Nuclear Fusion has occurred on Earth!

bird mcbride said:

H2o + an electrostatic field = oxygen,hydrogen + ignition temp(fusing) = h2o. In order to have a continuous reaction, defusing is a necessary componant of a true hot fussion reactor.

Click to expand...

Ummmm... that makes little or no sense. An electrostatic field will accelerate charged particles...
Perhaps you mean electrodynamic?
And if so, what frequency/wavelength are we talking about?

ginjawarrior said:

No

McBride being wrong doesn't automatically make you right

No

So much butt hurt over nothing more than a simple correction....

You still haven't said what you think comes from a hydrogen + oxygen reaction

I correct glaringly wrong mistakes, I can hardly help that your a large source of such mistakes



You get co2 from combining carbon and oxygen (no hydrogen needed)
You get co2 + h2o from combining carbon oxygen and hydrogen


Now again (without carbon) what exactly do you think happens when you combine H2 + O2?

Click to expand...

aww ya got me. H2O is the primary exhaust product of combustion.

thats why automotive exhaust is drained out by the tailPIPE and thats why the streets have gutters, to catch and divert all that water.
i guess thats why the Los Angeles River fills up twice a day, between 7 am and 10, and between 4 pm and 6.

yes, H2O is a component of combustion, but it is NOT the primary result.

i am well aware that fire produces small amounts of water, but asserting that this is a primary function of fire is stupid.

Dr Kynes said:

aww ya got me. H2O is the p̶r̶i̶m̶a̶r̶y̶ only exhaust product of combustion of hydrogen and oxygen

Click to expand...

Fixed for accuracy

thats why automotive exhaust is drained out by the tailPIPE and thats why the streets have gutters, to catch and divert all that water.
i guess thats why the Los Angeles River fills up twice a day, between 7 am and 10, and between 4 pm and 6.

Click to expand...

your incredulity only speaks to your lack of knowledge

Next time you start your car on a cold morning observe the water coming out of the tailpipe until the tailpipe heats up sufficiently to stop condensation of exhaust gasses

yes, H2O is a component of combustion, but it is NOT the primary result.

Click to expand...

Still waiting on what you think you get from a h2 o2 reaction....

i am well aware that fire produces small amounts of water, but asserting that this is a primary function of fire is stupid.

Click to expand...

If it's a hydrogen oxygen fire....

Come on Keynes put your incredulity aside and say what you think you get?

Dr Kynes said:

aww ya got me. H2O is the primary exhaust product of combustion.

thats why automotive exhaust is drained out by the tailPIPE and thats why the streets have gutters, to catch and divert all that water.
i guess thats why the Los Angeles River fills up twice a day, between 7 am and 10, and between 4 pm and 6.

yes, H2O is a component of combustion, but it is NOT the primary result.

i am well aware that fire produces small amounts of water, but asserting that this is a primary function of fire is stupid.

Click to expand...

Best get down to the gas station before the price goes up on the hydrogen and oxygen. I'm so glad I'm not this guy.

bird mcbride said:

Best get down to the gas station before the price goes up on the hydrogen and oxygen. I'm so glad I'm not this guy.

Click to expand...

Don't know what your so smug about. Your idiotic statements in this thread are far and away the most misinformed

ginjawarrior said:

Fixed for accuracy
your incredulity only speaks to your lack of knowledge

Next time you start your car on a cold morning observe the water coming out of the tailpipe until the tailpipe heats up sufficiently to stop condensation of exhaust gasses


Still waiting on what you think you get from a h2 o2 reaction....

If it's a hydrogen oxygen fire....

Come on Keynes put your incredulity aside and say what you think you get?

Click to expand...

i know quite well what such a hypothetical fire produces, heat light and h2o, however your picayune and pointless whimpering doesnt change the fact that "fire not make water"

Fire can sometimes disassemble water and then reassemble a portion of that water, but not in any great degree, and not without a lot of extra help.

fire can also release water trapped in the fuel (like wood) but actually manufacturing water as a primary exhaust component as described by birdie mcbride, not a chance.

you feel like a winner now?

quick go tell your mommy you won an argument on the internet, i bet she will give you a cookie.

Let us do a little light reading on what we are attempting to discuss.

How to light a fire vs how to fuse two atoms into a bigger atom. In this case, the fusion of a mixture of Deuterium and Tritium. 2H and 3H. Hydrogen fusion. 4H Not so easy. Damn Neutron is emitted along with an Alpha particle. But, a big fat, juicy [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]17.6 million electron volts (MeV) of released kinetic energy through the loss of mass in the fusion process is the output.

Not a lot....a few flashlight batteries...well, more than a few. But, that is just the creation of one atom of 4H. And in Jou[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]les, still not even one. But, you get the picture....use plenty of atoms.

1 eV =1.6×10[SUP]−19[/SUP] joule (symbol J).

[/FONT]About the nuke waste. It is the current problem with fusion. Those damn fast neutrons fuse into EVERYTHING. And that material becomes radioactive.

But, there is a way around the neutron popping. Eject a proton instead. And that is the state of the Art so far.
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]
\http://library.thinkquest.org/17940/texts/fusion_dt/fusion_dt.html
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica] The D+3He reaction in particular is a promising reaction, in that this reaction is the easiest "aneutronic" reaction, producing 4He and a proton. Aneutronic means it does not produce a neutron. This is good because radioactive waste caused by neutron absorption is eliminated. This is considered a more advanced fuel, however, and will most likely not be used in the first generation of commercial power plants. [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]

[/FONT]

Doer said:

Let us do a little light reading on what we are attempting to discuss.

How to light a fire vs how to fuse two atoms into a bigger atom. In this case, the fusion of a mixture of Deuterium and Tritium. 2H and 3H. Hydrogen fusion. 4H Not so easy. Damn Neutron is emitted along with an Alpha particle. But, a big fat, juicy 17.6 million electron volts (MeV) of released kinetic energy through the loss of mass in the fusion process is the output.

Not a lot....a few flashlight batteries...well, more than a few. But, that is just the creation of one atom of 4H. And in Joules, still not even one. But, you get the picture....use plenty of atoms.

1 eV =1.6×10[SUP]−19[/SUP] joule (symbol J).

About the nuke waste. It is the current problem with fusion. Those damn fast neutrons fuse into EVERYTHING. And that material becomes radioactive.

But, there is a way around the neutron popping. Eject a proton instead. And that is the state of the Art so far.

\http://library.thinkquest.org/17940/texts/fusion_dt/fusion_dt.html
The D+3He reaction in particular is a promising reaction, in that this reaction is the easiest "aneutronic" reaction, producing 4He and a proton. Aneutronic means it does not produce a neutron. This is good because radioactive waste caused by neutron absorption is eliminated. This is considered a more advanced fuel, however, and will most likely not be used in the first generation of commercial power plants.

Click to expand...

wouldnt highly energetic protons flying about the place be just as dangerous as neutrons?

my understaning is neutrons shooting around at high speed knocking shit off other atomic nuclei was the source of the problem, but shouldnt protons, being also fairly massive and moving at high speed make pretty much the same result?

Well, I am out of my depth on that. You want Neutrons. But you want to use them not eject them as Fast. Protons can fuse with Protons and Beryllium for more energy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_confinement_fusion
And all this happens in nano-second cascades. Adsorbing and reflecting, accelerating and capturing "particle-waves." We can see how difficult that is. with these x-ray maps of the DT implosion.

Dr Kynes said:

wouldnt highly energetic protons flying about the place be just as dangerous as neutrons?

my understaning is neutrons shooting around at high speed knocking shit off other atomic nuclei was the source of the problem, but shouldnt protons, being also fairly massive and moving at high speed make pretty much the same result?

Click to expand...

Danm, I should not type while not stoned....can't think.

Proton = Positive Charge

Ejected, high energy protons, are not out of control. They can be directed, magnetically. And protons are useful, for fusing Boron. Here is the latest thing I could find. ( But, we are far from fusion, so may as well frack for Ngas.)

Proton-boron fusion uses one laser to create a boron-11 plasma and another to create a stream of protons that smash into the plasma, producing slow-moving helium particles but no neutrons. The laser-generated proton beam produces a tenfold increase of boron fusion because protons and boron nuclei collide directly. Earlier methods used a solid boron target, "protected" by its electrons, which reduced the fusion rate. Scaled-up versions... expected to require substantially less energy input to create and sustain the reaction.[SUP][1][/SUP]