Groups & Studies about Fusion via Colliding Beams

In summary: This would take more energy than to just make new particles.In summary, the conversation discusses the feasibility of using beam collisions to obtain nuclear fusion energy. The main problems identified are the low event rate and particle loss due to coulumbian scattering. The idea of using muons and a magnetic field to recover scattered particles is suggested, but it is questioned whether it is more energy efficient than just creating new particles. The use of a thermal blanket and the Polywell device are also mentioned as possible alternatives. Further research and experimentation is needed in this area.
  • #1
AndyUrquijo
20
0
Hi everyone,

I am studying the feasibility of using the collision of two beams to obtain nuclear fusion energy. I would like you to recommend me some serious and intersting articles about this. Is there any experiment that does fusion by beam collitions already?

Im open to hear about any theoretical and techonological issues you can think of. So far the principal problems seem to be the low event rate and the particle loss due to coulumbian scattering.

I don't think I understand the real problem with the event rates. With other parameters such as energy (or temperature) fixed, the event rate is heavily dependent on density, n2 for temperature based systems. So what is the diference between a Beam Collider (BC) and other devices? A physical one? Is the dependence on density different for this sytem? Or is there a techonological barrier in achievieng high beam densities?

I clearly understand the problem with scattered particles though. You lose more than 1000 particles per successful fusion*. This sucks, so you need to either reduce this loss or recover some of the scattered particles.

The only method I can think of to the first alternative is using muons. The problem is getting them of course. But supose you could obtain them somehow. Then in a D-T reaction aplying a muon beam to the deuterium or tritium beam (or both) would greatly reduce coulumbian interacions.

To "recover" some scattered particles, you could apply a magnetic field that rectified the path and the velocity. Most of the scattered particles would have small deviation angles and the velocities would only be affected by the small energy loss of brehmsstrahlung. So I would think without doing any calculation, that it is possible to recover a good amount of the lost particles. The recovered particles could then be used in the next collision cycle. And of course cyclic colliders are needed. this idea can't be aplied in linacs.

Resuming:
- Could you help me with material on the subject?
- Do BC for fusion exist already?
- Can you think of critical issues for this method?
- What do you think of my ideas? (Stupid? Awesome?)

*I read this here somewhere, but can't find it again to cite/link it.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
As you said, the main problem is that you only get about 1 in 1000 fusions per collision and have almost no way of increasing that rate other than to increase the amount of collisions each nuclei have before they are lost. As far as I understand it's simply more feasible to use other methods to achieve this, such as magnetic confinement.
 
  • #3
AndyUrquijo said:
Hi everyone,
To "recover" some scattered particles, you could apply a magnetic field that rectified the path and the velocity. Most of the scattered particles would have small deviation angles and the velocities would only be affected by the small energy loss of brehmsstrahlung. So I would think without doing any calculation, that it is possible to recover a good amount of the lost particles. The recovered particles could then be used in the next collision cycle. And of course cyclic colliders are needed. this idea can't be aplied in linacs.

I am not sure what you mean by recover the particles.
It may take more energy to do this than to let them hit a thermal blanket and get some heat recovery, and then accelerate new particles.
 
  • #4
capanni said:
I am not sure what you mean by recover the particles.
It may take more energy to do this than to let them hit a thermal blanket and get some heat recovery, and then accelerate new particles.

I mean putting some type of focusing device on the collition site to pull the scattered particles back to the beam. It could be better to recover just the ones that have small deflection angles. This should be cheaper (energywise) than the cost of accelerating a new particle from the beginning.

Im not sure you would get a good enough amount of energy with a thermal blanket to afford losing the scattered particles. Besides, on of the main issues is having high intensity beams, so this is also a method to maintain density as well.
 
  • #5
AndyUrquijo said:
I mean putting some type of focusing device on the collition site to pull the scattered particles back to the beam. It could be better to recover just the ones that have small deflection angles. This should be cheaper (energywise) than the cost of accelerating a new particle from the beginning.

Im not sure you would get a good enough amount of energy with a thermal blanket to afford losing the scattered particles. Besides, on of the main issues is having high intensity beams, so this is also a method to maintain density as well.

Look up the Polywell on wikipedia. It also uses inertial confinement to confine the ions to the center of the device. (Which is kinda what you want in your beam-beam fusion)
One of the problems that the Polywell device had trouble with was electrons getting lost from the device. They eventually figured out a way to have the electrons circulate back inside if they happen to exit the grid of the device. I say this because a polywell is similar to colliding beams of ions, except that in a polywell the "beams" are coming from every direction at once. The consctruction of the device let's the ions oscillate back and forth through the center of the device enough times for them to fuse. Now, it is still in the prototype and research phase, but hopefully they can get one to perform well enough to breakeven.
 
  • #6
Your problem with recovering the particles is that they are past the collision site and heading away from it. This means you would have to slow them down then accelerate them back the way they came.
 
Last edited:

1. What is fusion via colliding beams?

Fusion via colliding beams is a method of achieving nuclear fusion by using particle accelerators to create and collide beams of atoms at extremely high speeds. The collisions result in the fusion of the atoms, releasing large amounts of energy.

2. How is fusion via colliding beams different from other fusion methods?

Fusion via colliding beams is different from other fusion methods, such as magnetic confinement or inertial confinement, because it does not require the extreme temperatures and pressures found in the core of stars. Instead, it uses high-speed collisions to overcome the repulsive forces between atomic nuclei and initiate fusion reactions.

3. What are the potential applications of fusion via colliding beams?

Fusion via colliding beams has the potential to be used as a clean and sustainable energy source, as it produces no greenhouse gas emissions and uses abundant sources of fuel, such as hydrogen isotopes. It could also be used in nuclear research and the production of medical isotopes.

4. What challenges are scientists facing in developing fusion via colliding beams?

One of the main challenges in developing fusion via colliding beams is the high energy requirements for accelerating and colliding the beams. This requires advanced and expensive particle accelerators. Additionally, controlling and confining the fusion reactions is a complex task that requires precise control of the beams and their collisions.

5. What have been the recent advancements in fusion via colliding beams research?

Recent advancements in fusion via colliding beams research include the development of more powerful and efficient particle accelerators, as well as improved control and diagnostic techniques for studying the fusion reactions. There have also been successful demonstrations of fusion via colliding beams in laboratory settings, bringing us closer to potential practical applications of this method.

Similar threads

  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
49
Views
3K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top