CLASSICAL CONCEPTS
It would be beneficial, in an informative sense at least,
to briefly describe mainstream science's understanding and explanation
of the fusion process.
Since two like charged particles repel each other (according
to Coulomb's Law), why does fusion take place at all?
Current concepts hold that if two like charged nuclei (such
as our previously-mentioned deuterium nuclei) can be brought
close enough together (approx. one nuclear diameter-about 5 x
10-13 cm), that a short range nuclear 'strong force'
will take over and bind the two nuclei into a single new nucleus.
Enough energy must be supplied to the interacting nuclei to enable
or allow them to come close enough together so that fusion can
take place. According to the classical theory, the energy that
must be supplied to the interacting nuclei to overcome the force
of electrostatic repulsion (known as the Coulomb barrier) so
that the nuclei can fuse, is given by:
Energy required to surmount the Coulomb barrier
= (ZlZ2e2
o
where Zl and Z2 are the respective charges
(or atomic numbers) of the interacting nuclei, 'e' is the unit
(or electronic) charge, and Ro is the distance between
the centers of the nuclei at which the attractive 'strong force'
can dominate or overcome the repulsive Coulomb force. For light
nuclei, that are of interest in controlled nuclear fusion research
Ro may be taken to be approximately equal to a nuclear
diameter (5 x 10-13 cm), and since 'e' is 4.8 x 10-10
esu (statcoulomb) it follows from the equation that the
energy required to surmount the Coulomb barrier is:
= 4.6 x 10-7 Zl
Z2 erg
= .28 Zl Z2MeV
(million electron volts)
Where 1 MeV = 1.6 x 10-6 erg.
It can be seen that the energy that must be acquired by the
nuclei before they can undergo fusion increases with the atomic
numbers Zl and Z2 For reactions among hydrogen
isotope nuclei (deuterium, for example) for which Zl=Z2=l,
the minimum energy according to classical theory is about .28
MeV. Larger energies would be required for reactions involving
nuclei of higher atomic numbers because of the increased electrostatic
repulsion.
These large energies that, according to popular theory, must
be supplied to fuel nuclei, imply extremely high temperatures
for the fuel gases. Achieving these high temperatures and containing
the gases has consumed the mental efforts and research budgets
of more than an entire generation of physicists. Even though
billions of dollars have been spent to support the research and
development of thousands of scientists over the span of the last
fifty years, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) admits they
are no closer to a solution than they were when they started.
They were predicting 'ignition' (a reactor going to the initial
self sustaining burn state) for the year 2025. DOE estimates
that it will be many years after that before a fusion reactor
can be made commercially viable. They have since backed away
from estimating 'ignition' will be achieved by 2025. In 1995,
Martha A. Krebs, then Director of the Office of Energy Research
wrote to Dr. Robert W. Conn, Chair of the Fusion Energy Advisory
Committee, School of Engineering, University of California, San
Diego: "In 1991, the National Energy Strategy (NES), following
a recommendation of the Fusion Power Advisory Committee, defined
the principal goal of the fusion energy program as "Prove
fusion energy to be a technically and economically credible energy
source, with an operating demonstration plant by about 2025 and
an operating commercial plant by about 2040." Having been
advised that Congress has seen through this scam and has reduced
funding for fusion, she then presented a draft to Dr. Conn where
she stated: "In this revised program strategy, the focus
of the U.S. fusion program has shifted from the operation of
a demonstration power plant in 2025 to fostering improvements
in confinement concepts and the underlying science and enabling
technology of fusion." I think it entirely appropriate that
she turns for advice to Dr. Conn since the whole fusion engineering
program has been a tremendous con job
foisted upon the U.S. Congress. Their continuous pitch is 'If
you give us enough money we can make it work'. Well, the facts
are that fusion researchers have been given obscene amounts of
money and still don't really have a clue as to how to build a
working 'ignited state' net energy producing nuclear fusion reactor.
|