• Resonant tunneling diodes and hydrogen fusion

    From Big Bad Bombastic Bob@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 31 11:45:46 2023
    Sometimes Wikipedia can be very useful [when bias cannot be a factor] so
    you'll see some Wikipedia links in this.

    I have had ideas about nuclear fusion for a long time, it STILL being unrealized (in a useful sense) since the invention of the Tokomak. I
    think it is being OVER-researched, because there is no sense of urgency.

    Currently there are 2 competing methods (that I know of) to get short
    term >1:1 energy out of fusion: One is a Tokomak-like system (most
    research done here). The other is "inertial confinement" where a
    crapload of lasers blast a (very expensive) fuel pellet from all
    directions until it undergoes fusion.

    To the best of my knowledge, NONE of them use resonant energies.

    In electronics there is a device called a 'Resonant Tunnel Diode' which
    is very new/expensive/hard-to-make but has a LOT of potential:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonant-tunneling_diode

    Tunneling can be described as a small percentage of particles being able
    to get through a barrier without having sufficient energy to cross it.

    long link: https://phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/University_Physics/University_Physics_(OpenStax)/University_Physics_III_-_Optics_and_Modern_Physics_(OpenStax)/07%3A_Quantum_Mechanics/7.07%3A_Quantum_Tunneling_of_Particles_through_Potential_Barriers

    tiny link:
    http://tinyurl.com/taduw9re

    Other info here:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling

    In a semiconductor, you need sufficient voltage to get it to conduct,
    but tunneling allows it to conduct a *tiny* amount below that. A tunnel
    diode leverages this by being heavily 'doped', which causes a 'negative resistance' region (i.e. voltage up, current down) in its operating
    curve, which can be used for an amplifier.

    A resonant tunnel diode has multiple barriers, and at a 'resonant'
    energy ALL of them can be crossed by an incoming particle (in this case electrons) and as such the conductivity is much better at those energies
    (think voltage) than a regular tunnel diode.

    In fact, at the right energy, the probability of tunneling is 1, i.e.
    100%, which is the same conductivity as if the diode were operating at
    the normal potential WITHOUT tunneling. In other words, these resonant energies ELIMINATE the barriers entirely.

    This is the *KIND* of RESONANCE energy I have been considering with
    respect to fusion. In the sun H-H fusion reactions actually happen at a
    much lower temperature than expected BECAUSE of tunneling.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton%E2%80%93proton_chain

    For the barrier between hydrogen nuclei there is something called a
    'Gamow window' i.e. a range of energies in which tunneling occurs and
    the probabilities of it occuring:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamow_window

    As far as I can tell this is for a SINGLE barrier and is generic for any particle interactions involving tunneling (though the various constants
    would be different for each type of interaction).

    There is also a secondary type of fusion reaction that is more common in heavier stars, the "CNO" cycle:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNO_cycle

    This was once thought to be the only reaction in the sun, but was later theorized (and then measured and proven using neutrino detectors) NOT to
    be the case.

    CNO cycle happens at higher energy levels and involves Carbon, Nitrogen,
    and Oxygen (and sometimes Flourine, Neon, and some slightly heavier
    elements). In short the fusion process adds protons one at a time,
    starting with carbon. When the result is unstable one of the protons
    becomes a neutron by spitting out a positron and a neutrino. As the
    element gets heavier, it eventually spits out an alpha particle (which
    is basically a helium nucleus) and (generaly) becomes carbon again.

    Each reaction here, of course, would also fall under the probabilities
    of tunneling.

    So here's the thing: WHAT IF multiple barriers can be created AND the
    energy of protons be controlled such that it is ALWAYS at this resonant
    energy? If it is sufficiently low, fusion would become VERY economical.


    In electronics there is a device known as a "Travelling wave tube".
    Back in the dark ages of electronics, where satellites first needed
    microwave communications, they used these things a lot in low power transmitters and signal amplifiers on satellites. (apparently they are
    still in use today in a lot of applications, just as magenetrons are
    used in radars and microwave ovens).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traveling-wave_tube

    These devices work by 'bunching' electrons in a beam, through the use of resonant cavities and/or a helix with a resonant circuit attached to it.
    In short you can make a tuned beam of particle bunches at a specific frequency.

    The key here is the 'bunching'. The energy of the particles is
    determined based on voltages and magnetic fields in the tube. HOWEVER,
    if these bunches were sufficiently compact, and the energy 'resonant',
    smashing them into other bunches COULD result in fusion. Resonant
    energies are lower than blasting with lasers or heating plasma, perhaps
    WAY lower.

    The trick here is to create multiple barriers. But there is no reason
    why you cannot smash (let's say) HEAVY OIL together to create fusion.
    Heavy oil (containing heavy hydrogen) would get you the Deuterium +
    Deuterium or Deuterium + Tritium reaction, which releases the most
    energy, as well as (possibly) a portion of the CNO cycle. With both
    carbon AND hydrogen you now (potentially) have TWO barriers. So the
    idea is to smash hydrocarbon plasma (with heavy hydrogen) bunches into
    one another at ExACTLY the right energy.

    Then the probability of fusion should be VERY high.

    Anyway this is the kind of thing I mull over when I have time to think.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Auric__@21:1/5 to Big Bad Bombastic Bob on Tue Jan 2 05:31:27 2024
    Big Bad Bombastic Bob wrote:

    I have had ideas about nuclear fusion for a long time, it STILL being unrealized (in a useful sense) since the invention of the Tokomak. I
    think it is being OVER-researched, because there is no sense of urgency.
    [snip]
    Anyway this is the kind of thing I mull over when I have time to think.

    I don't really understand most things electronic at a non-layman level. I
    mean, yeah, I get the logic of many things -- especially those things that
    have analogs in programming -- but not the hardware-level understanding necessary to, well, understand them. I wish my father was still alive; he
    once offered to teach me, said it would take a weekend, and I told him words
    to the effect of "some other time."

    Also, back in 7th or 8th grade, I did a science fair presentation of the
    state of the art of fusion at the time (1988/89/90). I included cold fusion
    in my report. My conclusion was effectively "this ain't Back to the Future; fusion probably won't happen in our lifetimes; cold fusion might never be possible."

    --
    These are dangerous words. How is it you dare such words?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Big Bad Bombastic Bob@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jan 30 11:52:48 2024
    On 1/1/24 21:31, Auric__ wrote:
    Big Bad Bombastic Bob wrote:

    I have had ideas about nuclear fusion for a long time, it STILL being
    unrealized (in a useful sense) since the invention of the Tokomak. I
    think it is being OVER-researched, because there is no sense of urgency.
    [snip]
    Anyway this is the kind of thing I mull over when I have time to think.

    I don't really understand most things electronic at a non-layman level. I mean, yeah, I get the logic of many things -- especially those things that have analogs in programming -- but not the hardware-level understanding necessary to, well, understand them. I wish my father was still alive; he once offered to teach me, said it would take a weekend, and I told him words to the effect of "some other time."

    it'd take a BIT more thaN a weekend...

    Some additional study has proved some of my ideas, actually, with
    respect to magnetic compression.

    THESE guys are working on magneto-inertial confinement, a kind of
    hybrid, where an electric current causes nearby conductors to 'squeeze together', and then they blast it with lasers. Still needs a kind of
    fuel pellet though, and they are relatively expensive.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helion_Energy

    What I propose is bunching at a resonant energy, and interestingly
    enough, induced current might also help compress it. Firing a laser at
    the "bunches" might be enough to start it, then 'turn up the volume' to
    sustain it.

    Something else I've kicked around in my head is based on the pistol
    shrimp, which uses its claws to produce cavitation and as short distance
    shock wave to stun prey. The bubble collapse actually causes a flash of
    light, and in theory you could do this for fusion in heavy water.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubble_fusion

    Unfortunately not very practical, but it at least has been looked at.

    Also, back in 7th or 8th grade, I did a science fair presentation of the state of the art of fusion at the time (1988/89/90). I included cold fusion in my report. My conclusion was effectively "this ain't Back to the Future; fusion probably won't happen in our lifetimes; cold fusion might never be possible."

    I think the reason it is NOT being done is a lack of urgency. SPACE
    TRAVEL is likely to change that. Unfortunately, unless Elon (or someone
    like him) gets something moving, in the realm of space travel, AND soon
    enough to make a difference, society will CONTINUE to be deliberately
    "held back" by those who control. "For our own good"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)