Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Experiment Supports Controversial 'Fusion-In-A-Jar' Claims
Information Week ^ | July 22, 2005

Posted on 07/25/2005 8:33:29 AM PDT by Irontank

A widely criticized effort three years ago to create low-cost tabletop nuclear fusion could gain new support following an experiment at Purdue University.

Taking the basic apparatus used in 2002, two Purdue researchers refined the experiment and published new results that once again seem to prove that nuclear fusion was taking place. If it proves to be real, the new approach might lead to a genuine new source of energy.

An inexpensive, practical method of controlling nuclear fusion could revolutionize energy production, so any hint of a breakthrough in that direction generates high interest among both the technical community and the mainstream media. But hard-headed physicists have grown wary of "fusion in a jar" experiments.

The physics community was lukewarm to n approach to tabletop fusion that originated with Rusi Taleyarkhan at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in 2002. Using acoustic cavitation generated by ultrasound waves in a solution doped with deuterium, Taleyarkhan and his colleagues published results that they considered an airtight case for nuclear fusion. But criticism followed. When Taleyarkhan replied with a follow-up experiment to address those concerns, the reaction was muted.

The Purdue team began its work independently two years ago. "Sonofusion is thermonuclear fusion and is scalable," said Yiban Xu, who performed the experiment with fellow researcher Adam Butt. "However, much research and development needs to be done before reaching so-called energy break-even."

In the language of nuclear fusion researchers, break-even is the point beyond which a reaction produces more energy than it consumes, the minimal requirement for success. Xu, more concerned with proving that any nuclear fusion occurred, cannot say whether the reaction produces energy efficiently.

Xu said a small-scale apparatus like his experimental setup could have other important applications. "Neutrons seed cavitation in the test fluid, and so do the other nuclear particles. Therefore, in principle, cavitation occurrence indicates the presence of radiation activities if appropriate conditions are provided," he said.

Possible applications could be a simple and portable neutron source or a way to generate tritium, a helium isotope produced by the reaction.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: acousticcavitation; bubblefusion; deuterium; energy; fusion; hydrogen; nuclearfusion; physics; purdue; science; sonofusion; sonoluminescence
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last
To: Dinsdale
He was making plutonium by bombarding gas lantern mantles with neutrons from radium he collected from old clocks. If you doubt me google 'boy scout breeder reactor'

Uh, radium does not emit neutrons.

41 posted on 07/25/2005 7:05:10 PM PDT by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey
There are more details available (Google is your friend). He was a smart kid also dumb as dirt.

I misremembered the details so sue me.

42 posted on 07/25/2005 7:09:29 PM PDT by Dinsdale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Irontank
"A widely criticized effort three years ago to create low-cost tabletop nuclear fusion could gain new support following an experiment at Purdue University."

In unrelated news, scientists have yet to explain how Lake Michigan's shoreline moved so far south over night.

43 posted on 07/25/2005 7:15:41 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Irontank

But criticism followed. When Taleyarkhan replied with a follow-up experiment to address those concerns, the reaction was muted.

Oh boy, WHICH REACTION??

Hehehe.


44 posted on 07/25/2005 7:17:36 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dinsdale
He was making plutonium

There is NO evidence that he produced any plutonium.

45 posted on 07/25/2005 7:28:23 PM PDT by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Dinsdale
I misremembered the details so sue me.

Oh, another detail. He never built a breeder reactor.

46 posted on 07/25/2005 7:36:56 PM PDT by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Irontank

47 posted on 07/25/2005 7:38:22 PM PDT by Shazbot29 (If you paid attention you'd be worried, too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fooman
What is your take on this? Real or bogus?

I think it's real but I don't believe it is scalable to a level that will produce power. I hosted a talk by Dr. Seth Putterman a year or so back on this very subject. I think it is pretty clear from the neutron flux measurements that fusion is indeed taking place and these devices show much promise as portable neutron sources (think neutron "x-ray") but getting more power out than you put in is a whole other can of worms.

regards,

48 posted on 07/25/2005 7:59:02 PM PDT by Mycroft Holmes (Fnord!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey

Not exactly. An exothermic reaction means the reaction gives off heat. A fire is an exothermic reaction. The Law of Conservation of Energy states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. In the case of a fire, the potential energy of something flamable (a spotted owl nest) is converted to heat energy, which is then put to something useful (such as roasting the spotted owl).

We can never get more energy out of a reaction than we put into it. We also can never get as much energy out of a reaction as we put into it because some energy is always lost to friction or is absorbed elsewhere (such as some heat from a fire being absorbed by the oven walls instead of the spotted owl).


49 posted on 07/26/2005 4:24:14 AM PDT by bobjam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: bobjam

Additional energy is lost as the spotted owl feathers flare up brightly, the light accounts for a small amount of the total energy.


50 posted on 07/26/2005 11:10:53 AM PDT by conservativewasp (Liberals lie for sport and hate their country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: bobjam

I think you need to upgrade your thermodynamic database. Start with throwing out your outdated "Conservation" law and replacing it with the presently accepted one. Then go get the definitions of exothermic and endothermic reactions. OTHOH, just stay ignorant, it makes for great posting.


51 posted on 07/26/2005 4:34:21 PM PDT by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: bobjam
We can never get more energy out of a reaction than we put into it.

If that were true, then it would meant that an enormous amount of energy is also pouring into the sun. What is the form of the 'invisible energy' flowing into the sun?

52 posted on 07/26/2005 4:45:02 PM PDT by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey

The potential energy of the fuel on which the sun depends. The nuclear fusion converts H to He and gives off an enormous amount of heat and radiation in the process.


53 posted on 07/27/2005 4:34:22 AM PDT by bobjam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: bobjam

Ah so, the sun emits more energy than it absorbs, a very basic exothermic reaction.


54 posted on 07/27/2005 5:24:29 PM PDT by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: bobjam
The potential energy of the fuel on which the sun depends.

Actually, it is a conversion of amss to energy!

55 posted on 07/27/2005 5:25:13 PM PDT by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey

amss >>> mass


56 posted on 07/27/2005 5:59:25 PM PDT by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Dinsdale

Just Damn... I mean that's some merit badge project.


57 posted on 07/27/2005 6:11:43 PM PDT by AFreeBird (your mileage may vary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey

The proof of fusion ocurring is that high-energy neutrons are produced (the standard proof with heavy hydrogen isotopes.)

In other words, Tabletop-dangerous-radiation-producing-and-explodable-device might be a more appropriate name.


58 posted on 07/27/2005 6:12:05 PM PDT by JustDoItAlways
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey
Well it sounds like something was goin on....

"It was radioactive as heck," David says, "far greater than at the time of assembly." Then he began to realize that he could be putting himself and others in danger.

When David's Geiger counter began picking up radiation five doors from his mom's house, he decided that he had "too much radioactive stuff in one place" and began to disassemble the reactor. He hid some of the material in his mother's house, left some in the shed, and packed most of the rest into the trunk of his Pontiac.

One of those genius types with Zero common sense.
59 posted on 07/27/2005 6:15:31 PM PDT by AFreeBird (your mileage may vary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Irontank
a way to generate tritium, a helium isotope produced by the reaction

The editor was asleep at the wheel. Tritium is a hydrogen isotope that decays into helium-3.

60 posted on 07/27/2005 6:35:42 PM PDT by aposiopetic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson