many   
   variations on the device as that patent attorney can think of. Patents do   
   =NOT= provide enough technical information to actually build the device !!!   
      
      
   -- Gordon D. Pusch   
      
   perl -e '$_ = "gdpusch\@NO.xnet.SPAM.com\n"; s/NO\.//; s/SPAM\.//; print;'   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)