Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Table-top fusion?

  1. Apr 27, 2005 #1


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 27, 2005 #2


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    The article mispels "pyroelectric" as "pryoelectric". :biggrin:

    It does seem they obtained fusion reactions, although at a very low level.

    What is strange is the claim of using a pyroelectric material at room temperature, when the article also states "This material is pryoelectric, which means that positive and negative charges build up on opposite faces of the crystal when it is heated." So did they heat it or not? If they heated it, it's not exactly room temperature. :rolleyes:

    UCLA's site - http://rodan.physics.ucla.edu/pyrofusion/
  4. Apr 27, 2005 #3
    Room temperature relative to what is usually thought of when one hears "fusion". The heat flow seems to be incident from one side only.
  5. Apr 27, 2005 #4
    why? why? why?

    Wow! more neutrons! Ionizing one's, too. What Neandertal 'modern' means of energy transformation will be utilized to make 'electricity?'. or What? another terrorist device.
    What happens to the immediate surroundings when these neutrons 'pollute' change deleteriously everything close by., 'researchers' inclusive.
    perhaps a better pursuit would be to maybe ask "how many BTU's are contained in water vapor in the Atmosphere assuming that the atmosphere is 100 mi thick and all other elements within the atmosphere would extend only 1500 feet above the surface?"

    refugee from the nuclear industry....
  6. Apr 28, 2005 #5


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    There is a writeup in the NY Times (Aarrggghhh!!!).

    Potential uses (in answer to Why? Why? Why?):
    And inexpesive neutron source.

    Also, about have the reactions should produce T+p. Hmmm.

    From the journalist:
    Well, not exactly. Yes the sun (and stars in general) use fusion to produce energy, but the sun is primarily p+p fusion with about 2% from the CNO cycle.

    I posted a copy of the article with schematic at E-S: http://www.everything-science.com/components/com_smf/index.php?topic=6060.msg55160#msg55160 [Broken]

    The cell uses an accelerating potential of about 1 kV, hence the low yield. The yield could be boosted using a tritiated target (with concommitant radiological issues) and a higher potential. However, the low potential means low energy input.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 2, 2017
  7. Apr 28, 2005 #6
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook