Register to reply

Question of Sound Fusion Power Generation

by scorpio_wan1945
Tags: fusion, generation, power, sound
Share this thread:
scorpio_wan1945
#1
Apr15-06, 03:28 AM
P: 12
1.with the hot and cold fusion under experiment level now, would power from sound fusion provides equal or more power and economic value if it has been successfully researched?

2. what is the difficulty faced in building a commercial sound fusion generator?

3. Future of sound fusion development?

thanks in advance
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
Study links polar vortex chills to melting sea ice
Lab unveil new nano-sized synthetic scaffolding technique
Cool calculations for cold atoms: New theory of universal three-body encounters
Rach3
#2
Apr15-06, 06:37 AM
Rach3's Avatar
P: 318
Sonofusion has never been observed.
Morbius
#3
Apr15-06, 01:38 PM
Sci Advisor
P: 1,160
Quote Quote by scorpio_wan1945
1.with the hot and cold fusion under experiment level now, would power from sound fusion provides equal or more power and economic value if it has been successfully researched?

2. what is the difficulty faced in building a commercial sound fusion generator?

3. Future of sound fusion development?

thanks in advance
Scorpio,

Neither "sound fusion" nor "cold fusion" has been conclusively demonstrated; and
based on our current understanding of the physics - they won't be.

Dr. Gregory Greenman
Physicist

Astronuc
#4
Apr15-06, 02:40 PM
Admin
Astronuc's Avatar
P: 21,887
Question of Sound Fusion Power Generation

I know 'cold fusion' was dismissed as false, but I thought that some folk from RPI and one of the labs had detected neutrons in a deuterated liquid (acetone or something). Has that been found to be false?

Here is press release from RPI - New Sonofusion Experiment Produces Results Without External Neutron Source
http://news.rpi.edu/update.do?artcen...tappvar=page(1)
Azael
#5
Apr15-06, 06:49 PM
P: 324
Taleyarkhan must be celebrating now!! I hope that experiment will be verified by another team.

Astronuc do you think sonofusion can be a viable energy source in the future??
Astronuc
#6
Apr15-06, 07:08 PM
Admin
Astronuc's Avatar
P: 21,887
Not as an energy source. May understanding is that the process is inherently low energy density.
ZapperZ
#7
Apr15-06, 07:37 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
ZapperZ's Avatar
P: 29,238
Quote Quote by Azael
Taleyarkhan must be celebrating now!! I hope that experiment will be verified by another team.

Astronuc do you think sonofusion can be a viable energy source in the future??
Not so fast!

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=113669

Zz.
Azael
#8
Apr17-06, 06:22 AM
P: 324
Quote Quote by ZapperZ
Yeah I read that :( I was more thinking about the article astro posted
http://news.rpi.edu/update.do?artcen...tappvar=page(1)

or was that in response to the above article aswell? I know Taleyarkhan has published 2 times about his bubbel fusion and I though that what astro posted is a third time now with a completely different method
Azael
#9
Apr17-06, 06:28 AM
P: 324
Quote Quote by Astronuc
Not as an energy source. May understanding is that the process is inherently low energy density.

(if it works) is there anything preventing scaling it up?
My naive thought would be that if its possible to get one stable bubble why not thousand stable bubbles. If it is possible to scale up the number of stable bubbles in one canister wouldnt it be possible to get enough for heat production

The other option I could think of is to make the canisters very small(maby spherical canisters a few milimeters in diameter) and have alot of them in close proximity. I dont know if its possible to create a stable bubble in the frequence range required in very small canisters though?
Astronuc
#10
Apr17-06, 07:08 AM
Admin
Astronuc's Avatar
P: 21,887
Quote Quote by Azael
(if it works) is there anything preventing scaling it up?
My naive thought would be that if its possible to get one stable bubble why not thousand stable bubbles. If it is possible to scale up the number of stable bubbles in one canister wouldnt it be possible to get enough for heat production

The other option I could think of is to make the canisters very small(maby spherical canisters a few milimeters in diameter) and have alot of them in close proximity. I dont know if its possible to create a stable bubble in the frequence range required in very small canisters though?
My feeling is that at the moment, the sonofusion system uses more energy than it produces. I don't see how it could be scaled up to be a useful energy source. Using sonofusion simply for a source of neutrons would be impractical with regard to power generation.

Also, I would like to acknowledge ZapperZ's post regarding the dispute over the validity of sonofusion. It appears that, like cold fusion, sonofusion may not be proven.
russ_watters
#11
Apr17-06, 10:02 AM
Mentor
P: 22,305
Quote Quote by Azael
(if it works) is there anything preventing scaling it up?
My naive thought would be that if its possible to get one stable bubble why not thousand stable bubbles. If it is possible to scale up the number of stable bubbles in one canister wouldnt it be possible to get enough for heat production
Slight clarification - there is a difference between getting it to work and getting it to produce a positive and continuous amount of power. Regular hot fusion "works" - just only for a fraction of a second and without producing excess power (afaik).

So scaleability isn't the only issue, even if fusion can be successfully/repeatably demonstrated in a lab.
Astronuc
#12
Apr17-06, 01:47 PM
Admin
Astronuc's Avatar
P: 21,887
Hot fusion has been in the works since the 50's. It is the basis of thermonuclear weapons, which however, are not practical energy sources.

Seriously, fusion research has focussed on magnetically confined plasmas, which are really 'hot' and inertial confinement. Both are still in the experimental stages.

Cold fusion was found to be false, and it would appear sonofusion may also be false. Even IF sonofusion has been demonstrated, it seems limited to provided low level neutron sources. The question is whether or not it is any better than current (alternative) neutron sources.
Azael
#13
Apr17-06, 04:39 PM
P: 324
Quote Quote by Astronuc
My feeling is that at the moment, the sonofusion system uses more energy than it produces. I don't see how it could be scaled up to be a useful energy source. Using sonofusion simply for a source of neutrons would be impractical with regard to power generation.

Also, I would like to acknowledge ZapperZ's post regarding the dispute over the validity of sonofusion. It appears that, like cold fusion, sonofusion may not be proven.

I hope that, even if Taleyarkhan is proven to be a crank regarding sonofusion, research into sonoluminescence will continue. Its a exciting phenomenon and maby something worthwhile will be the result of it all.

Quote Quote by russ_watters
Slight clarification - there is a difference between getting it to work and getting it to produce a positive and continuous amount of power. Regular hot fusion "works" - just only for a fraction of a second and without producing excess power (afaik).

So scaleability isn't the only issue, even if fusion can be successfully/repeatably demonstrated in a lab.
Didnt think about that

Quote Quote by Astronuc
Hot fusion has been in the works since the 50's. It is the basis of thermonuclear weapons, which however, are not practical energy sources.
I sure enjoy the tan the big thermonuke in the sky gives me each summer
Astronuc
#14
Apr17-06, 04:47 PM
Admin
Astronuc's Avatar
P: 21,887
Quote Quote by Azael
I sure enjoy the tan the big thermonuke in the sky gives me each summer
Well, yeah! Nature has demonstrated hot fusion on a big scale for billions of years, and some think that solar energy/power (PV or otherwise) is the best utilization of fusion energy, and it probably is.
Azael
#15
Apr17-06, 04:49 PM
P: 324
Quote Quote by Astronuc
Well, yeah! Nature has demonstrated hot fusion on a big scale for billions of years, and some think that solar energy/power (PV or otherwise) is the best utilization of fusion energy, and it probably is.
But solar power isnt exciting
Astronuc
#16
Apr17-06, 06:52 PM
Admin
Astronuc's Avatar
P: 21,887
Quote Quote by Azael
But solar power isnt exciting
Au contraire, mon ami.

2006 IEEE 4th World Conference on Photovoltaic Energy Conversion
http://www.wcpec.org/ in Hawaii no less.
Azael
#17
Apr18-06, 09:21 AM
P: 324
Quote Quote by Astronuc
Au contraire, mon ami.

2006 IEEE 4th World Conference on Photovoltaic Energy Conversion
http://www.wcpec.org/ in Hawaii no less.
They sure are good at picking locations atleast
ZapperZ
#18
May11-06, 10:16 AM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
ZapperZ's Avatar
P: 29,238
More problems with the bubble fusion claim. Read this soon before you require a registration access.

http://www.nature.com/news/2006/0605.../060508-8.html

Zz.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Wind power generation help please Introductory Physics Homework 3
Power generation and distribution Electrical Engineering 6
Wind power generation Electrical Engineering 1
Power generation and storage Engineering Systems & Design 5
Next generation power reactors General Discussion 12