Nano Fusion? Micro Fusion? Fusion Learning Source?

11
0
Maybe that's it. I was thinking about squeezing atoms together, not nucleii. Though I still think the space between two intersecting planes goes to zero.
 

e.bar.goum

Science Advisor
Education Advisor
949
388
Maybe that's it. I was thinking about squeezing atoms together, not nucleii. Though I still think the space between two intersecting planes goes to zero.
Take a good look at a pair of scissors!

But yes, fusion is a nuclear process. Even for atomic processes, you can't do what you are describing - crystals won't look smooth to atoms either - think about atomic force microscopy!
 

mheslep

Gold Member
255
727
could we try mechanical confinement?
Here's an electromagnetic explanation at the macro level. (Though traditional EM fails at the quantum level).

Mechanically applied static force, or force applied by solid state structures, is electronic, i.e. a function of the forces between electrons. As you likely are aware, the energies involved with nuclear interactions are on the order of million times larger than those seen in chemical (electronic) interaction. So too the forces involved. F=qE. Statically applied chemical (electronic) bonds are nowhere near strong enough to overcome the coulomb force produced by nuclei when separated by the radius of the nucleus.

This is all to be expected, that only the forces on the order that found in the gravity of stars suffice to produce fusion and not in a sufficiently sharpened pair of scissors. Else the universe would look very different.
 
11
0
Though I knew on one level that it's about nuclei, I was imagining squeezing atoms. While we could try that, we'd only create molecules; we don't have the tech to squeeze nuclei. Thanks.
 
32,810
8,649
You can induce chemical bonds via mechanical processes. Cold welding is an example.
 

mheslep

Gold Member
255
727
we don't have the tech to squeeze nuclei. Thanks.
No mechanical technology because the physics of solids does not it allow it. The technology for fusion does exist via inertial, electrostatic, and magnetic confinement of nuclei, or "squeezing" them if you like, and has for some time. Unfortunately so far nobody has proven how to do so with out using more energy in the process than is produced (outside of fusion enhanced nuclear explosions).
 
624
17
When experimenting with fusion, why do we always go so big and make extremely expensive reactors that take years to create and even construct facilities for? I've seen some failed attempts at making fusion happen in carbon nanotubes, failing in the sense that the carbon nanotubes are just completely demolished. It makes more sense to me (I'm new to this stuff) to make small reactors that could fit in your hand or smaller to have far many more experiments conducted,had the same amount of money that's put into these massive reactors been put into a large quantity of smaller projects.
Agreed, the big guns are pulling the majority of funding while ignoring gaps in our knowledge that could be filled with simpler, less expensive fusion experiments. Engineers require data if they are to eventually design a feasible commercial reactor for power generation.

I am not saying we aren't collecting good information with these 'big' experiments, just that we should grab more of the low hanging fruit at the same time as you suggest.
 
32,810
8,649
Some effects appear in larger reactors only, or appear in smaller reactors but don't appear in larger reactors. Building 1000 desk-sized reactors gives a good statistics, but it cannot address several things ITER is built for.
 
624
17
Some effects appear in larger reactors only, or appear in smaller reactors but don't appear in larger reactors. Building 1000 desk-sized reactors gives a good statistics, but it cannot address several things ITER is built for.
Absolutely, both are required equally.
 

Drakkith

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
2018 Award
20,514
4,217
Agreed, the big guns are pulling the majority of funding while ignoring gaps in our knowledge that could be filled with simpler, less expensive fusion experiments. Engineers require data if they are to eventually design a feasible commercial reactor for power generation.

I am not saying we aren't collecting good information with these 'big' experiments, just that we should grab more of the low hanging fruit at the same time as you suggest.
Err, what? We've had small-scale fusion experiments running for over 50 years. It's only been recently that we've started to scale up into really big designs.
 
624
17
Err, what? We've had small-scale fusion experiments running for over 50 years. It's only been recently that we've started to scale up into really big designs.
Hey Drakkith!

If you think the bulk of funding is going to small scale fusion experiments then I have a reactor I would like to sell you ;)
 

mheslep

Gold Member
255
727
I believe the intent was small *relevant* to ISIS or NIF. Everything prior, tokamaks, magnetic mirrors, etc, fell much further away from the Lawson criterion.
 

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving
Top