Room-Temperature, Small-Scale Fusion at UCLA

gnuman99 writes "A UCLA collaboration (Seth Putterman, Brian Naranjo and Jim Gimzewski) appear to have developed a fusion device powered by a pyroelectric crystal, a type of crystal used in cell phones to filter signals. When heated, such a crystal produces a large electric charge on its surface. The UCLA researchers placed a lithium tantalate (LiTaO3) pyroelectric crystal so that one side touches a copper disc. A tiny tungsten probe is then placed at the center of the copper disc. When the crystal is subsequently heated, a very large large electric field is produced at the end of the tugsten tip, ~25 billion volts per meter. This field gradient is so high that it strips the electrons from nearby deuterium atoms. The ionized deuterium atoms then accelerated by this field towards a solid target of erbium deuteride (ErD2). They collide with it at such high energies that some fuse with the target. A measurement of almost 900 neutrons per second was observed. This is 400 times the background! Although the amount of energy produced in this initial experiment was miniscule (~1E-8 jules), this technology could be used for things like microthrusters. There are pictures and movies on the UCLA's physics site." Reader richmlpdx adds a link to coverage at MSNBC.

Potential Uses

[Skyshadow]

Quoth the MSNBC article:
...the technique could have potential uses in medicine, spacecraft propulsion, the oil drilling industry and homeland security

So what they're saying is that this technology just happens to have potential more or less exclusively in areas populated by companies/agencies that have a lot of money floating around for research grants, eh?

What a stroke of luck!

Re:Potential Uses

[mmkkbb]

when i was in school, every project final report had to mention possible military applications of the little robots or whatever that we had produced. remote-control car with programmable automatic navigation? reconnaissance, bomb-laying, etc.

Re:Potential Uses

[Anonymous Custard]

every project final report had to mention possible military applications

That's kind of depressing... why didn't they require that every final report had to mention applications that could improve life in underdeveloped areas or something?

Then students would pursue projects with this in mind, instead of developing with military applications in mind. Highly reliable and easy-to-repair water pumps, improved farming tools constructable from local materials, simple and effective water filtration devices, etc.?

Re:Potential Uses

[budgenator]

Then students would pursue projects with this in mind, instead of developing with military applications in mind. Highly reliable and easy-to-repair water pumps, improved farming tools constructable from local materials, simple and effective water filtration devices, etc.?

You say that like those aren't military applications, I think perhaps your out of touch with what modern military actualy does. Demonizing anything military is easy, and the people who do it the most are the people who don't realize that it's the military's infrastructure that make most humanitarian relief operations possible. Next time you think somebody needs 10,000 tons of relief supplies ask FedEx what the going rate is, and if they drop it off in a hostile fire zone.

Re:Potential Uses

[Anonymous Custard]

You say that like those aren't military applications

Just because the military is involved in getting aid relief to combat zones doesn't make a water purifier a military tool. Nor is a reliable water pump the kind of military applications the original poster's school had him think up.

I take issue.

[Grendel Drago]

You know, that's pretty simple-minded thinking. And the direct causes of native peoples' subjugation at the hands of marauding, murderous Europeans were swords, guns and terrible diseases.

But what made us turn from wild near-apes with rather large foreheads into what we are now was farming, which led to writing, political centralization, and the rest of civilization.

So, our ancestors (culturally, if not genetically) beat up everyone else's ancestors because, at the start of it all, they were better farmers.

And we're not even really evolved from predators! We evolved from small, squirrelish lemurs who, if I remember right, were pretty much omnivorous, certainly not anything like the species of Carnivora [wikipedia.org]. More recently, some of the Australopithecus apes were even vegetarian. Even when they hunted, our ancestors were much better gatherers than hunters, no matter what those cave paintings would have you believe.

But I suppose you were just making a point off the top of your head, which sounded good at first blush.

--grendel drago

Re:Potential Uses

[Mac Degger]

This is meant as a polite reply, but it will seem harsh. My appologies, but nonetheless:

Read my post. Read up on evolution. I've already agreed with you that agression has been a force in evolution, and in certain parts of the world (large tracts of africa, wherever there is conflict) it still is. In develloped countries it is actually a negative: the violent and aggressive get locked up (and don't make enough money to pay for surgery and other medical attention, further limiting the spread of his genetic heretige).

The guy who invents military applications recieves a steady paycheck, which grants him a small amount of status. The guy who owns the company who employs the aforementioned guy gets all the status, gets to fuck around with a large number of nubile women, and spreads his genetic seed the widest. Same goes for rockstars or rich people. Cynical? Yup....but too true. Geeks do not breed well. We don't contribute too heavily to the genetic pool. There is a big difference between agrression and the capability to think up new means to commit larger forms of aggression. Just look at Bush. He can be aggressive (as long as it isn't physical), but do you see him thinking up a new weapon system? But I bet he could have any Whitehouse intern he wanted.

I have to say I kinda agree with a lot of your post, but I remain convinced that Darwin and Gould will back me up on the way evolution works: it does not promote thinking of science as applied to military application, even though it might select towards application of military force (which is a totally different thing entirely).
Thus forcing kids to think of military applications is an entirely forced-from-above thing to do, not something which is somehow 'genetically enforced'. And it's still a horrible thing to force kids to do, IMNSHO, as it directly canals a childs thought processes into applications of agression. /ditto, but it's still an interesting aside nontheless :).

Re:Potential Uses

[Jerf]

once everyone has a decent standard of living we either need to go to space or prepare for another population boom like there is in China / S. America.

Evidence?

This concern is out of date. Rich people have fewer kids; the evidence at this point is effectively incontrovertible, though one can yet debate the reasons.

I'm not ready to panic about underpopulation yet, but if you insist on panicking, that's the way to go at the moment. Malthus was wrong; humans are the only known species to figure out reasons

Re:Potential Uses

[mmkkbb]

Actually, no, it was the University of Rhode Island. Glad to know we weren't alone though. I always figured that the requirement was due to out close proximity to Raytheon, Electric Boat, the Naval War College, and the Newport Naval Undersea Warfare Center.

Re:Potential Uses

[Citizen of Earth]

So what they're saying is that this technology just happens to have potential more or less exclusively in areas populated by companies/agencies that have a lot of money floating around for research grants, eh?

Um, the low-lying fruit has already been picked.

Re:Potential Uses

[Merk]

I just think it's funny that they try to limit the applications.

That's kinda like saying "The 'Internet' could have potential uses in communications, biomedical research and remote sensing."

If small-scale fusion that produces more power than it consumes is indeed possible, it could have implications everywhere in everything. Portable, standalone fusion power sources could (in time) change everything. ((Note to self: do not mention phasers and lose all credibility....))

Re:Potential Uses

[(54)T-Dub]

From the MSNBC article:

The reaction gave off an isotope of helium along with subatomic particles known as neutrons, a characteristic of fusion. The experiment did not, however, produce more energy than the amount put in -- an achievement that would be a huge breakthrough.

To me this was the most important part of the article and the summary would have benefited for it. The quote shows the reason why this only has limited applications.

Re:Potential Uses

[modecx]

But hey, perhaps it might be a good helium generation technology, depending on how efficient it can be made... For those who don't know, the world is facing a shortage on helium. Most of the world's supply is found in Kansas, Texas and Wyoming mixed in with natural gas or oil. It's necessary for various industries and sciences, such as calibrating instruments and welding aluminium.

I'd guess that lowering the temperature of Natural gas to -300F so that everything but He is liquified is pretty darn ineffic

Re:Potential Uses

[Anonymous Coward]

This reaction is known to cause cancer in the State of California.

Re:Potential Uses

[jabuzz]

In which case the whole concept of cold fusion is utterly bogus as it is impossible to get *any* two atoms to fuse without input of large amounts of energy to overcome the Coulomb repulsion.

On the other hand if it does not involve large magnetically confined plasmas at millions of Kelvin, huge lasers squezzing tiny pockets of gas, or nuclear explosions doing the same, but is taking place with relatively simple apparatus at room temperature we call it cold fusion.

Re:Potential Uses

[gumbi west]

An atom is atomic (i.e. the gold nuclei that they accelerate at BNL are high energy atomic particles). Subatomic paricles make up atoms (protons, neutrons, and electrons).

Re:Potential Uses

[cavemanf16]

"While the energy created was too small to harness cheap fusion power, the technique could have potential uses in medicine, spacecraft propulsion, the oil drilling industry and homeland security, said Seth Putterman, a physicist at the University of California at Los Angeles."

And why is it that every new American invention these days has a "potential use" in homeland security? There must be plenty of money wasting away in that crappy program right now if every single scientist talks about it whenever they release new findings. I'm off to begin building my CompuMegaInterCorpHomelandSecurity company now... (I figure with a name like that, how can the VC's NOT trust me with googleplexes of money?!!)

Re:Potential Uses

[daviddennis]

I think that's what he meant.

1 Googleplex of money = the valuation of Google at this time.

D

Re:Potential Uses

[demonbug]

So what they're saying is that this technology just happens to have potential more or less exclusively in areas populated by companies/agencies that have a lot of money floating around for research grants, eh?

What a stroke of luck!

Hey, research funding has to come from somewhere.

Re:Potential Uses

[mparar]

Indeed. A lucky break for them. It's an amazing coincidence that I just finished reading "Bad Science : The Short Life and Weird Times of Cold Fusion" by Gary Taubes last night. It's a fast paced, light, extremely well-written book that'll put most thriller/mystery type books to shame. Especially for anybody remotely connected wth academia. He describes the events leading up to and following the great cold fusion sham in the late 80s and early 90s out of Utah U and BYU and quickly picked up by a bunch of

Dilthium Crystals

[Anonymous Coward]

Goes to show that sci fi is sci fact.

The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

They should have been useing DI-lithium crystals. Stupid UCLA.

Solar Sails

[mfh]

A UCLA collaboration ... this technology could be used for things like microthrusters...etc

I can see this being of use with solar sail vessels. But how close are we to fusion power stations?

Pyroelectric?

[Anonymous Coward]

Submitter is confusing "pyroelectric" with "piezoelectric." Crystals used for oscillators, filters, and speakers use the piezoelectric [wikipedia.org] effect.

Re:Pyroelectric?

[grmoc]

pyroelectric-- Converts heat energy into electrical energy

piezoelectric-- Converts kinetic energy into electrical energy

In this experiment, they heat up a (Lithium tantalate) crystal which reacts by creating a very high charge.. etc.

In other words, the crystal is a pyroelectric crystal, and not necessarily piezoelectric.

Re:Pyroelectric?

[wgaryhas]

but heat is a form of kinetic engery, so piezoelectric is still correct, pyroelectric is just more accurate

Re:Pyroelectric?

[deander2]

In other words, the crystal is a pyroelectric crystal, and not necessarily piezoelectric.

from the wikipedia article linked:

All (known) pyroelectric materials are also piezoelectric, the two properties being closely related.

Re:Pyroelectric?

[OOGG_THE_CAVEMAN]

OOGG wish to clarify description of piezoelectric.

KEY ASPECT NOT CONVERT ENERGY. RATHER, RELATION BETWEEN mechanical strain & electric polarization, OR IN CASE pyroelectric BETWEEN electric polarization & thermal gradient.

EXPERIMENT USE pyroelectric CONVERT THERMAL GRADIENT into polarization = electric field.

http://www.cohr.com/Applications/index.cfm?fuseact ion=Forms.page&PageID=118 [cohr.com]

NOT NEED ENERGY CONVERSION FOR PIEZOELECTRIC APPLICATION. Cell phone filter (SAW=surface acoustic wave) USE COUPLING BETWEEN ELECTRIC FIELD & SOUND WAVE PROPAGATION FOR high-Q MICROWAVE/RF FILTER. NOT CONVERT ENERGY.

Re:Pyroelectric?

[tgrigsby]

RTFA, then Google if necessary. Here are some articles to help:

There's a Wiki article [wikipedia.org], a
product announcement [fuji-piezo.com], and
this one [amptek.com] even details how pyroelectric crystals have been used to generate X-rays.

Re:Pyroelectric?

[tgrigsby]

Sorry, meant to add that piezoelectric refers to materials that generate electricity when they change shape. Pyroelectric substances generate a charge when heated.

Yes, pyroelectric.

[GQuon]

They call the study "Observation of nuclear fusion driven by a pyroelectric crystal".

Unless the submitter is one of the researchers, the submitter was correct.

Thanks for making me learn about those electric characteristics of chrystals though.

It's pyroelectric. But submitter was also confused

[GQuon]

... as was I.

Certainly, the research is about using the pyroelectric effect. The submitter was right about that.

What the submitter was wrong about was this:
"a type of crystal used in cell phones to filter signals."
That is, as the parent post correctly points out, using the piezoelectric effect. So it is informative, although it should have pointed out exactly in what part of the write-up was wrong.

(My other reply down as -1 Wrong. Sorry, Anonymous Coward.)

Re:Pyroelectric?

[whitehatlurker]

the submitter isn't wrong.

Not completely, but the section about "a type of crystal used in cell phones to filter signals" is not accurate. This would be an application of piezoelectric materials. Check the wiki page.

Re:Pyroelectric?

[idontgno]

"a pyroelectric crystal in a deuterated environment"

True dat. The experiment uses a heat-activated crystal rather than a mechanically (pressure) activated one. Hence, pyro versus piezo.

So if anything, the submitter isn't wrong.

Well, maybe not completely correct either: "...a type of crystal used in cell phones to filter signals...."

I thought that signal filtering was a piezo crystal application. But IANAEE, so YMMV.

Applied science

[empty drum]

Old and busted: Mini fuel cell power
New hotness: Mini fusion reactor power

Re:Applied science

[game kid]

It came with dark matter, but it kept getting pulled over.

Great Scott!

[1evilmonkey]

Next week they will place that bad boy on a flux capacitor.

Re:Great Scott!

[garcia]

Actually it would have been last week because they would have skipped over this week to arrive at exactly this moment in time.

25 billion volts per meter huh?

[Penguinoflight]

eh, too bad it cant stop a 26 billion hits per nanosecond... oh wait, this is slashdot.

Argh!

[Anonymous Coward]

A UCLA collaboration (Seth Putterman, Brian Naranjo and Jim Gimzewski) appear to have developed a fusion device powered by a pyroelectric crystal, a type of crystal used in cell phones to filter signals. When heated, such a crystal produces a large electric charge on its surface. The UCLA researchers placed a lithium tantalate (LiTaO3) pyroelectric crystal so that one side touches a copper disc. A tiny tungsten probe is then placed at the center of the copper disc. When the crystal is subsequently heated, a very large large electric field is produced at the end of the tugsten tip, ~25 billion volts per meter. This field gradient is so high that it strips the electrons from nearby deuterium atoms. The ionized deuterium atoms [are] then accelerated by this field towards a solid target of erbium deuteride (ErD2). They collide with it at such high energies that some fuse with the target. A measurement of almost 900 neutrons per second was observer. This is 400 times the background! Although the amount of energy produced in this initial experiment was miniscule (~1E-8 jules), this technology could be used for things like microthrusters. There are pictures and movies on the UCLA's physics site."

Do the editors even look at these things anymore?

Takes a lot more energy than it produces

[nokiator]

Going briefly over the available documents on this, it appears that this technique consumes orders of magnitude more energy than it produces. This would preclude energy generation as one of the potential applications, which is usually regarded as the most promising potential application of cold fusion. Most of the other potential applications mentioned in the articles use this as a neutron generator, but there are other well known ways of achieving that...

Re:Takes a lot more energy than it produces

[jmv]

You would be right if this weren't a prototype (it's not like they're selling it). What they demonstrated is that it's possible to do fusion outside of a tokamak (or similar device). From there, you can always try making the thing work at a higher scale, with less energy.

Except you can already do that.

[JudasBlue]

You would be right, if there weren't already other ways of doing fusion without a tokamak or simlar devices.

Philo Farnsworth was doing table top fusion back in the 60's using tube techniques that were part of the outgrowth of his pioneering work in Television.

Check out fusor.net [fusor.net] for details on the technique.

Look around on the Net, and you can find more articles on the device in question, including people who have built them to play around with. To the best of my knowledge, there is no practical appliction for a Farnsworth device, except the not-inconsiderable bragging rights that you have built your own fusion reactor (a line sure to have the babes just lining up).

Re:Except you can already do that.

[0racle]

no practical appliction for a Farnsworth device

I dunno, I hear he had several doomsday devices.

Re:Except you can already do that.

[ERJ]

"Doomsday device? Now the ball's in Farnsworth's court! I suppose I could part with one and still be feared..."

--Professor Hubert J Farnsworth (Futurama)

Re:Except you can already do that.

[SydShamino]

Aye, one of my college professors ran NASA's fusion program in the 70s, and created the EFBT (Electric Field Bumpy Torus) fusion reactor. I don't know if you would call it a similar device to a tokamak - it used electric fields to stabilize the plasma instead of magnetic - but it also worked well.

I think any new method that could possibly draw money away from the tokamak model is a good thing. I think it is one of the reasons that fusion research has been so stagnant. When the Princeton TFTR was being b

Re:Takes a lot more energy than it produces

[kebes]

The only other ways to achieve neutron flux (that I'm aware of) are to (1) use a particle accelerator collision to release neutrons (i.e.: spallation) or (2) to use a radioactive source (or running nuclear recator) and guide the flux of exiting neutrons. Both of these are quite large and not very portable.

Although this research is not going to give us energy production, it is the smallest neutron source I've heard of (palm-sized according to article). This in and of itself is quite exciting, and it would have numerous applications in industry. Neutron sources right now are used to image industrial materials (it can be used to map the internal stress distribution in pipes, aircraft components, etc... and it can get images through materials that would block x-rays). Having portable neutron-imagers would be useful to industry for doing stress analysis/imaging on components while they are in actual use. I can think of lots more applications, but I'll leave it at that.

For those interested, here is the abstract of the Nature article in question (the article is already available online, to subscribers, even though it officially releases in tomorrow's issue of Nature):
Nature 434, 1115-1117 (28 April 2005) | doi: 10.1038/nature03575

While progress in fusion research continues with magnetic[1] and inertial[2] confinement, alternative approaches--such as Coulomb explosions of deuterium clusters[3] and ultrafast laser-plasma interactions[4]--also provide insight into basic processes and technological applications. However, attempts to produce fusion in a room temperature solid-state setting, including 'cold' fusion[5] and 'bubble' fusion[6], have met with deep scepticism[7]. Here we report that gently heating a pyroelectric crystal in a deuterated atmosphere can generate fusion under desktop conditions. The electrostatic field of the crystal is used to generate and accelerate a deuteron beam (> 100 keV and >4 nA), which, upon striking a deuterated target, produces a neutron flux over 400 times the background level. The presence of neutrons from the reaction D + D --> 3He (820 keV) + n (2.45 MeV) within the target is confirmed by pulse shape analysis and proton recoil spectroscopy. As further evidence for this fusion reaction, we use a novel time-of-flight technique to demonstrate the delayed coincidence between the outgoing alpha-particle and the neutron. Although the reported fusion is not useful in the power-producing sense, we anticipate that the system will find application as a simple palm-sized neutron generator.

Re:Takes a lot more energy than it produces

[kebes]

muon-catalyzed fusion would only viably occur in a particle accelerator setup, which I already mentioned (where else are you getting the muons from). In any case (as far as I know) no such thing is actually used today at neutron facilities.

For examples of neutron-beamline research facilities that exist today, I refer you to NIST [nist.gov], HMI [www.hmi.de], and the Spallation Neutron Source [sns.gov] (still being built).

Lets see...

[starseeker]

If we can get his webserver to produce more fusion!

I can see it now - "Slashdot - powering the world through mass action browsing."

Doomsday machine

[LemonFire]

Finally! That was the last missing part for my doomsday machine. Thank you guys...

-- This SIG was never meant to be.

LiTaO3

[The Fun Guy]

How can you possibly expect to get useful fusion reactions using a monolithium crystal?

Re:LiTaO3

[HtR]

I know! And what's with the erbium deuteride (ErD2) target? When I duplicated their results in my garage this afternoon, I found that you get much better results with a radium deuteride (R2D2) target. What were they thinking?

Re:LiTaO3

[simcop2387]

of course you can get FUSION out of a monolithium crystal, its the Matter/Anti-Matter control that you can't get without a dilithium crystal matrix.

Shhh!

[alienmole]

Don't screw with the timeline -- they have to get through the monolithium phase on their own!

Re:LiTaO3

[Talinom]

How can you possibly expect to get useful fusion reactions using a monolithium crystal?

Duh! That what the fusion part is for; to fuse monolithium into dilithium (or even trilithium)!

Not quite "Fusion" in the lay person's sense.

[Colgate2003]

Yes, they are fusing particles, but this is not power-producing fusion. To call it fusion will mislead a general audience.

What it is -- which is still very cool -- is a particle accellerator the size of a toaster. High energy accerators fuse atoms, but we don't usually call them fusion reactors.

So, we should be talking about a small particle accelrator that could be used for medical imaging and treatment, sensing, or spacecraft propulsion.

Re:Not quite "Fusion" in the lay person's sense.

[Colgate2003]

Before someone else points it out:

How did I possibly manage to spell "accelerator" three different ways in the same post?

Re:Not quite "Fusion" in the lay person's sense.

[idontgno]

How did I possibly manage to spell "accelerator" three different ways in the same post?

Talent?

On a slightly more serious note, not just any particle accelerator. A neutron accelerator. With a very simple input (heat), if this kicks out a high enough neutron flux density you could have a cheap-n-compact high-yield neutron source for all kinds of kind and nefarious purposes.

The First Particle Accelerator Was Smaller

[ninjagin]

Not to burst any bubbles, but the first cyclotron particle accelerator was smaller than a palm pilot, and was built in 1929.

You can see it here:

http://science.howstuffworks.com/atom-smasher2.htm

Anyhoo, while I find the experiment and subsequent discovery kind of interesting, it isn't anything terribly exciting.

Now that's news for nerds!

[Pedrito]

Seriously, except for the minor grammar/spelling error with "observer" (which is just a typical miss for our dear old editors here), this was a quality post with quality information and no question, news for nerds! If Slashdot could maintain this sort of quality (and perhaps even correct the spelling and grammar errors), I would be a much happier reader.

beo

[42Penguins]

"Although the amount of energy produced in this initial experiment was miniscule (~1E-8 jules), this technology could be used for things like microthrusters." ----------------- So, to get a good amount of energy, you'd need a beowulf cluster of these?

Other contested fusion report

[kebes]

In 2002 there was a report claiming fusion due to cavitation. The article appeared in Science:
Science, Vol 295, Issue 5561, 1868-1873 , 8 March 2002 [DOI: 10.1126/science.1067589]

The method involves irradiating a liquid with sound. The acoustic waves can cause microscopic bubbles to form in solution (cavitation). When these bubbles collapse, their temperatures can become quite high. Done properly, in fact, these cavitations can lead to sonoluminescence (creation of light from sound). The creation of a plasma under these conditions has been confirmed. The Science article further claimed that neutrons were measured, indicating that fusion temperatures had been achieved. They were certainly not claiming this as a power source (yet), since energy input was much greater than output.

The interesting thing is the controversy that resulted, and, as far as I know, is still not resolved. Scientists worldwide are still split on whether or not fusion has really been achieved. It will take some time longer before we know for sure (altough the most recent reports I've read lean towards this really being fusion).

I'm bringing this up because it seems rather similar to what we have here. It is a high-profile announcement of fusion in a rather unusual setup. I anticipate that this will be met with much skepticism (rightly), and that it will take some time before we know "for sure" that it's really fusion.

Anyways, highly interesting results, and I'm looking forward for future confirmation/elaboration of these experiments. But I wouldn't get too excited, since these kinds of discoveries sometimes have subtle flaws (or mis-interpretations) that only become revealled when the full scrutiny of the scientific process is applied to them.

Re:Other contested fusion report

[khrtt]

Don't forget the good old pulse neutron tubes [lbl.gov].

Pulse neutron tubes are fusion-based neutron sources, most commonly used in circa 1970 atom bomb trigger mechanisms. They are also used for peaceful purposes, pretty much whenever one needs a 14 MeV neutron source. The vacuum tube uses very high voltage to accelerate deterium ions towards a target. Or something... In other words, achieving fusion at room temperature in a small apparatus is no big deal. The problem is that you always have to input way more energy into the device than you can get out. I don't see how any of these new advances in achieving fusion bring us closer to use of fusion as power source. Not to say that this new fusion neutron source is a wonderful scientific achievment, it is, it's just doesn't seem likely to be a potential power source technology.

Re:Other contested fusion report

[kebes]

Well firstly there are other applications for fusion besides power production (such as neutron sources for imaging, detection, etc.).

Secondly, with regard to power production, every fusion experiment adds a piece to the puzzle, even if that particular device setup will never be used to generate power. Most large-scale fusion experiments that have been performed, in fact, had no intention of generating power. They merely wanted to push the boundaries of what was known about fusion, and what could be engin

Cool, but something still missing?

[DoubleDownOnEleven]

From the MSNBC article:

"The experiment did not, however, produce more energy than the amount put in"

So, how is this useful from a fusion / energy source standpoint?

Small-scale (server) fusion at UCLA

[Jurph]

gnuman99 writes "A UCLA collaboration (Seth Putterman, Brian Naranjo and Jim Gimzewski) appear to have developed a fusion device powered by a Pentium, a type of silicon chip used in personal computers to generate heat. When charge is applied, such a chip produces a large thermal gradient on its surface. The UCLA researchers placed a Pentium-based webserver so that one side touched a website called Slashdot. A tiny CAT-5 cable is then connected to the internet. When the website about fusion is visited by thousands of geeks at once, a very large large load is produced on the server, ~25 billion hits per hour. This traffic volume is so high that it strips the heavier "one" bits in the packets from the "zeroes". The ionized packets are then accelerated by this field towards the central processing unit (CPU). They collide with it at such high energies that some fuse with the target. A measurement of almost 900 Kelvin was taken by an observer. This is way higher than the background! Although the amount of energy produced in this initial experiment was miniscule (~1E-8 jules), this technology could be used on things like Microsoft's website. There are pictures and movies on the UCLA's physics site contributing to the problem." Reader richmlpdx adds a link to coverage at MSNBC, in hopes that he can slashdot them too.

Macromedia

[Spy Handler]

don't they already developed this technology ?

Is it real...?

[__aaclcg7560]

There was no explosion. Real fusion power should involved accidentally blowing up a neighborhood because it was tested in a warehouse (a la Chain Reaction). If there's no boom, it doesn't exist and no one will believe you.

Other uses for Fusion than power

[Frumious Wombat]

The reason these devices are interesting is the flow of Neutrons.

There are several applications in materials science where you want neutrons, but you don't want to send your sample off to Oak Ridge, and wait, or go through the paperwork to try to build a research reactor. This device would allow, for instance, in-house Neutron Diffraction experiments, which is similar to X-ray diffraction except that Hydrogens show up. You can see hydrogen loading in containment materials, migration in batteries, and

Not viable for energy production

[MontyApollo]

New Scientist has a right up as well. The seemed to have written off the whole idea of using it to produce energy. http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7315 [newscientist.com]

im sorry...

[patrick.whitlock]

but could someone put that through a babelfish and tell me what this guy said?

Re:im sorry...

[pdbogen]

Big electricity make little particle.

English Please?

[rAiNsT0rm]

Holy Crap, no matter how much of a nerd you are you realize there are always bigger ones. Dude ions and erbin-somethin's collide and holy cow they make 900 other-sumpthins that's like 400 times the back-doo-dad!

That whole article could have been written in Esperanto for as much as I could get from it and I have a solid background in Compsci, EE, and sci.

Hulk !

[zymano]

Which one of these scientists will turn into the Hulk ?

And who knew i was using this technology everytime I lit my cigarette !

Desktop fusion is not new...

[MrKevvy]

The Farnsworth-Hirsch Fusor [wikipedia.org] has been around since the 1960's, and is so easy to build that it is sometimes seen in high school science fairs. It is commonly available as a neutron source.

What would be "new" would be a net gain in energy, but like the fusor, that doesn't seem to be happening with this new device.

Re:Desktop fusion is not new...

[kebes]

It is commonly available as a neutron source.

Can you provide me references on that, please? I use neutron sources in my research, and I'm not aware of a Fusor setup being used at any real neutron beamlines around the world. They are all either particle accelerators that produce neutrons via spallation (such as the upcoming Spallation Neutron Source [sns.gov]), or are radiological/nuclear reactors (such as NIST [nist.gov], HMI [www.hmi.de], etc.). Despite the simplicity of the Fusor, it is not actually used as a neutron source by anyone. As far as I know, the flux is much too low and the system not efficient.

Re:Desktop fusion is not new...

[thelizman]

Despite the simplicity of the Fusor, it is not actually used as a neutron source by anyone.

Diamler-Chrysler has commercially sold a fusor it calls "Fusion Star" for several years as a high-count neutron source. Fusors are in use at the University of Illinois, Brigham Young, and NC State. If you want references...google. Common knowledge shouldn't have to have a citation.

Useful for neutrons, not power (and it's hot)

[radtea]

What these guys have done is found a novel application of a relatively well-known means of generating extremely high electric fields. This is good, and may produce more compact, robust neutron generators than we currently have.

But it is clear from the article--and the basic physics--that this isn't a practical means of generating fusion power. This is just another hot fusion mechanism--it isn't "room temperature". The deuterium ions from the gas discharge are accelerated by the field and smash into the ErD surface with high energies.

The interaction cross-sections are such that virtually all of the D ions will slow down without fusing, and the energy that went into accelerating them will be only recoverable as heat, with the usual thermodynamic (in)efficiencies. The DD fusion cross-section just isn't high enough to overcome those losses.

Cool experiment, though.

--Tom

cold fusion

[Suppafly]

Is room-temperature fusion considered cold fusion or is that something else?

Uses in homeland security?

[nurb432]

Is this the new requirment for getting funding for any project? " see it also can be used for homeland security ".. So can my damned shoes..

What a farce.

( oh, great project.. good work guys )

My god! Carl Sagan saw it all first!!!

[Pig Hogger]

The ionized deuterium atoms then accelerated by this field towards a solid target of erbium deuteride (ErD2).

In Contact (the book, not the movie), at one point, when they were assembling the Machine, they had some problem with ERBIUM DOWELS. Does erbium has some esoteric nuclear capabilities???

Build your own?

[TheSync]

Instructions for building your own electrostatic confinement fusion device (aka fusor) are here [kronjaeger.com].

Research Value

[knapper_tech]

Even if the technology is found to be unable to produce sufficient amounts of energy to be valuable in that role, it could still be a great platform for studying fusion in the lab, and it could yield useful information for controlling fusion in the large scale research reactors that may eventually lead to scalable, cheap, and abundant energy production.

Worldwide Splash

[sterlingda]

Because this development was featured in prestigious Nature, the world is taking notice. An Associate Press story is receiving widespread coverage by mainstream news organizations. Google News is showing major coverage by a wide range of news organizations worldwide. http://pesn.com/2005/04/28/6900088_UCLA_Cold_Fusio n/ [pesn.com]

UCLA website http://rodan.physics.ucla.edu/pyrofusion/ [ucla.edu] credits SlashDot for overwhelming their server.

"Sorry, couldn't handle Slashdot effect. ...Last modified: Wed Apr 27 20:37:46 UTC 2005"

Also worth note: Cold Fusion Goes Back to School at MIT - Colloquium to be held on Massachusetts Institute of Technology campus May 21, 2005. http://pesn.com/2005/04/20/6900085_Cold_Fusion_MIT / [pesn.com]

Back to the Future here we come!

[sydbarrett74]

We're one step closer to Mr Fusion -- now all we need is the time-travelling DeLorean....

Re:First Post People Suck

[selectspec]

They heated up the crystal to about 100 degrees celsius.

Re:First Post People Suck

[SatanicPuppy]

Only if it's a room full of boiling water.

Re:How well does it scale up?

[helioquake]

That's kind of what people said about electrons and X-rays...about 150 years ago.

So think about that.

Re:How well does it scale up?

[KillerDeathRobot]

It's a fun physics experiment, but I don't think it is much use in the economic driven world.

That's an interesting conclusion to come to without getting the answers to your questions.

Re:How well does it scale up?

[ciroknight]

Obviously it scales up really well, but there is some point in which lithium tantalate no longer becomes effecient and "DiLithium" will be phased in as its replacement.

Scaleup? Who cares? Get George Lucas on the phone.

[JonTurner]

George baby, I've got a great idea for the next film. You sittin' down? Good. It's about a Robot named ErD2 (erbium deuteride, or "erb" for short) and he's powered by nuclear fusion. Now here's the good part: We take advantage of his name ("erb") and have him talk with an incredibly annoying urban slang. (That's "Erb" as in the word "urban". Get it? Get it?) Now, he wants to put the slap down the shizzle manizzle and be bustin' caps with his frickin' "laser beams". What up, dawg?
[click]

Hello? George, you t

Re:How well does it scale up?

[maxwells_deamon]

There might be some very economical uses of this. A small lightweight source of neutrons that does not contain or produce any radiation before being activated might have some very nice (money producing) applications.

Also they stated that the energy production in the Initial experiment was less than it took to generate the fusion. This does not rule out variations or even a scaled up version (I would guess that simple scaleing would not work)

Re:The Saint says:

[dabigpaybackski]

Cold fusion can't be total BS if somebody is willing to bump off [pureenergysystems.com] it's chief spokesperson.

Re:The Saint says:

[ed__]

you're right!

sad, but true: 90% of murders committed in the US are cold fusion related. much fewer are the murders committed for motives such as robbery, revenge, rage, not paying back your bookie, or randomly.

in fact the only explanation for current murder statistics is the success of cold fusion.

Re:Next month called...

[Rorschach1]

"it said there were errors in the experiment and it in fact produced less energy than was added"

Did anyone claim otherwise? This is a novel way to produce fusion, I don't see any claims of net energy production.

I can build a Farnsworth-Hirsch fusor in my garage, too, and get fusion out of it. Just not 1/100 as much as I put in.

This is another (interesting) avenue of experimentation. No one's saying it's going to be producing power any time soon.

Re:/.'ed already with helpful message

[Billy the Mountain]

Wow, $30? That's some kind of deal!

Re:By far

[LastNickAvailable]

Exactly. A single bit of technical data is unacceptable. At least they could have converted the units into something inteligible like library-of-congress-equivalent neutrons per football field.

Re:PADME NEARLY SUCCUMBS TO FORCE CHOKE. DIES LATE

[Rude Turnip]

Could that have been prevented by room temperature, small scale fusion?

Re:Still uses deuterium

[Waffle Iron]

Yet another fusion process that produces less energy than is input into it and requires a specialized isotope of hydrogen.

Deuterium is hardly specialized. The hydrogen in sea water is 1/6000 D. It is easily separated, and it's readily available by the truckload.

Any practical fusion process is likely to use deuterium rather than ordinary hydrogen because it's plentiful and far easier to fuse.

Re:Commercial Neutron Generators

[jericho4.0]

You're an idiot. The goal is to produce neutrons. This research, while expanding our knoledge of fusion and giving more researchers a fusion source, will never result in power generation.