NASA Lattice Confinement Fusion [2020]
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 жов 2020
- Subject Zero Patreon
/ subjectzerolaboratories
NASA Lattice Confinement Fusion [2020]
Lattice confinement is the idea of constraining smaller atoms with bigger ones.
In this case the crystalline layer of a metal is used to hold deuteron atoms, just like pouring water into sand.
For this experiment they used Erbium and Titanium at 99.9% purity. Erbium is a rare earth metal mainly found in Sweden, and it is used in optical amplification media such lens and lasers for optical fibers. It is also used in nuclear technology as control rods for neutron-absorption.
The reason they used Erbium for this experiment lies in fuel density, where it can hold about 8.1022 Deuteron atoms/cm3. It is also very stable where losses from fuel loading to testing were minimal. Lastly, it showed enhanced nuclear reactions.
A sample of Erbium is pumped with deuterium which is packed with a billion times more fuel than what magnetic confinement of tokamaks are able to constrain.
The ability to pack more atoms in a given volume, especially a billion times denser, increases the chances of deuterons hitting each other.
All you need now is a source of energy to excite the atoms and start the reaction.
In this case they blasted the sample with 2.9+Million electron Volts of gamma beam or energetic X-ray which causes the dissociation of the atom.
That is where the magic happens, this dissociation creates the necessary energetic neutrons and protons. The neutron collides with a static deuteron giving it enough energy to collide with another deuteron ultimately fusing.
Softwares Used:
Blender 2.8 EEVEE
Apple Motion
Final Cut Pro X
Sources
www1.grc.nasa.gov/space/scien...
www1.grc.nasa.gov/wp-content/...
www.iter.org/sci/FusionFuels
Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppenhe...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erbium
Attribution
Kevan from London, England / CC BY (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) - Наука та технологія
![Why Metallic Hydrogen is so important! [2020]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LMpdK1NeNTI/mqdefault.jpg)
![ITER - Blanket Shield Module | How it works [2022]](/img/n.gif)
_"Do you people still use fossil fuels, or have you discovered crystallic fusion?"_ -- Buzz Lightyear, Toy Story, 1995
If they telling it to the public then it's old news that goes for all technology just drip feeding it to use slowly as planned
ua-cam.com/video/1rDb8_uNwbo/v-deo.html
Evidence Buzz Lightyear is NOT a toy.
with time stamp ua-cam.com/video/1rDb8_uNwbo/v-deo.html
LOL IT'S ACTUALLY REAL
Theoretically tritium could be "bred" within the neutron flux of the fusion reactor. So that's not a long term problem... Theoretically...
So a flux capacitor?
I'm wondering if you could boost classic fission reactor fuels neutron flux with deuterium lithium fusion. Might make molten salt reactors more attractive.
Or we just return to the moon with this new market incentive
Heavy water reactors also produce tritium (in trace amounts) as a byproduct
"In theory there's no difference between theory and practice, in practice there is"
I bet that they will eventually develop a crystal for the fusion and call it dilithium
thats what i was thinking HAHA!!
Dilithium would be the equivalent to any "meta stable" super conductor at room temperature.
Haha, so true
@@EMcKelvyF isn't that what offset graphine promises. Were so close. Exciting time to be alive.
@@reticenti6365 look into metallic hydrogen, quite the rage amongst the lattice confinement field
4:28 that is actually amazing. it really surprised me. 8x10^22 atoms is around 0,13 mol. (which weighs 0,26 g in the case of deuterium). considering that in gaseous state 1 mol always equates to 22.4 l this means that the method allows 2.9 l of gas to be stored in just 1 cm^3 of the metal crystall or 2900 l D+ per l. that is alot more than even liquid hydrogen storage solutions in discussion such as dibenzyltoluene which stores 660 l h2 per liter.
now this has nothing to do with deuterium or fusion specifically but maybe a video on hydrogen storage would be interesting. there are so many options in discussion.
D is twice as dense as H, so its not that impressive. Still a big leap tho
It's not quite as dense as liquid H2, and the added weight of the crystal wouldn't make it good for rocket fuel, but it would make it useful as hydrogen storage on earth in that it wouldn't need to be kept at super low temperatures like liquid hydrogen. I wonder if the super high energies involved would be a problem, though.
@@carltheshivan Yea, great option for hydrogen storage! It isn't fuel ofc, you don't want other materials mixed in a fuel.
I've heard of people trying to use crystal lattices to store hydrogen at high densities, but so far I've only seen people do it with graphene
“You look like you’re having fun. What are you watching?”
Me: I HAVE NO IDEA
Erbium-Deuterium fusion battery powered cell phones for the win
... orwould that be titanium-deuterium?
@@OldGamerNoob Good one. Maybe next millineinum or two assuming human techno civil continues and there no great filter or two.
Fusion will never yield a net positive output... Plain and simple! Buncha degenerate gambler scientist... Selfish and foolish thinking you can increase mass and make positive energy outcome! Morons!
@@AquarianSoulTimeTraveler That the process in the stars and our sun. The Fusion process and the life and death cycle of stars is what made the stuff ie: the elements in the periodic table that makes us and everything in our planet/ecosystem. Like the carbon (most of our bodies), the oxygen, the nitrogen (protein building block),the phosphate (ATP that acclerant to celluar activity), the iron (Haemogloblin of our red blood cells), etc. Its Fusion that powers our star sol our sun that by photosynthesis, C3, C4 and CAM that capture the sunlight energy from Fusion in our sun that fuels and power our ecosystem. Yes we can create mass by way of linear particle accelerators that can create new elements in the perodic table. We can create new elements via our fission reactors from U235 such as plutonium.
@@kevinyaucheekin1319 and that I think is important for science to create elements but as far as using fusion to create energy is total bullshit gamblers pipe dream... Yes just use the sun's energy aka solar panels...
Something that wasnt mentioned in the video, but really should be:
I get that Tritium is pretty rare on earth, but there are ways to make the system *self sustained by creating your own Tritium*, as planned with ITER.
They use escaped neutrons from the plasma and try to fuse it with certain Lithium isotopes (L6 and L7) which gives off Tritium as a byproduct.
Of course you would still need to supply a certain starting amount of Tritium, but estimates suggest that the plant can remain active for 1000 years without any further Tritium input.
And with an natural occurence of more than 90% of L7 it should not be a problem economically.
Edit: corrected an expression error which induced false information
I wouldn't describe Lithium as expensive in this context. Sure, it runs at about 100 USD per kg, expensive by everyday standards, but 1kg is a *lot* of fusion fuel.
By my math it ought to net you somewhere in the range of 40-50 gigawatt hours, or a few million dollars worth of electricity at current prices.
The Deuterium is likely to be the more expensive part of the fuel mix, though even it should still be comparatively cheap.
This comment should be pinned. Supplying tritium was already something not considered in the near future. The only way we might use tritium as fuel is if we set up a mining station in the moon with a rail gun to fling h3 cargo to earth. For now, it's lithium and that metal although is expensive, it is abundant enough to supply enough nuclear fusion reactors for the entire world... If ITER hits the 500/50 energy mark... And we accept that global currencies must deflate in order to get any climate change project seriously going.
@@lazarus2691 Thank you! I corrected that...English is not my first language
@@1566marcus
Your English is very good!
@Bainsworth Im actually studying physics at university so I dont know about that
Regarding metallic hydrogen, producing this is looking to be just as hard or even harder than creating the fusion reaction in a tokamak.
The deuterium erbium lattice system sounds much smarter.
true. But we are in the same shit.
Maybe, but it'll at least be easier to transport. Nobody is going to be moving a thousand ton tokamak anytime soon.
Agreed. 90+ Tokamak experiments show they are a dead end - problem is Libs do not have brakes or reverse gear, so end up stuck in ruts worse than conservatives, that don't like throwing good money after bad.... ITER will merely prove a few magnetic confinement tricks work, but not well enough, with fundamental, KNOWN issues ignored regarding wall damage and other factors... Small scale, new experiments are acceptable... Multi-laser trap tech. could also have other benefits, and the lasers are reusable in other projects when it likely fails, for instance... I don't like Robert Boutaille? as he's an EU nut but the metallic hydrogen for fusion idea matches his metallic hydrogen sun model to explain its black body radiation spectrum....
Considering this was a nas experiment I think the idea is that you can't put a tokamak on a rocket haha
@@blackjoker2345 It's actually 23 thousand tons
Missconception here, tritium is breeded from deuterium, neutrons (created by fusion) and lithium which can be used as moderator. Lithium absorbs a neutron and decays to tritium
Not to mention that Lithium is a REALLY good moderator. And can be used as a pretty good coolant as well (you can use a FliBe salt if you want).
The ONLY problem with a Lithium moderator is that it spews out Tritium. For fission that's a headache but for fusion that's a headache with a big opportunity. (Although Tritium is pretty valuable as is so I guess fission plants would want to harvest it too, especially since you have to control it anyway to preveny hydrogen (or Tritium in this case) embrittlement)
And also, the "energy to start the reaction is too great" is false. 50MW is pedestrian.
@@DavenH True but it is not easy to pump it inside the plasma. More importantly it's hard for the plasma to generate enough of its own energy so that enough of it remains inside. I believe the folks at MITs ARC reactor project call that state "plasma ignition" and I think they believe it could be achieved with something like 10 or 12 Tesla magnetic field which is close to possible with modern superconductors.
@@DavenH Pedestrian.. 50MW.. weird definition theere
@@junholee4961 it means 'run of the mill'
I watch this while being a fledgling in high school learning calculus. I really want to make things like this.
@Alex Podolinsky Yeah, a very recent edition to the education system, though I wish I could just extract the knowledge so that I could materialize my ideas.
r/iamverysmart
First off, I’m not sure what age ‘high school’ is, but for a UK reference example I was studying things like calculus, trigonometry and number sequences (prime/Fibonacci) at the age of 11 before going to senior school.
I know these days a problem at the university level, is that entrance year students are arriving without the necessary skills to accomplish basic statistical analysis in experiments. I will stress this is not all students, and many very bright people arrive annually miles ahead of their peers.
@@pup4301 that's anecdotal. I went to HS 20 years ago in a poor rural county in a southern US state known for its poor education, and I had AP calculus and physics.
Unsolicited advice:
Learn to think critically and for yourself. Stay dedicated to your work. Manage time. We'll be waiting for ya!
5:03 "They blasted the sample with 2.9 MeV of energetic X-Rays"
That makes it sound like 2.9 MeV is a quantity of energy flow; it's not. It's a way of measuring the excitation energy; like wavelength or frequency.
Also, not sure where you got "X-Ray" from, 2.9 MeV is way up into Gamma Rays; X-Rays stop in the keV range.
For example, blue-green light has a wavelength of 500nm, frequency of 600THz, and excitation energy around 2.4eV
The experiment used gamma rays around 430fm, 700EHz, and 2.9MeV.
People often refer to any high wave length as ‘x-rays’ even tho they’re technically gamma rays
when you say x-ray, people have something real to grasp onto in their minds,
you say gamma ray,
and 'most' people will think scifi.
@@2Worlds_and_InBetween that’s what I was also trying to say 👍
@Christopher Stone - You are saying they used an unspecified quantity of total energy, provided as photons of specified energy. As stated in the video, there is no evidence of that interpretation. If the sample of Deuterium-loaded Erbium was veerrry small it IS possible that they used only 2.9 MeV _of total energy_ to heat it. Electron-volts _are indeed a measure of energy,_ as 2.9 MeV equals 4.6 x 10^-13 Joule.
@@YodaWhat I’m not smart enough to interpret this yet 😂
I feel like Pons and Fleischman are owed a huge apology...
They didn't die of radiation somehow then.
Completely different type of fusion so, no.
@@chbu7081 Nah, some people theorized that what those two found out may have actually have been this. They say that as the ionized deuterium atoms got pulled towards the palladium electrode, some of them might have gotten trapped within the metal's lattice, which under the high voltages may have caused some to fuse, leading to the anomalous heat and fusion products they described. This was before this NASA paper came out, BTW.
Of course, Pons and Fleischmann would have had no idea this is what was going on since they were electrochemists, not nuclear physicists. IMO, they should have actually called up an expert in fusion to take a look at their experiment and draw conclusions before publishing their paper. They wound up dragging what could have been a promising new branch of nuclear research through the muck because of that little snake oil salesman stunt of theirs.
@@augustovasconcellos7173 Mr. Augusto Vasconcelos , that little snake oil stunt is what started the revolution in this new important science and which NASA is trying to take all the credit for.
@@artdehls9100 proton boron11 is aneutronic.
"the power of the sun in the palm of my hand"
Nice spiderman reference
Brilliant as always. Thank you Subject Zero 🙏🏻
Nobody explains like Subject Zero! Almost all necessary areas are covered, the topic is made so comprehensible through the marvelous animation.... Learnt a lot.
So the cold fusion reactor may have actually worked.
This would explain why it was so sporadic
Yeah. Pons and Fleischman were correct. They just weren't in the "in" club, so their careers were destroyed. MIT destroyed these me, so that they had to move their work to Japan. Now cold fusion is all the rage at MIT. So corrupt.
By far, your channel is the best that I have come across and been hooked since! Thanks for putting in so much efforts to explain these complex things
That sounds remarkedly similar to Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons cold fusion experiments.
In tokamak fusion reactor designs, the fuels are deuterium and lithium, not deuterium and tritium.
Tritium is bred from lithium during the capturing of high energy neutrons from the fusion reactions in the vacuum vessel.
So the fuels are fairly abundant, seeing as deuterium can be gotten from sea water and lithium is one of the most abundant elements on earth
To be fair you still need to enrich both to higher concentrations of particular isotopes, but even still those isotopes are extremely common and not exceedingly difficult to refine
@@xxportalxx. if you enriched deuterium to a higher isotope you would have tritium...
@@gwentarinokripperinolkjdsf683 the deuterium source on earth is water, where only about 1 in 3000 water molecules contain deuterium, that's where the enrichment occurs. When you enrich a fuel you don't change the isotopes, you simply concentrate the already existing one.
@linlinö önilnil yes but it requires a particular isotope of lithium, not a particular rare isotope however
@@xxportalxx. Enrichment is the wrong word to use here. You enrich radioactive elements to get a higher concentration of the isotope you want from that element for nuclear Fission reactions.
This is absolutely not necessary for deuterium and tritium since they are already in the isotopic form we need them to be in.
Maybe you mean we need to get a higher quantity of deuterium from the sea water, but like you said, that's pretty obvious and straight forward to do.
I love all your videos. Your analysis of the newest tech helps me to write.
oh man I love your videos so much, every time they get recommended to me it brings a smile to my face!!!
Omg! Amazing! The other thing to consider is that now room temp superconductors are becoming possible with the offset graphine stuff. Incredible time to be alive
Parabéns pelo seu trabalho árduo, você merece as vitórias pelo que você esta conquistando , Ciências pra todos . Gratidão!
Thanks for putting this together - I'll be sharing this with our colleagues.
The much better way to accomplish fusion without the need for unhandy temperatures of a supernova and to satisfy the Lawson criterion (self sustaining fusion) is easier, most people think. Exactly three things are required: i) A fast, pulsed electrical discharge in a Z-pinch configuration, ii) a magnetic field structure, that breaks. Reconnection the field lines provide further compression to high three-digit MPa-Range for a couple of ns (enough for fusion) and expel (nearly) all electrons from the Hohlraum. This minimizes losses. iii) Use of boron and protons instead if T and D. Conveniently, both elements are contained in a close stoichiometric ratio in decaborane (B10H14). Since most of the energy of the reaction B-11 + p -> 3·He-4 is released as kinetic energy in alpha-particles, this radial particle stream can be guided by magnets along electrical coupling loops (like in a transformer). This creates pulses of electricity, that can be stored in capacitors and used to drive vehicles, ships, aircrafts and trains. Since fossile fuel industry and countries, who take mineral oil taxes are not very keen on this stuff, our institution for nuclear physics have been closed down and we scientists and engineers are placed in food stamp programs. Whenever somebody of our former staff would blat out the technology he ended like Jamal Kashoggi. Therefore, it will take about 400 years (end of coal), until we can turn to fusion.
is that mean fusion bomb without fission is possible
@@omnianti0 Theoretically yes. A so called EPFCG (see Wikipedia for details) with an intermediate energy storage stage for pulse compression could deliver the required ignition energy. The problem for military use however is the yield. The fore mentioned reaction delivers an electrical yield (y=Wout/Win) of about 10. That's fine for energy production, but for an ordinary tactical 100 kt bomb, you would need 10 kt of electrical (!) energy for ignition. That is 4.187E13 J. Hence, high pressure pulse plasma fusion is not exactly the right thing for thermonuclear warfare, particularly, since it doesn't make a big sense to convert conventional explosives into electrical energy within an EPFCG with 20% efficiency (in the best case) and convert it into a thermonuclear blast with a yield of 10. The total yield would be 0.2·10=2. Double the charge of a conventional bomb - and you get the same result of destruction. The good old reaction scheme D + T -> He-4 + n doesn't work well here, since LiD Lithium Deuteride is useless due to lack of neutrons in the system. In conventional two-stage nuclear bombs, fusion fuel (D, T) is transmuted from LiD by neutron capture LiD + n -> He-4 + T. Since contemporary conventionally ignited nukes are incredibly small, powerful and efficient devices, military has no reason to promote aneutronic fusion, subcriticle Th-232 Technology, etc. They need fission reactors for breeding Pu-239, since weapon pits must be replaced every 30…40 years. That is the true reason, why CIA ordered SNL (Sandia National Lab) to cease their pulse plasma fusion experiments and to unpublish their findings in 2007 and fought down all attempts to proceed with further developments - along with the beloved fossile fuel industry.
@@debrainwasher i not sure than fossile can stop bobm innovation
20%efficiency seem very little gain and probably ridicul considering the cost and complexity of the process
what gain can be worth in your opinion
i mean the minimal for compensation of all work this induce
because the idea of a super powerfull explosive without radiation dust is attractive
@@omnianti0 Please read my comment again. The provided figure of 20% is about the efficiency of turning ordinary high explosives into electrical energy by an EPFCG to start the reaction p + B-11 + 0.6 MeV -> 3·He-4 + 8.7 MeV. This equation with addd energies shows the theoretical maximum yield of y=8.7 MeV/0.6 MeV=14.5 (about y=10 electrical, as measured). Therefore, the maximum theoretical gain g is the product of the efficiency of the EPFCG eta and y (g = eta · y). That figure is between g-low=0.2·10=2 (200%) and g-high=0.2·14.5=2.9 (290%). Fusion is always a (relative) low yield stuff - compared to fission. ITER hopes to achieve a total gain of about 1.035…1.05 (103.5%…105%) with their antique Tokamak-design from the 50's, that maximizes all imaginable losses. And hopes. I would neither consider an an alpha-particle bomb (p+B) with 8.7 MeV output, nor a neutron-bomb (D+T) with 14.1 MeV neutrons as «free of radiation dust». The mean if ignition doesn't matter. Fusion energy-levels alone create a whole bunch of transmutation reactions in surrounding materials that leave behind all sorts of nasty radionuclides - termed as fallout. Only p-B reaction for electricity production is free of radioactive waste, since kinetic energy of alpha-particles is harvested by inductive coupling according to i(t)=dq/dt. This leaves behind pure, innocuous Helium - as sold in flasks.
@@debrainwasher not a master at math so did you mean the fusion without fission will not produce any explosion with latice detonator
or its output more than 20% of the global weight of the device compared to TNT energy
This was excellent well done my man
This is not a topic I would choose on my own. But somehow this channel explains it well enough that I can walk away a little smarter than before. Thanks!
We're basically talking about Cold Fusion, aren't we?
Almost, the erbium would be cold but the deuterium would reach high energies from the X-rays. Nowhere near the temperatures of inertial or magnetic confinement though.
@@Nosirrbro did they made mention of fusion chain reaction
Don't knock it. It's possible. We just are looking at the problem too narrowly.
@@blahsomethingclever I'm simply excited about it. After all, we know so little of quantum physics that ruling out something like cold fusion would be just stupid.
@@blahsomethingclever Not saying it's possible or not, just would like evidence before I make an opinion. To be honest I think science needs more observable & repeatable experiments and less theoretical non-observable stuff.
Man... your visuals...
Top tier science outreach
This channel is amazing
Amazing piece of content yet again!
is this similar to what Fleischmann and Pons were trying to achieve back in 1989? With palladium instead of erbium?
This was called cold fusion as no external source of energy was needed.
The concept is similar however the methodology is vastly different. Pons and Fleischmann didn't fully understand the mechanism that caused their results, Later work theorized that by submerging palladium in a solution of deuterium+electrolite and passing an electric current through it would cause deuterium atoms to bond with the electrons passing through the solution and follow the charge into the palladium, By oscillating the frequency of the electric current it was theorized that the palladium would expand and contract at the atomic level allowing more and more deuterium to pass deeper and deeper into the lattice structure of the palladium. Once the palladium was sufficiently saturated or "loaded" with deuterium the continued expansion and contraction of the palladium would force the deuterium atoms so close together they would fuse creating tritium and a high energy neutron that results in excess heat energy.
this the same - cold fusion is the out dated term for it
Yeah, its quite similar. Im skeptical beacuse the heavy metal would poison the reaction, and the mechanism described is not very efficient, but it woukd be very cool if turned out to work (and not like muon cat fusion that works but its useless)
The main problem encountered after Pons and Fleischmann made their announcement was in reproducing the results. It was later discovered that the issue was the palladium used by other labs was either not of the same quality or had been processed in such a way that damaged the atomic lattice structure on the surface of the palladium thus preventing proper loading and resulting in little or no detectable excess energy that couldn't discounted as margin of error in measurement.
Holy crap, it just hit me, this is the precursor to the dilithium crystal! Of course dilithium is used to regulate the rate of annihilation of matter and anti-matter. But I see the connection!
Another excellent video!
I like how there are so many concepts and attempts at fusion, im starting to wonder which one will be the one that works. (or if we even know it)
Most of them work and are useful for different things. And yes they work, nothing suggests otherwise. Just yave to make it bigger, which is the problem with fusion, big machine
@@antaresmc4407 wonder if they can shrink it down in the future. Could slap it on a space ship.
@@TheCaptainSplatter yea, you just need better magnets. Exponentially bigger with reducing sizes. So they are mostly limited by superconductor material science. Inertial methods tend to be more scalable at the cost of efficiency, thats why most proposed engines are ICF
@@TheCaptainSplatter Once net energy is proven and people start investing seriously on it, then we will start improving the machines. The most important point of iter is proving that you can gain energy out of the process. Once it's done, imagine how many investors would love to put their money on it.
@@BlueFrenzy LOL. I wouldn't invest a penny unless I thought it would make money. In order for that to happen, it would need to have an LCOE that was at least on par with conventional carbon-free energy sources (solar/wind + storage, fission). I think the odds of that are very low.
I really enjoy your format, straight forward explanation, and cleanliness. Would you ever make a video on the james Webb telescope? It recently passed its acoustic vibration testing and is being shipped overseas soon to be packed up for launch in late 2021.
My "this is too good to be true" sensors are beeping here. It does relie upon metallic hydrogen as you mentioned but daium!
Hypothetically it relies on metallic hydrogen but the initial experiments are conducted using Rare Earth minerals.
@@mrspeigle1 If thats the stage though its prety far off aint it?..
@@JMAssainatorz way far off if they're relying on metallic hydrogen, we've only just confirmed its existence in a laboratory. Hypothetically of course because the paper still needs to be confirmed. Even assuming that the experiment and paper involved is legitimate Given the difficulties involved it will likely be decades before we can produce metallic hydrogen in amounts useful for anything outside of laboratory experiments. And that's assuming of course that we are correct about metallic hydrogen. Personally I think we'll see commercialized magnetic confinement long before we see anything close to this method of fusion though this method May well be the superior in the long run.
Since metalic hydrogen is in it's infancy (not even completely reliably confirmed yet), it is not unlikely that metallic hydrogen fusion is just as far from commercial use as tokamak fusion.
@@migBdk wouldn't say that, tokamak fusion is 15 years from proof of commercial concept, less if you factor that iter is already obsolescent due to advanced electromagnets..
This method is
Hold on, what's the difference from this type "lattice confinement", to the same idea in LENR AKA "cold fusion"? They are using x rays to excite the atoms when packed tight in the lattice but apart from that, seems suspiciously similar no?
Indeed, and the old cold fusion experiments DID PRODUCE ENERGY, but all of that was ignored because it wasnt technically "fusion" by heat.
Lattice confinement IS Lattice Enabled, the LE in LENR. Lattice Enabled Nuclear Reaction.
or Low Energy Nuclear Fusion a.k.a. “cold fusion”
@@Baleur it was a chemical reaction tho
Yes, it is all the same thing, more or less. Cold fusion is any fusion that is not at millions of degrees C, so cold fusion is a superset of fusion technologies. LENR and lattice confinement are really the exact same thing, and are a subset of cold fusion, needing only hundreds of degrees C (or in the NASA case, direct laser excitement) to drive the reaction by confining hydrogen and/or its isotopes in the lattice of a metal.
Brilliant explanation
So that's what possibly happened to Andrea Rossi his E-cat research. He disappeared in obscurity after demonstrating this method of low temperature nuclear fusion.
Yes Andrea Rossi was a hack with previous inventions, so I was watching it what would come from it with a grain of salt. But Rossi claimed to have been generating fusion through the same principle of lattice confinement with his LENR E-cat. Then had his work peer reviewed by a Swedish university or something, who said it was legit, after which we heard little of it. Well I guess it's good that LENR fusion is coming back, but it does come across as taking notes from Rossi his E-cat. That was the first time I heard of lattice confinement fusion anyway, I wonder who officially invented it and when.
Edit; I remember I read Rossi started working with NASA or something, is that right? And something about Boeing being interested. Let me look it up.
Edit; O yeah forgot it was called LENR (low energy nuclear reactions)
What I found so far:
e-catworld.com/2011/07/15/rossi-meets-with-extremely-high-level-nasa-scientists-will-work-together/
newenergyandfuel.com/http:/newenergyandfuel/com/2011/09/02/andrea-rossi-agrees-to-nasa-test-of-the-e-cat/
energycatalyzer3.com/news/nasa-has-applied-for-a-lenr-patent
Found an article of a lawsuit for fraudulent claims of energy production against Andrea Rossi in 2016.
news.newenergytimes.net/2016/08/09/cherokee-investments-darden-says-rossis-claims-are-fraudulent/
For those interested, this is the site to that E-cat LENR company that seems to still be moving foreward in 2020. (Hadn't checked in 5 years or something).
e-catworld.com/
Edit; The method of lattice fusion in this video does seem to be different. With Andrea Rossi's E-cat I never heard about blasting with X-rays for example, but that may just be a better way of going about it. As it's still roughly the same method of achieving low energy nuclear reactions.
So it seems to me that after testing it with Andrea Rossi in 2011 Nasa is doing their own research and this article from NASA is suggesting that NASA invented it.
www1.grc.nasa.gov/space/science/lattice-confinement-fusion/
It sounds like unsavory business practices, but I'm sure I only know half the story. And if NASA invents their own way of more effectively and consistently harnessing LENR and figuring out the underlying nuclear mechanics then that is legitimately their research and discoveries. Last I heard Andrea Rossi was never able to explain why his invention wasn't producing radiation as it should have and thus could not completely explain the nuclear mechanics behind his own invention.
Awesome Man!!
Great video, very informative!
Could you do release a video showing how you create your animations and edit your videos? Your work is awesome and I'm curious about how you make them.
Lattice confinement sounds like a version of cold fusion! Is it that new?
Thank - you . 'Excellent article on new progress toward 'room - temperature' fusion (getting more energy out of fusion than you have to put in to achieve fusion) updated . Keep trying.
Good job👍 We will definitely travel interstellarly some day!
Cold Fusion is back, baby
using a lattice fusion matrix, combined with muon catalysation and electromagnetic flow direction could be a hybrid approach that might work.
This shares some similarities to the use of Palladium to work as a containment lattice for hydrogen atoms in current Cold Fusion experiments. Interesting.
That’s what I thought. This sounds like the much discredited cold fusion approach of pons and fleischman
Is a Helium3 energy system worth your review? If not, would you explain why in a quick dismissive statement in a future video. I'm very interested in your insights. Thanks.
Fission reaction, once started, is a chain reaction with direct local feedback. On the other hand, fusion reaction is conditional reaction. Example? It start and runs like a jet engine, pressure, heat then add fuel follow by ignition. Any discontinuity in the process can stop that reaction.
I see lots od discussion about 'Cold Fusion' a-la Fleischmann and Pons below. My question about that experiment is: Why didn't they try to detect Helium and then they would know if a fusion reaction had actually taken place? Years of dispute over chemical reaction, vs fusion reaction. I'm sure there is a (many) good reason(s) why this was not feasible, but I don't know 'em. Any takers?
Fission is easy partly because we have an unstable element to begin with and once ignited it continue to create successive ignition itself without external intervention.
Fission is the opposite that makes it more difficult to realize.
To advance our efforts on fusion, we need to foster a new plasma process for fusion that possess a chain reaction and self organize characteristics towards an ignition state. To prevent melt down we inject tiny packet of fuel in it to let it produce pulsed energy, to stop accidental melt down.
so say one of these fusion designs work and create continuous more power out then in(as i type this, isnt this not possible but if not then whats the point), how does this get implemented to providing power to the grid? first of all are we still just going to use it to heat water to power steam generator or is there another way to create electricity or store energy and then who is going to build and run these fusion power plants?
It’s funny how the science is following a path that slowly pulls it closer and closer to Fleishman and Pons.
If those two would have been able to provide reproducible data and experiments. Scientists would have followed their path much earlier. It's possible that the two stubled upon their findings by chance (which is often the case in science, right?) and it has taken scientist 30 years to just get to this point in a controlled, "sciency" way.
Of course, it would probably be a real relief for them, if someone can explain - maybe in another 5 years - what why observed 30 years ago.
Heinz Heinz I think we’re still far from understanding. You should consider reading the book ‘nuclear transmutation’. I think you might find it interesting.
How long would it take ITER to reach operational temperature (150M°C) when it's activated? Is the lattice confinement process attempting to do something comparable to the conditions that exist in a main-sequence star's core? Meaning it can sustain hydrogen fusion at much lower temperatures (15M°C) due to quantum tunneling induced by the extreme density?
Whats the temp jump after fusion? I mean if its using the heat to break down the barrier wont thay heat stop the fusion also? Would the heat raise after fusion?
I had tested making a fusion reactor with protium only, that resulted in plasma and electrons that could be used as a current and plasma can accelerated by magnetic confinment and at end of accelerater combining with oxygen. This can be useful for making ironman repulsors
Like as in thrust producing plasma?
Now you can make video about LENR.
How is the energy output from the D-D fusion step captured by the lattice? Perhaps the expulsion of the energetic proton carries high energy with it that can be captured outside the lattice? Great high level video to pique my interest - time to read the paper!
check out MITs spark reactor it uses more advanced superconducting magnets than the ones than iter uses and recently the team released a study that puts them on track for achieving stable positive fusion even before iter.
Honestly the reactor design used by iter is pretty dead in the water, pretty sure it's mostly to study the physics rather than to prove the design, and with all the alternatives that are looking to be cheaper and faster to production it's not looking good for the traditional tokomak haha
I love your video very much! I have a question regarding the making of your video? Are those fantastic cartoons all made by Blender? How much time do you spend on Blendering for each video?
Not to sure on the explanation of this actions in the lattice? Is the lattice used up and dispose of? Or does the tritium and byproducts pass through the lattice?
This tech will be one of the pillar pieces of our future world.
sorry for a probably obvious question but how do you extract energy from lattice confined fusion? Do you let the fusion reaction melt the erbium and use that heat?
At times I loathe how in the know the world becomes about technology such as this, but very few truly know how this works let alone how to improve it at a fundamental level.
The quality and frequency of your uploads ist just astonishing and the topics are really interesting, too. I am so glad I found your channel.
This lattice structure and temperature are why a liquid metallic hydrogen model of the sun makes so much sense.
Nope, it makes zero sense. Which is why such a thing does not exist in the peer-reviewed literature.
So LCF is the same thing as ICF? or is LCF a different approach to inertial confinement fusion?
This method, whatever it may be, has nothing whatever to do with inertial confinement fusion. Source: me, who has worked on a laser driven ICF reactor for the last 2 decades. It's just one more in a litany of exotic laboratory curiosity methods to do small scale and low rate fusion. It never has any hope of producing energy - the species are in total thermodynamic disequilibrium. Todd Rider proved this in his master's thesis in the mid 90s. The rest of the video is also filled with misinformation and irrelevant conjecture, eg. confusing power and energy and invoking the mythical unicorn of metastable metallic hydrogen.
I was looking for this comment! None of these exotic methods will ever get off the ground, the best hope for fusion is in ITER/DEMO and NIF alone.
@@ObjectsInMotion I would expand on that slightly by widening the possibilities to include ultrahigh field compact superconducting devices from eg. MIT's SPARC tokamak or Tokamak Energy's REBCO based high field machines. Though divertor heat flux is going to be a serious issue for both. The field reversed configuration of TAE technologies has also made considerable and impressive progress in confinement times via utilization of neutral beam injection in the last few years though their claim to be focusing on aneutronic P-B11 as a goal is obviously ridiculous.
Where do you get your video material from? It looks stunning!
Interesting concept, I am curious what is the mechanism of heat extraction? The majority of the heat comes from neutron which requires a thick wall to capture the heat.
5:16 The term X-rays is used for photons which fall in the energy range of 0.1 to 100 keV. Photons in the MeV energy range fall into the gamma-ray spectrum.
NASA calls it energetic X-Ray beams in their Lattice Confinement page. I don't know why such name.
I'm pretty sure that was the total power of the beam not an individual X-Ray, hence why they called it a beam an not a Photon
Superb
genial , muy buenos videos , felicidades y sigue adelante , from argentina
You do such as great job presenting information. Would love to see a presentation regarding the SAFIRE Project plasma reactor system. Thanks
You mean like a debunking video?
@@rakinkazi9780 Not a debunking video, they are in the later stages of development as small generators, +10MW. The group of scientists are basing the designs upon an "electric/plasma universe" model and how they theorize the Sun functions. The entire project is beyond theory working towards actual small generator production.
@@sonnyhayes689 with all due respect, I hope you realize that the electric sun/universe stuff is pseudoscience.
@@rakinkazi9780 I certainly respect your view. However, I would encourage you to investigate the work Dr. Anthony Perat has accomplished in the last 30 years. He is the chief plasma physicist at Los Alamos National Labs. He has written a great book "Physics of a Plasma Universe". So many scientists are locked into their models they have not been able to breakout into new paradigms.
@@sonnyhayes689 I'm afraid that many scientists disagree with the electric universe model. Manifest errors include: Disregard for General Relativity, attempts to link mythology with Velikovsky's fanciful theories, Rejecting the fact that the universe is currently expanding, etc. There's a reason why this idea is not found in any peer reviewed journals. It is akin to Young Earth Creationism, Intelligent Sesign, etc. Sorry, but SAFIRE is definitely a ponzi scheme. It is objectively based on pseudoscience.
Do with know if molecular chirality of materials affects fusión reactivity?
👀sapphire project .
Is lattice confinement fusion still producing the Millions of degrees of heat like the other 2 methods, or is it lower in temperature ?
Was expecting an explanation on what the NASA lattice confinement experiment was. Maybe in following videos?
huh, sooo how long till we get these dilithuim crystals powering warp drives?
This is **great stuff!** The approach is a **lot simpler and more elegant** than the clunky ITER reactor!
The explanation of how the process works is excellent too - ok, I'm not a nuclear physicist but I can't see any holes in it.
could a moleclue of anti-detrium be used to kick start the process or would it just go boom?
Your animations are amazing.... are you doing them by yourself?
talking about fusion fuels- what about ultradense deuterium? A variation of rydberg matter, and a possible source for muons to catalyse standard fusion reactions
.........and it's only 30 years away!
Is the distance between protons really much shorter in metallic hydrogen ? I mean in the liquid states atoms are pretty close too, the difference with the solid state is the crystalline structure, not the interatomic distance, isn't it ?
Creating a type of ping with palitium and magnets in opposite directions with inertia and a spiral like coil with cut like vents polarizing sound reaction to lite vibrated frequentcy
Would you please share your sound fx/ music source?
wasn t the fleisman ponz experiment also based on latice confinement ?
I'm guessing the output power is much lower in order to keep the lattice somewhat unaltered. Is that the reason?
This is literally magic
No, it's not "sufficiently advanced."
I'm glad Strongbad continued pursuing science.
fusion is so freaking far away we cant possibly plan on it for our energy needs
Agreed. Frankly, the compact fission reactors that have emerged in the last ten years or so are a better near-term option for energy production.
Actually it's only 10-15 years away.
@@colonelsanders8216 they are now building a compact fusion device. Its become like that parable of sending a spaceship out now or waiting 10 years and building a better one that can catch up and surpass it.
then why are we planning our future energy needs on non existent electricity storage while shunning nuclear fission ?
@@failandia im not shunning it... remember who is shunning it when you vote
4:05 - no, most of it comes from Choina currently. It was first mined in Sweeden, at Ytterby Quarrty, but no, they dont produce much. And therein lies another Achellies heel, it relies on another rare element and it destroys it in the process.
1980 "Cold fusion is bollocks, its impossible"
2020 "OH RLY?!" *owlface*
Not cold fusion.
@@theflyingwelshman5338 not 150 million degrees either
totally agree, I was about to point out myself. everyone after Fleishmann and Pons were basically crucified for this very idea... and now it’s suddenly legit. Nice to see how the world change. if only apologies were also to be made...
@@szocsdaniel There is still a good deal of skepticism, the mechanism described is inefficient, and X rays dont brak appart deuterons per se, so some extra thing has to be happening. Also its very weird that the heavy metal doesnt absorb most the X (H is fairly transparent) and poison the reaction
@@degraft3960 Cold Fusion meant room temperature fusion by the way.
can't wait for the pcket sized version
come on subject zero; just come out and say it. this is COLD FUSION. that is exactly what this is. several independent researchers have had success with this technique. with outfits like NASA publishing the results of their own research, and credible science people like you reporting this stuff; it's just a matter of time before COLD FUSION comes in from the cold and is widely accepted by mainstream science. good work.
What is the video editor used to make this animation?
Dang, first Aunt Jemima, then Uncle Ben's, and now cold fusion. They're rebranding everything!
I highly doubting heating by x-ray is cold fusion at room temperature
It doesn't have to be room-temperature to be cold fusion. It just has to be colder than plasma.
Maybe I'm just being pedantic, but kilowatts are a unit of power not a unit of energy. Kilowatt hours and joules are units of energy.