#41 LHC to tell us the temperature at which fusion breakeven stops; Archimedes Plutonium's Fusion Energy EXPERIMENT Challenge; Faraday Law 1/3 larger energy content than Coulomb Law; new book: Fusion Barrier Principle
plutonium....@gmail.com
Equations. First being, that
superconductivity and tokamak fusion will guide us to a temperature
term for the Maxwell Equations.
Secondly, the Maxwell Equations become nullified once the temperature
rises above a upper bound
which is somewhere between 10^12 to 10^17 Kelvin.
Thirdly, the first Maxwell Equations to be nullified are the Faraday
and Ampere Laws, so the temperature
term would fit in the Displacement-Current of Ampere law and the
Displacement-Magnetism in the
Faraday Law.
Fourthly, there are more questions than answers. Does the Coulomb law
have a temperature term?
I think the answer is no, in that the Coulomb law is not nullified as
is the Faraday and Ampere laws.
Fifthly, to fit a temperature term into the Faraday and Ampere law
would be to have the Displacement
Current and Displacement Magnetism terms cancel out the Faraday and
Ampere terms. So we have
a natural spot to place the temperature term.
Sixthly, the temperature term would easily describe superconductivity,
in that you could have
superconduction all the way up to 10^17 Kelvin in that superconduction
is a capacitor-current.
So as long as a Capacitor is possible to exist physically, you can
have a superconduction
current. So the ability to have capacitor follows in suit with the
ability to have Faraday and
Ampere law.
Seventhly, tokamak fusion, likes hot temperatures, the hotter the
better, but the energy to control
increasing temperature is lost when the temperature reaches the point
where the Faraday and Ampere
laws are nullified. So at some temperature, inside the Tokamak, where
the Faraday and Ampere
laws are annulled, is the point in which only 2/3 breakeven is the
maximum breakeven.
Eighly, since we have the LHC in operation, is a good opportunity to
investigate the temperature at
which tokamak fusion has reached maximum breakeven. If you look at the
LHC, you realize
it is really a tokamak that allows us to "peek and look" inside. It
was fortunate that the LHC was
built before building ITER, since ITER will not let us look inside at
the events going on. So the LHC
allows us this opportunity to find this critical temperature. The
temperature in which the Faraday
and Ampere laws are annulled. It would be the temperature at which no
superconductivity can exist
since no capacitors can exist. And it is the temperature at which
tokamak fusion has reached
its maximum breakeven which is 2/3.
Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
extremesou...@yahoo.com
You proble have several formulas to explain Horton Hears A Who
existance as well
Ha Ha HA just kidding
plutonium....@gmail.com
temperature for the Maxwell Equations
and a upper bound temperature for fusion physics should deliver a
Fusion Barrier Principle exactly
at a 2/3 breakeven. But sad to say, my mind has not reached that
clarity, and I suppose I can be
sarcastic, although a scientist should rarely be sarcastic, by saying
a clarity-barrier.
Clarity was excellent for me in the idea that CONTROL of a fusion
chain of events involves the
Faraday or Ampere laws and those laws are always 1/3 larger in energy
content (energy density)
than is the Coulomb law of repulsion that the tokamak is designed to
overcome. So if the energy
content is 1/3 larger means only 2/3 breakeven is possible. So you can
see that the clarity is
all there, where even a HighSchooler can understand the logic.
But sad to say, if I transfer the argument over to temperature, I do
not see the clarity, as of yet.
Perhaps the clarity will come in a few days or weeks or months.
The Maxwell Equations have an upper limit of temperature where Faraday
and Ampere laws evaporate
or are nullified due to the high temperature. Has anyone proven that a
H-bomb cannot be confined?
Is it because of the temperature? Here I am making confinement equal
to that of control. So an
H-bomb is not to be confined means it is not to be controlled.
Now LHC is going to reach 10^17 Kelvin, at least that is what some
press data gives.
So I was looking up to see how high of a Kelvin that a H-bomb has
reached. Alot of that data is
secret, so I was not expecting too much information. Wikipedia did
have some information on
H-bomb temperature.
--- quoting wikipedia ---
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermonuclear_fusion#Hot_fusion
To evaluate the usefulness of these reactions, in addition to the
reactants, the products, and the energy released, one needs to know
something about the cross section. Any given fusion device will have a
maximum plasma pressure that it can sustain, and an economical device
will always operate near this maximum. Given this pressure, the
largest fusion output is obtained when the temperature is chosen so
that <σv>/T² is a maximum. This is also the temperature at which the
value of the triple product nTτ required for ignition is a minimum,
since that required value is inversely proportional to <σv>/T² (see
Lawson criterion). (A plasma is "ignited" if the fusion reactions
produce enough power to maintain the temperature without external
heating.) This optimum temperature and the value of <σv>/T² at that
temperature
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermonuclear_fusion#Hot_fusion
At the temperatures and densities in stellar cores the rates of fusion
reactions are notoriously slow. For example, at solar core temperature
(T ≈ 15 MK) and density (160 g/cm³), the energy release rate is only
276 μW/cm³—about a quarter of the volumetric rate at which a resting
human body generates heat. [10] Thus, reproduction of stellar core
conditions in a lab for nuclear fusion power production is completely
impractical. Because nuclear reaction rates strongly depend on
temperature (exp(−E/kT)), then in order to achieve reasonable rates of
energy production in terrestrial fusion reactors 10–100 times higher
temperatures (compared to stellar interiors) are required T ≈ 0.1–1.0
GK.
--- end quoting wikipedia ---
The website of LHC did cite the fact that they would reach 100,000
times hotter of a temperature
than the core of the Sun, whereas the Wikipedia quote suggests JET
only needed 100 times higher
temperature.
So I am still in need of a highest temperature achieved by a H-bomb. I
suspect LHC is higher of a
temperature than a H-bomb, but that is only my perceptive-guess.
So let me try to work out a crude logic here, on the spot --
If a H-bomb is never able to be controlled and since its temperature
in the explosion exceeds
the temperature at which the Maxwell Equations of Faraday and Ampere
Law are annulled
would be proof that controlled fusion that surpasses breakeven is
impossible.
Maybe that is a good first stab of the underlying logic of how
temperature parameter alone
proves the Fusion Barrier Principle.
That you can bring together huge temperatures in a fusion explosion
but in that instant of time
you lose *all control* and thus never a machine.
In the news media I hear all this carping about how expensive LHC is,
well, it is actually very
cheap considering how much it would cost to build ITER. And that LCH
is in fact a tokamak
itself. A tokamak that can do far more things than ITER. So if you ask
me, it was money well
spent on building LHC. For if they did the right experiments with LHC
can tell us whether
ITER is going to be a dud.
plutonium....@gmail.com
>
> So let me try to work out a crude logic here, on the spot --
>
> If a H-bomb is never able to be controlled and since its temperature
> in the explosion exceeds
> the temperature at which the Maxwell Equations of Faraday and Ampere
> Law a
> temperature parameter alone
> proves the Fusion Barrier Principle.
>
Now I have a better handle today on what that logic is. The more
simple logic of the direct
time and energy involved is that logic that the barrier principle is
2/3 breakeven because
the Faraday and Ampere Laws are 1/3 larger in energy content than is
ever the Coulomb
law of repulsion. That is direct logic. But with temperature logic is
the inverse of time
and energy. So that is a bit confusing to make the temperature logic
clear to understand.
So let me try again today to improve the above first stab.
If the Maxwell Equations have an upper-limit of temperature so that
when the temperature
reaches that point the Maxwell Equations are nullified. We would not
know that Maxwell
Equations existed at that temperature or above. But that this
temperature is far below
the temperature inside a H-bomb explosion.
So to get Fusion Tokamak to yield breakeven or to surpass breakeven,
means that the
tokamak has to reach the temperature of a H-bomb. In other words, the
tokamak becomes
a H-bomb.
That is the logic, albeit indirect compared to the direct logic that
Faraday Law is 1/3 larger
in energy content than the Coulomb Law. In that logic I used time and
energy and so it was
direct logic. But with temperature, since temperature is inverse that
of time, the logic is
different, albeit the same conclusion. With temperature, the Fusion
Barrier Principle becomes
that the temperature at which the Maxwell Equations no longer exist in
the Plasma is a temperature
far below that of the temperature in a H-bomb where all the fusion
takes place. And this temperature
of the annulled Maxwell Equations compared to the H-bomb temperature
should be in a ratio of
2/3.
So, unless H-bomb temperatures are classified as government secrets??
And the comparison ratio is exponential, I would guess, since the
temperature that Maxwell
Equations are annulled is perhaps around 10^12 Kelvin. The temperature
of H-bombs is perhaps
around 10^20 Kelvin.
Let me not get too wrapped up in details that are mostly guesses. The
important message
is that the Barrier Logic when using Temperature involves the idea
that tokamaks have to
become H-bombs and we all know that there is never a confinement and a
repeating of a
series or sequence of H-bombs, since the machine is vaporized or
destroyed during the first
blast.
plutonium....@gmail.com
>
> So, unless H-bomb temperatures are classified as government secrets??
>
> And the comparison ratio is exponential, I would guess, since the
> temperature that Maxwell
> Equations are annulled is perhaps around 10^12 Kelvin. The temperature
> of H-bombs is perhaps
> around 10^20 Kelvin.
>
I do not know what I was rambling on about above. I got caught between
the
frustration of finding out the temperature of a Hydrogen Bomb blast
and
verifying the 10^17 Kelvin.
A H-bomb critical temperature is of the order of 35,000,000 Kelvin
H-bomb core temperature is of the order of 45,000,000 Kelvin
The Sun core temperature is of the order of 15,000,000 Kelvin
Faraday Law is 1/3 larger of energy content then Coulomb Law
Tokamaks reach only 2/3 breakeven
Fusion in the Sun is only 1/3 the temperature of fusion in a H-bomb.
Can we say the Faraday Law still works in the Sun? I would say yes in
that features
such as Solar Flares and Sunspots are Faraday and Ampere laws
Temperature is inverse of time. The inverse of 1/3 is 3/1 The H-bomb
temperature
is 3X that of the Sun.
extremesou...@yahoo.com
bomb
Temperature
Are 3X that of the Sun?
I thought frequency was the inverse of time last time I checked is
this true for temperature as well.
can they both be true.
David Kerber
46bb9d...@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
plutonium....@gmail.com says...
> I wrote several days ago:
> >
> > So, unless H-bomb temperatures are classified as government secrets??
> >
> > And the comparison ratio is exponential, I would guess, since the
> > temperature that Maxwell
> > Equations are annulled is perhaps around 10^12 Kelvin. The temperature
> > of H-bombs is perhaps
> > around 10^20 Kelvin.
> >
>
> I do not know what I was rambling on about above. I got caught between
> the
> frustration of finding out the temperature of a Hydrogen Bomb blast
> and
> verifying the 10^17 Kelvin.
>
> A H-bomb critical temperature is of the order of 35,000,000 Kelvin
>
> H-bomb core temperature is of the order of 45,000,000 Kelvin
>
> The Sun core temperature is of the order of 15,000,000 Kelvin
>
> Faraday Law is 1/3 larger of energy content then Coulomb Law
>
> Tokamaks reach only 2/3 breakeven
>
> Fusion in the Sun is only 1/3 the temperature of fusion in a H-bomb.
>
> Can we say the Faraday Law still works in the Sun? I would say yes in
> that features
> such as Solar Flares and Sunspots are Faraday and Ampere laws
>
> Temperature is inverse of time. The inverse of 1/3 is 3/1 The H-bomb
> temperature
> is 3X that of the Sun.
Our sun, maybe, but there are plenty of stars that are much hotter than
ours. How does that factor into your argument?
--
/~\ The ASCII
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML
/ \ Email!
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).
plutonium....@gmail.com
>
>
> I thought frequency was the inverse of time last time I checked is
> this true for temperature as well.
> can they both be true.
That is in a branch of physics called Harmonic Motion. Frequency is
time itself,
just as wavelength is distance itself, but when we have Harmonic
oscillators
we just give time another subdefinition as well as wavelength for
distance.
When we have temperature we can talk solely of Kelvin, but someone
else
may like to talk Celcius, but both remain temperatures.
Frequency is not the inverse of time, but merely a special definition
of time
in a special branch of physics. We do not say the dinosaurs were
extinct
in the Cretaceous frequency although we could device a scheme where
we do have a frequency for the event. Nor do we say the distance from
Earth to Moon
is a y number of wavelength, although we could. Frequency is time and
wavelength is distance for a special class of physics.
The equations of statistical mechanics of physics indicate that
whereever you
see time, you can replace it with 1/Temperature.
Archimedes Plutonium
plutonium....@gmail.com
Thanks, you exposed a weakness in my logic. But there is always
weakness in
logic whenever one has little data and information of the facts. It is
extremely
difficult to come across reliable data as to the core temperature of H-
bombs.
Some of those laser experiments that modeled a H-bomb explosion, those
data are kept under secrecy. What was the name of that one
experiment--
Shiva seems to ring a bell.
I guess about the only answer that I can retort with, is that you find
a larger star of
hotter core temperature, and I will build you a larger H-bomb with 3X
the temperature.
And which the Logic seems to always come back to square 1 -- that the
smallest
tokamak that will work is the smallest sized star that will shine from
fusion. So the
only way to control and harness fusion is build a small star and use
gravity as the
confinement chamber. So in a sense that is another way of stating the
Fusion
Barrier Principle. That the only machine to control fusion is the
smallest size
star. If you do not want to use gravity in your tokamak, then your
tokamak needs
to reach hotter temperatures and thus it becomes a H-bomb and no
longer a machine.
To build a tokamak that surpasses breakeven without using gravity as
the confinement
means you have to have a series of H-bomb explosions but then you do
not have a
machine that can repeat.
Thanks for pointing out my weakness of logic but in my answer I seem
to have found
a stronger argument.
Let us face it, we want a tokamak that works but we want to not have
to use gravity as
the confinement. So if a Fusion Barrier Principle exists and is 2/3
breakeven. Then what
I have to show is that the smallest sized shining fusion star
temperature is related to
the temperature of the smallest sized H-bomb explosion and that
temperature should be 3X hotter.
So going with that logic, I need to find out the smallest sized
shining fusion star with the
very smallest sized H-bomb explosion. Not as you suggested that you
can find hotter stars,
and I have to find a hotter H-bomb to correlate.
We can kind of consider the Sun as the smallest star using fusion,
although most would say
it is an average star. And we can say that our H-bombs are the
smallest ones possible to build.
So with that logic, my above seems to be on the up and narrow path of
truth. So it does not
matter whether there are hotter stars, for there are hotter H-bombs to
match. It is that we
want the smallest star and smallest H-bomb.
So thanks for the pointing out of the logic, because it seems that I
learned alot from your
question, and that another way of stating the Fusion Barrier
Principle is that no tokamak will
exceed 2/3 breakeven because only the force of gravity can make a
fusion machine that
repeats and lasts without destroying itself. If you want a tokamak
that surpasses 2/3 breakeven,
you have built an H-bomb but you no longer have a machine.
David Bostwick
>Someone wrote:
>>
>>
Is this the royal "someone"? As in "Le physics, c'est moi"?