--- Michel > I am not aware that the fusion rate in a Farnsworth > Fusor is anomalous as you suggest.
After all of these decades, it's not now all that much of a surprise (to anyone who hasn't been confined in an ivory tower) but it once was deemed anomalous. > If it was, I would think mainstream science would have reacted by now. Hmm... Thirty+ years, yes ... that would be about right, except that too much notice of it might detract from the obscene funding levels for hot fusion. Actually hot fusion funding is probably not obscene, per se -- except by comparison with the promising but unfunded alternatives. > Also are you sure that 20-40 keV electrons are at > play there, or did you mean 20-40 keV deuterons? The plasma is balanced and net neutral so there are both electrons, positive ions (deuterons) and negative ions. ... and perhaps redundant-ground-state species not yet identified ;-) If I am not mistaken, the (D2-) ion is more prevalent than one would suspect, indicative of three body interaction -- but it has been a while since I was following all the posts on that forum (which are quite perceptive, in comparison with other forums) > am yet to understand electrode polarity in these > contraptions, is the outer electrode positive or > negative? Either way will work. Farnsworth himself was fond of adding an electron gun(s) in addition to the grid; which was the design which had the highest output (still five orders of magnitude [or more] from breakeven) Richard Hull has debunked the myth of an actual "runaway," but they were getting so 'hot' by the time that ITT dropped the program that they had to be operated in a shielded 'pit'. Jones
