Calculating the Potential of a Beryllium Beam for Energy Generation

  • Thread starter Thread starter vlamir
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Beam
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the potential of a beryllium beam for energy generation, exploring various theoretical reactions and models related to particle physics and energy conversion. Participants examine the implications of these reactions, including the structure of fullerens and nanotubes, and the conservation laws in physics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a reaction involving LiD and gamma radiation leading to beryllium and electromagnetic energy, suggesting an engineering concept that may be speculative.
  • Another participant challenges the validity of a proposed reaction involving protium, claiming it violates conservation laws of baryons and leptons.
  • A participant defends their model, the polytronic model, asserting that it adheres to the conservation of energy and hints at a more complex understanding of particle interactions.
  • Concerns are raised about the efficiency of a proposed photon mover based on the beryllium projector, with suggestions that interstellar matter and energy might be more effective.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of proposed reactions and models, particularly regarding conservation laws. There is no consensus on the correctness of the claims made, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for careful consideration of conservation laws, including linear and angular momentum, in their theoretical models. There are indications of missing assumptions and unresolved mathematical steps in the proposed reactions.

vlamir
Messages
149
Reaction score
0
Recently I have made some calculations for reaction:
LiD + gamma –> Be + gamma –> EM-energy
As result, the interesting engineering idea has appeared. But, maybe, it is only fantasy.

http://vlamir.nsk.ru/THE_BERYLLIUM_BEAM_e.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Engineering news on Phys.org
The next problem, which has the direct attitude to the design of beryllium projector, has arisen because of the false theory of the structure of fullerens and nanotubes.
Our own calculations have shown, that the real structure of fullerens and nanotubes is more complex and graceful, than it is offered by the official paradigm of quantum chemistry.
The results of our small research are stated here:
http://vlamir.nsk.ru/WHAT_DIAMOND_SPEAKS_ABOUT_e.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In our last work concerning alternating transformations “an energy <=> a matter” you can see one more cycle:
protium + gamma => electron and positron –> acceleration in the accelerator on counter beams => proton or antiproton
http://vlamir.nsk.ru/THE_MOST_IMPORTANT_QUANTUM_NUMBER_e.pdf

Further, there is an assumption about existence of reaction:
LiD + pressure => Be + gamma => protons and antiprotons => annihilation => EM–energy
 
Last edited by a moderator:
vlamir said:
In our last work concerning alternating transformations “an energy <=> a matter” you can see one more cycle:
protium + gamma => electron and positron –> acceleration in the accelerator on counter beams => proton or antiproton

vlamir,

Your "reaction" protium + gamma --> electron + positron

violates some a basic physical laws: Conservation of Baryons and
Conservation of Leptons.

Protium, i.e. "light hydrogen", consists of one proton [ a baryon ] and an
electron [ a lepton ].

Therefore, the reactants consist of 1 baryon and 1 lepton.

The products consist of an electron [ lepton number 1 ] and a
positron [ lepton number -1 ].

Therefore, after the reaction you have 0 baryons and 0 leptons,
whereas before you had 1 each of baryon and leptons.

Therefore, your postulated reaction doesn't conserve baryon and
lepton numbers in contradiction to the laws of Physics.

Dr. Gregory Greenman
Physicist
 
Dear Dr. G.Greemam,
Thanks for your reply.
I know the modern physics of elementary particles rather well. But, also, I see many contradictions in this paradigm. Therefore, I have followed the example from my model – from polytronic model of atomic structure. Probably, I should make one more figure and show, that frame of protium (baryon) does not disappear after radiation of electron and positron.
The polytronic model is constructed on the law of conservation of energy.
 
vlamir said:
Dear Dr. G.Greemam,
Thanks for your reply.
I know the modern physics of elementary particles rather well. But, also, I see many contradictions in this paradigm. Therefore, I have followed the example from my model – from polytronic model of atomic structure. Probably, I should make one more figure and show, that frame of protium (baryon) does not disappear after radiation of electron and positron.
The polytronic model is constructed on the law of conservation of energy.

vlamir,

Any model that you propose has to not only obey the law of conservation
of energy - but you must also conserve both linear and angular momentum,
as well as baryon and lepton numbers.

Dr. Gregory Greenman
Physicist
 
It is clear, Morbius!
At collision of particles the quantities of the linear and angular momentums are redistributed, and the amount of movement remains constant.
However, all this isn’t so simple.
The physical sense and mathematical expression for any momentum (mechanical, magnetic, electric) should enable for direct calculation of forces of interaction between particles and for dynamics of process of collision.
Unfortunately, the modern theoretical physics does not devote to this question of due attention.
But, as, we are in subforum Nuclear Engineering the suggested theme of Beryllium beam, does not demand the careful analysis of the momentums.
I have analyzed an opportunity of creation of the photon mover on the basis of the beryllium projector and have understood, that such engine will be very inefficient. More effective would be use of interstellar matter and energy.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K