Nuclear Fusion Spin

you have several teams working on this. so far 2 of those teams claim containment of plasma but its only for a fraction of second. both teams think with reasonable tweaking to existing designs and increased magnetic field strengths they'll have a reactor within 5 years or less...stay tuned

http://bostinno.streetwise.co/2015/09/16/mit-professor-creates-compact-cheap-fusion-reactor/

Maybe they could rotate the magnetic field at the proper frequency....

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0029-5515/1/3/001/meta;jsessionid=655856532801EE76A37A63F9F0FE4516.c1

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0029-5515/43/6/302/meta

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0029-5515/51/10/103038/meta

Thank you, Excellent GA.

Are you building one, you yourself?

Can't afford it, I'm retired, a SOB, sitting around thinking to much.

The seeds of creative thought need not be rooted in reality....Imaginative inspiration can come from anywhere....certainly on the cutting edge of Science and technology, this will always be true, a lot of "breakthroughs" are purely accidental, accomplished in pursuit of something else which sometimes is just whimsy...

Granted a good solid knowledge of scientific principles also helps....but I think some of the greatest technologies we have, started with, "It can't be done", or "That's impossible".....indeed I have found myself on occasion standing next to someone saying this very thing, with me agreeing!, looking at something I had just done! It seems the ignorant sometimes can do the impossible, because they don't know it's impossible...or maybe because they know nothing is impossible....

Yes I agree with your observation, high temp plus compression produces nuclear fusion that results in an explosion, as demonstrated by the hydrogen bomb. The point I am referring to is, what conditions support controlled sustainable nuclear fusion, like a ripe apple falling from a tree, why?

Nature does it the easy way. Gravitational confinement is simple and effective. Unfortunately, it doesn't scale down. To accomplish fusion on a human scale requires much more clever methods.

There are a number of ways that fusion has been accomplished...magnetic confinement (tokamak and others), laser inertial confinementl (National Ignition Facility), muon induced fusion, Beam-target fusion, etc. (See the link below.) They all, at present, suffer from one main defect: it takes more energy than is released. Even when "break even" is achieved, it then has to compete favorably with existing energy sources to be practical and economical.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion

There's always hope that someone will be thinking outside of the box and come up with some clever new way. (There was apparently false hope a few years back when Pons and Fleishmann claimed to have concentrated hydrogen in Palladium metal using electrolysis Cold Fusion.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion

Actually, that "false" hope was not precisely false. Many experiments by good researchers (after the completely botched work at MIT and CIT) where D/Pd atomic loading ratios were controlled to the higher levels required by Fleischman and Pons, and also using the same crystal axis cut metal did achieve detection of excess heat in a preponderance of the tests, (something like 17/25 or higher)...sure not perfect, and supposedly not enough to "boil a cup of tea", but there is a real effect.

Gentlemen in the informal group I participate in have had media "blown out" of the electrolysis experiment on about nine occasions now, and "we" are still not sure of what precisely is causing this, and some form of radiation above background levels have been observed, but even that appears not easily reproduced. The radiation is not highly penetrating (is suspected to actually be Beta particles), and ceases rather abruptly after about 20 minutes. This may have something to do with loss of intermediates, loss of NAE, or some natural decay mechanism dropping the rate below distinction from background.

One researcher at University of Missouri has routinely made excess heat 25 times the input power to the experiment, and claims at least one instance of over 50 times heat output/input. So yes, Mildred, there is an effect, and it is becoming more reproducible, but not to the point of flipping a switch and seeing instant results.

The answer is yes and no. Yes there are spin conservation issues within the nuclear spin states involved in the reactions as to energetic analysis. No, Kristy, magnetic fields will not prevent the spin states from reacting, but they may split the energy levels related to spin that would produce more degeneracy in the system, thereby allowing more degrees of freedom for reactant - product reaction path resonance.

There almost has to be some excited intermediary complex nuclear state that is still hydrogen (not yet helium), but at the expected drip line for high neutron to charge ratio. This complex must have a preferred pathway to helium, over simply falling apart back to a couple of deuterium atoms, or protium and tritium.

At least one of the LENR groups out there claiming heat gain of at least 2 COP, and is probably nearer 3 COP now, and one researcher at University of Missouri has a set up that can produce up to 50 COP. The First Brillouin Zone for immobilized H atoms on metals as nickel that are undergoing a phonon excitation from Q wave (100 KA current pulse) is very much a topic of interest, as it is suspected that the Heisenberg factor allows this immobilized nucleus to have sufficient cross section and energy (since the momentum is highly uncertain) to capture an electron from the metal lattice molecular orbitals. The resulting neutron is ultra-cold (obviously this is not thermal fusion), and is known to have an extremely high absorption cross section by nearby protons, deuterons, tritons, etc. In the LENR experiments, there is a general lack of neutron detection, probably related to the cold neutron production, i.e.-none of them have a snow-ball chance in hell of leaving the matrix before absorption. What people need to be looking for is Beta emission, a sure sign of an overly heavy nucleus (4H metastable nucleus) at the Beta drip line.

So once again, the answer is yes and no. That is my weird way of looking at the universe only, and other opinions may vary. Please seek a second opinion before embarking on any wild chasing of geese related to what I have stated. Side effects may include heavy breathing after attempting to quote the previous paragraph.