5 ms·

35 thousand Kelvin in a "cold" nuclear fusion reactor is much closer to room temperature than the temperature in a "hot" nuclear fusion reactor. Both types of r

35 thousand Kelvin in a "cold" nuclear fusion reactor is much closer to room temperature than the temperature in a "hot" nuclear fusion reactor. Both types of reactors do not produce excess energy, but the cold reactor has already found application while the hot reactor will be ready in 25 years. Which kind of reactor is hoax?

jacquesm 3y ago
The cold reactor fuses nuclei by virtue of energy input, the other tries to extract energy from a fusion reaction larger than its input. On a complexity level you're looking at 1:10000 difference or worse.
- oneshtein 3y ago
  Cold Fusion doesn't work because we are exchanging high-energy particles, which are expensive to produce, for low grade heat in bulk of material. If we will have cheap source of muons, we can change equation. We can drop a tiny bit of Nickel lattice filled with Deuterium, and then strike it with muons from all angles, to create implosion. This will allow us to create tiny blast of hot plasma, which is much easier to extract energy from. Sadly, we have no such cheap source of muons, AFAIK.
  - jacquesm 3y ago
    > If we will have cheap source of muons, we can change equation. You can make them but the cost in energy is exactly the problem: you will be spending money on energy to make muons at a considerable loss due to the inefficient ways in which we know how to make them (proton beams, which require a huge amount of energy to create), resulting in an insignificant number of particles. If your goal is to get net energy out it would be good to keep an eye on process efficiency from the beginning. Starting off with a billion to one or so conversion loss for step one raises the bar for the subsequent steps considerably. > Sadly, we have no such cheap source of muons, AFAIK. Indeed we do not, and that's pretty logical.
    - oneshtein 3y ago
      We have tons of free high-energy radiation in space. LENR can be impractical on Earth, but be practical on Mars, or on a space station, or in Van Allen belts. Mars is very cold, but constantly bombarded by cosmic rays, because it lacks magnetic shield. Thin atmosphere allows much larger flux of particles with lower energies to reach ground. It may work, if lattice will be exposed to the cosmic rays. LENR can be used here as lightweight source of heat for domes.
tomrod 3y ago
This one, specifically. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion#Response_and_fallout https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion#Response_and_fallo...

jacquesm 3y ago

The cold reactor fuses nuclei by virtue of energy input, the other tries to extract energy from a fusion reaction larger than its input. On a complexity level you're looking at 1:10000 difference or worse.

oneshtein 3y ago
Cold Fusion doesn't work because we are exchanging high-energy particles, which are expensive to produce, for low grade heat in bulk of material. If we will have cheap source of muons, we can change equation. We can drop a tiny bit of Nickel lattice filled with Deuterium, and then strike it with muons from all angles, to create implosion. This will allow us to create tiny blast of hot plasma, which is much easier to extract energy from. Sadly, we have no such cheap source of muons, AFAIK.
- jacquesm 3y ago
  > If we will have cheap source of muons, we can change equation. You can make them but the cost in energy is exactly the problem: you will be spending money on energy to make muons at a considerable loss due to the inefficient ways in which we know how to make them (proton beams, which require a huge amount of energy to create), resulting in an insignificant number of particles. If your goal is to get net energy out it would be good to keep an eye on process efficiency from the beginning. Starting off with a billion to one or so conversion loss for step one raises the bar for the subsequent steps considerably. > Sadly, we have no such cheap source of muons, AFAIK. Indeed we do not, and that's pretty logical.
  - oneshtein 3y ago
    We have tons of free high-energy radiation in space. LENR can be impractical on Earth, but be practical on Mars, or on a space station, or in Van Allen belts. Mars is very cold, but constantly bombarded by cosmic rays, because it lacks magnetic shield. Thin atmosphere allows much larger flux of particles with lower energies to reach ground. It may work, if lattice will be exposed to the cosmic rays. LENR can be used here as lightweight source of heat for domes.

tomrod 3y ago

This one, specifically. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion#Response_and_fallout https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion#Response_and_fallo...