> [Original Message]
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Horace Heffner)>
> To: vortex-l
> Date: 2/8/05 7:57:28 PM
> Subject: Re: High Energy Electron Bombardment of LiD & LiH, Was..
>
> At 6:09 PM 2/8/5, Frederick Sparber wrote:
>
> >"IN SANDIA'S
At 6:09 PM 2/8/5, Frederick Sparber wrote:
>"IN SANDIA'S "Z" MACHINE millions of amps of current are passed through a
>tiny spool of tungsten wires, producing a flood of x rays. Essentially the
>most powerful terrestrial producer of x rays, the Z device recently
>achieved the following milestones
Horace Heffner wrote:
>
> Yep, using your 0.1 amps instead of your 3.10e18 electrons per second I
get
> 6.24x10^17 electrons/sec. So: (6.24x10^17 electrons/sec)/(Pi*(0.02cm)^2)
=
> 4.97x10^20 electrons/(cm^2*s), which is indeed about 50 times the minimum.
>
> If your continuous operation approach
At 12:05 PM 2/8/5, Frederick Sparber wrote:
>Actually 50 times the minimum is available with a 0.4 millimeter diameter beam
>from a 150 Kev beam at 0.1 amps continuous operation.
Yep, using your 0.1 amps instead of your 3.10e18 electrons per second I get
6.24x10^17 electrons/sec. So: (6.24x10^17
Horace Heffner wrote:
> At 9:29 AM 2/8/5, Frederick Sparber wrote:>>Horace Heffner wrote: Energetically effective fusion created using electron beams I think is>>>or would be essentially>>> electron catalysed fusion. This requires a minimum beam intensity of>>> 1x10^19 electrons/(cm^2
At 9:29 AM 2/8/5, Frederick Sparber wrote:
>Horace Heffner wrote:
>
>>
>> Energetically effective fusion created using electron beams I think is
>>or would be essentially
>> electron catalysed fusion. This requires a minimum beam intensity of
>> 1x10^19 electrons/(cm^2*s),
>>
>Commercially availab
Horace Heffner wrote:
>
> Energetically effective fusion created using electron beams I think is or would be essentially> electron catalysed fusion. This requires a minimum beam intensity of> 1x10^19 electrons/(cm^2*s),
>
Commercially available Electron Beam Welders can put 3.10e-18 electro
At 6:15 AM 2/7/5, Frederick Sparber wrote:
>Horace Heffner wrote:
>>
>>You can always try aluminum loaded with H or D, as Kamada et al did in the
>>two experiments described below:
>>
>Snip.
>
>No Horace.
Sure, Fred. Anyone can try it. 8^)
>
>The Proton + Li-7 Reaction P + 3 Li-7 > 2 He-4 +
One could always add some Boron-10 or Lithium Borohydride LiBH4 to the Lithium Hydride/Deuteride
capsule, to get the high reaction cross-section neutron Boron-10 Reaction:
n + B-10 > He-4 + Li-7 + ~ 3.2 Mev
Boom or Bust?
Frederick
Horace Heffner wrote:
>
>You can always try aluminum loaded with H or D, as Kamada et al did in the>two experiments described below:
>
Snip.
No Horace.
The Proton + Li-7 Reaction P + 3 Li-7 > 2 He-4 + 17.6 Mev as well
as the D-D, D-Li & Possible Hydrino reactions are possible when you
At 7:11 PM 2/6/5, Frederick Sparber wrote:
>The melting point of Lithium Hydride (LiH) is 680 C with a vapor
>pressure of ~ 25 Torr.
>
>Differential Pumping requirements will be minimal if the Self-Sealing "Window"
>on a 304 stainless steel capsule of Lithium Deuteride (LiD) or LiH doesn't
>functi
The melting point of Lithium Hydride (LiH) is 680 C with a vapor
pressure of ~ 25 Torr.
Differential Pumping requirements will be minimal if the Self-Sealing "Window"
on a 304 stainless steel capsule of Lithium Deuteride (LiD) or LiH doesn't function as expected
using a Self-Healing Nickel "
12 matches
Mail list logo
