Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Power The Military United States Science

US Navy Files Patent For Compact Fusion Reactor (popularmechanics.com) 172

Posted by BeauHD from the stretching-the-limits-of-science dept.
Bodhammer shares a report from Popular Mechanics: The U.S. Navy has jumped into the game by filing a patent for a compact fusion reactor, according to exclusive reporting by The War Zone. The success of the device, developed by researcher Salvatore Cezar Pais of the Naval Air Warfare Center -- Aircraft Division, relies on a part called a dynamic fusor. According to the patent, Pais' plasma chamber contains several pairs of these dynamic fusors, which rapidly spin and vibrate within the chamber in order to create a "concentrated magnetic energy flux" that can squish the gases together.

Coated with an electrical charge, the cone-shaped fusors pump fuel gases like Deuterium or Deuterium-Xenon into the chamber, which are then put under intense heat and pressure to create the nuclei-fusing reaction. Current technology at reactors around the world use superconductors to create a magnetic field. The War Zone reports that the device could potentially produce more than a terawatt of energy while only taking in power in the kilowatt to megawatt range.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Navy Files Patent For Compact Fusion Reactor More

US Navy Files Patent For Compact Fusion Reactor

Comments Filter:

  • How? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Immerman ( 2627577 ) on Friday October 11, 2019 @09:09PM (#59298316)

    What exactly does it mean for the NAVY to file a patent? As I recall the U.S. government can't hold copyrights or patents, so would this just serve to put the technology firmly into the public domain?

    • At the very least, it'll prevent some Chinese patent troll from demanding billions to allow us to use them in our patrol boats.

      • At the very least, it'll prevent some Chinese patent troll from demanding billions to allow us to use them in our patrol boats.

        I'm not sure there are any patrol boats that require a terawatt of energy are there?

        • Lasers.

        • Re:How? (Score:5, Informative)

          by Immerman ( 2627577 ) on Friday October 11, 2019 @09:58PM (#59298420)

          Depends where your boat's patrolling.

          Combine this with the same guy's patent on a hybrid underwater/aerospace vehicle, powered by his EM-style drive, enabled by the same vibrationaly-induced room-temperature superconductors as the fusion reactor itself... (guess who invented them...) and a few terrawatts might easily be be put to use patrolling interplanetary space.

          The fact that there's a flood of patent filings for such "magic" technology, all invented by the same guy, would normally scream "nutcase". The NAVY's involvement though is perplexing, especially with the claims that these technologies are operational, rather than theoretical. It suggests that either someone's pet crackpot is getting far too much leeway, they actually have some brilliant paradigm-breaking inventor on their payroll, or someone has decided it's time to release some of the alien technology they've been gifted or reverse engineered.

          I'll leave the relative plausibility of those scenarios as an exercise for the reader.

          • I'm afraid that this is why software patents need to end. The US patent office is overwhelmed by nonsensical patents with no possibility of actually functioning, and expect the courts to settle the details after the patent is granted. Simply discarding the software patents would free the office to focus on physical patents.

            • I suspect we could eliminate a whole lot of the nonsense with a reversion to the original rules. You must submit a working model with your patent, and the President must personally sign the patent.

              Nothing that doesn't work can get a patent, and the president will only ever have time to sign the cream of the crop - so if your invention isn't of that caliber then filing for a patent is just a waste of time and money.

              • While I agree that this would reduce patent fraud profoundly, many patents involve systems that involve future technologies (such as space elevators and large scale solar mirrors). Others involve microtechnologies that require special equipment to detect, such as molecular chemistry patents, or very large scale projects, such as earthquake treating skyscrapers. So the working model requirement can be very difficult.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Shaitan ( 22585 )

            Coincidentally, following the reports from mass data analysis and ground exploration ultimately led investigators on the new series "Contact" has led to US and Russian Navy reports supporting the idea of a vehicle just like you describe as season finale. The series goes down twists and turns and has some "somethings gotta be going on with that!" TV moments but they do seem to at least be using a data driven approach, saying the government is not going to and can't tell us so we are going to have to use tech

          • The Navy DID recently admit to seeing UFOs.

          • Re:How? (Score:5, Interesting)

            by RubberDogBone ( 851604 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @10:00AM (#59299540)

            The other possibility is that these things are merely designed to fool our enemies into thinking we HAVE invented these devices, and leading them to spend major money trying to equal the inventions and spend a major effort trying to steal whatever they can about the US results.

            The first scenario, getting them to spend money, works. We did just that during the cold war and forced the Soviets to spend like crazy to keep up, until it wrecked their economy. Spending to keep up plays on the fears your enemy has something you don't, and generals and presidents tend to fall for it quite easily.

            The second scenario, military and industrial espionage, is a weapon of choice these days. What better honey pot is there than nearly magical inventions we went and patented because we love taking credit for things, and boasting, and flaunting. We surely would not do these things unless we HAD the inventions, right? So the enemy forces have no choice but to invest significant resources trying to steal anything they can about these things. People, money, techniques and resources, will all be spent and burned to obtain the information. We just sit back and watch and take notes about what and how they do it.

            And if it's fake, you just tricked your enemy into wasting a lot of time and money. You have won the match.

            If it's the real deal and you really DO have these things, then you have won THE game. Your old enemies are no longer even your peers, much less relevant enemies.

            I'm hoping for the latter. It sure would be nice to have the biggest breakthrough since the discovery of fire. But it is much more likely this is just a disinformation campaign.

        • Not yet.

        • "I'm not sure there are any patrol boats that require a terawatt of energy are there?"

          Build a reactor that fits and there WILL be!

          • I wonder how fast a submersible patrol boat could go with a terawatt of power. Or maybe they could fly.

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • What exactly does it mean for the NAVY to file a patent? As I recall the U.S. government can't hold copyrights or patents, so would this just serve to put the technology firmly into the public domain?

      It's right there on the actual patent application "United States government"

      http://www.freepatentsonline.c... [freepatentsonline.com]

      • Re:How? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Humbubba ( 2443838 ) on Friday October 11, 2019 @10:52PM (#59298522)
        Ryzilynt, you are so right. The government has the right to file patent applications:

        The government rights to patents for inventions developed under federally funded R&D at privately owned business organizations (except small businesses) are determined by the terms of the procurement contract.

        https://www.tms.org/pubs/journ... [tms.org]

        Furthermore, what for anyone else would be patent infringement, they argue that the U.S. government isn't an “infringer” but a sovereign who has agreed to offer compensation for its use of someone else’s patents - i.e., no inducement liability because there's no infringement.

        https://patentlyo.com/patent/2... [patentlyo.com]

        BTW, The US Government also holds copyrights too.

        https://www.copyrightlaws.com/... [copyrightlaws.com]

    • The government can't own copyright in the normal sense - all government-produced text etc is free to copy and use.

      Under 34 CFR S. 6.3 - Licensing of Government-owned patents, the government normally issues free patent licenses to anyone who wants one, without conditions. The primary effect of a patent held by government is to prevent other people from patenting the invention.

      The government can and occasionally does put conditions on using their patents, such as that it must be made to a certain level of qu

      • I just thought of another condition they might put on this patent. "If you build our patented invention, this type of fusion reactor, you have to show us your specific design and any improvements you made".

      • One small caveat: The US government can't own copyright, but companies working under contract to the government can. A lot of government work is outsourced to the private sector.

        • So, which private company has the rights when the patent assignee is, quote "United States of America as represented by the Secretary of the Navy (Patuxent River, MD, US)"?

          • If the patent is granted to the government, typically anyone who asks can license the patent, for free. *Typically".

            Much work is joint work between government and private and frequently such contracts will specify patent rights. Most often, those contracts will say the government can do whatever they want with the patented invention, the company gets the patent in their name.

            The contract COULD say "the government gets the patent and will wait two years before licensing it to any other companies", or any o

        • One small caveat: The US government can't own copyright, but companies working under contract to the government can. A lot of government work is outsourced to the private sector.

          Not true. They can own copyrights assigned to them as well as copyright standard reference data.

      • The government can't own copyright in the normal sense - all government-produced text etc is free to copy and use.

        While that is generally true there are some exceptions. For example, seals, crests, etc. can be restricted by other laws even though they may have been created by a government official. Contract work is copyright held by the creator, not the government unless assigned by the creator, so you could have a case where some material is not free to use because even though it is part of a larger work some parts may still be copyrighted by a third party.

    • Re: How? (Score:5, Informative)

      by hondo77 ( 324058 ) on Friday October 11, 2019 @11:02PM (#59298556) Homepage

      What exactly does it mean for the NAVY to file a patent? As I recall the U.S. government can't hold copyrights or patents, so would this just serve to put the technology firmly into the public domain?

      The inventor on the patent is one Salvatore Pais. "He" (if he is an actual person) just might be from the future [nextbigfuture.com]:

      Salvatore Cezar Pais is a US Navy researcher. Salvatore has three amazing patents that would be incredible breakthroughs in physics if they are true. The least extreme is a patent for Piezoelectricity-Induced Room Temperature Superconductor. The other two patents are gravity wave generator and inertial mass reduction.

      • Re: How? (Score:4, Funny)

        by Shaitan ( 22585 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @12:42AM (#59298706)

        Yes, I've yet to hear of anyone trying to reproduce his work from the patents.

      • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

        by blindseer ( 891256 )

        The link you gave was interesting, the article as well as a link highlighted in the sidebar of the article.

        https://www.nextbigfuture.com/... [nextbigfuture.com]

        France built 58 nuclear reactors over 15 years and has generated over 400 TWh with them. The inflation-adjusted price was $330 billion.

        Germany spent $580 billion on solar and wind to get about 220 TWh. This was four times more expensive than France.

        From that page is a link to another interesting article.
        https://www.nextbigfuture.com/... [nextbigfuture.com]

        France built up nuclear power in 15 years using inflation-adjusted $330 billion to generated over 400 TWh of electricity for many decades. Global solar power only passed 400 TWh in 2017.

        The first 1000 TWh of wind and solar required approximately $2.3 trillion of capital expenditure to deploy.

        We don't need nuclear fusion to get inexpensive, reliable, low CO2, and safe energy. We have that today. Thankfully we have a few potential candidates for POTUS that see the value in nuclear power for our future energy policy.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

        I expect Sanders to

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Shaitan ( 22585 )

      The navy researcher holds the patent

    • As I recall the U.S. government can't hold copyrights or patents, so would this just serve to put the technology firmly into the public domain?

      You recall wrongly. The US government can hold patents and copyrights just fine. There is no copyright in works created by government employees as part of their official duty, but if the government for some reason decides to buy the rights to A Song of Ice and Fire (and Mr. Martin sells it), it can hold the copyright and exercise the associated rights.

      And as far as I could find out, the government does hold patent rights to patents on inventions created by its employees if they either di the work on gover

    • What exactly does it mean for the NAVY to file a patent? As I recall the U.S. government can't hold copyrights or patents, so would this just serve to put the technology firmly into the public domain?

      The US Government holds many patents, mostly from government funded R&D, that the license. Nothing prevents them form holding patent rights which they can use much like any other patent holder. Various agencies then license the rights to use the patent

  • I've heard tons of stories from ITER to magic devices like e-Cat. Let's see a fully working prototype first.

    • I've heard tons of stories from ITER to magic devices like e-Cat. Let's see a fully working prototype first.

      If you are not interested in news about scientific research, then why are you reading Slashdot?

      The first fully working fusion reactor will be such a big deal that it will even be announced on Facebook. Maybe you should get your news there.

      • If you are not interested in news about scientific research, then why are you reading Slashdot?

        The claim is that the invention actually works. So let's see it. The idea is fairly exciting, but it's a lot to accept on faith.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Shaitan ( 22585 )

          Well you aren't going to see that from the U.S. Navy, any working example of a fusion reactor built by the Navy would be part of a classified project. Otherwise it would be DoD funded civilian research.

          This guy has a handful of very advanced patents with big claims. We'll just have to see if anyone attempts to start replicating his work from the patents.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Shaitan ( 22585 )

        Actually, it probably won't be if produced by the US Navy. It would probably be in classified craft already before they even file a patent like this.

    • ITER is such a prototype... it just takes a little while to get it built. Another promising development is the Stellerator, and experiments on a prototype are well under way [wikipedia.org].

  • And in 10 years, we'll have them in our cars, labelled "Mr. Fusion".

  • If they have a patentable idea, I guess we're only 15-20 years away from practical fusion!

    Again.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Shaitan ( 22585 )

      Maybe. This guy has a lot of extraordinary claims accumulated in Patents, on the other hand the patents were granted because of verification from Naval high command that they have credible reason to believe these kind of technologies are in fact possible and exist. I haven't heard anything about anyone putting any of it to the test replicating from the patent information. Those who could generally wouldn't, for one if they couldn't replicate it wouldn't necessarily mean anything because the patent doesn't g

  • Is that sort of like megajoules of electricity? Maybe kilonewtons of time?

  • Story is from The War Zone (Score:5, Informative)

    by steveha ( 103154 ) on Friday October 11, 2019 @09:51PM (#59298408) Homepage

    TFS is really a repackaging of a story from The War Zone. Every bit of info in TFS is in the original story, plus lots more.

    https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/30256/scientist-behind-the-navys-ufo-patents-has-now-filed-one-for-a-compact-fusion-reactor [thedrive.com]

    Here's the bottom line:

    To be frank, we at The War Zone have no idea what is going on here. We have tried to get the Navy to give us some perspective on why these patents were filed, whether they are based on legitimate technology, and why they were ever made public. The Navy remains unwilling to discuss them. At the same time, nearly every physicist we have talked to thinks all of these patents are beyond the realm of known physics and are almost laughable in terms of viability. At the same time, all this is occurring as the Navy, and the Navy alone out of all of the branches of the U.S. military, continues to discuss the fact that its pilots are encountering unexplained aerial phenomena at an alarming rate.

    If the Navy has a working prototype that outputs more energy than it consumes, this is huge, world-changing news. That doesn't seem very likely.

    It seems like the most likely scenario is that the Navy filed a patent for something that is not known to work and not likely to work. But why would they do that? It makes no sense!

    And the Navy is claiming that their pilots are seeing UFOs [thedrive.com]? WTF?!?

    Maybe this is cover for the fact that the Navy has a working time machine. Fusion power is always about 30 years away, so maybe they just pulled a working fusion design out of the future 30 years from now. </joke>

    P.S. A slim possibility: a covert group developed fusion technology, and the Navy is about to release it. It's barely possible that a covert group could have advanced the state of the art by 20 or 30 years in secret. It doesn't seem very likely, but I would be delighted to be wrong about this. Fusion power would be world-changing in good ways.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by cb88 ( 1410145 )
      Well fusor research in the public eye has always been plagued with lack of funding... so... if the Navy wanted to peruse it for real they could throw billions at it. In that context its 20-30 years of progress versus what is essentially a stand still for public research in the area.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Shaitan ( 22585 )

        Not only that but billions of those defense dollars couldn't be accounted for when they tried. A multi-billion dollar reactor project could potentially have been worked and completed in secret by the Navy.

      • Re:Story is from The War Zone (Score:5, Interesting)

        by blindseer ( 891256 ) <blindseer@noSPAm.earthlink.net> on Saturday October 12, 2019 @04:29AM (#59298996)

        Well fusor research in the public eye has always been plagued with lack of funding... so... if the Navy wanted to peruse it for real they could throw billions at it. In that context its 20-30 years of progress versus what is essentially a stand still for public research in the area.

        This was something I've seen brought up several times before. The problem is the Department of Energy.

        The Department of Energy is really the "department of nuclear weapons" as Rick Perry discovered after being named the secretary of the department. Sure, they put a lot of money into solar PV research and such but their primary mandate (or so it seems) is to conduct nuclear weapon research, and manage the many sites where this research is done and manage the radioactive waste that comes from it.

        When it comes to fusion energy research the Department of Energy is heavily invested in ITER. They are not interested in funding competing research, which is why we see fusion reactor patents coming from the US Navy. If a fusion project gets too big, where it might be something that won't fit on a ship, or calls for more manpower and funding than something the Navy would normally handle, then it becomes something for a department head to handle directly. A project to research a power plant on this scale of funding would not stay in the DoD for long, this would land under the DoE. The DoE, again, is not interested in any fusion technology other than ITER.

        Since any reactor of any useful size for fusion research would need a license from the DoE then they would simply not grant the license for any privately funded project. I'm sure that they would not explain that they don't want competition from ITER, they'd simply tie it up in the permitting process. They can do this because there isn't any well laid process for any kind of nuclear power plant other than a water cooled, solid fuel, fission power plant.

        There will not be any fusion energy research in the USA except what the US Navy can sneak under the radar as a power plant for future submarines and aircraft carriers. That is unless there is a major shift in the policy of the Department of Energy, new laws written allowing for such research, and a president that takes this research seriously.

        There's been a lot of talk with taking this research to China, as they seem willing to host these fusion reactor prototypes. They aren't as invested in ITER, they are in desperate need of clean energy, and they generally are far more willing to investigate many options for energy. This is a door that seems to have closed with the problems of trade disputes, Hong Kong getting to be a political hot spot, and other matters that makes people uneasy to export this research there.

        Dr. Robert Bussard, in discussing his polywell fusor project, made comments on the difficulty in getting funding and permits. The US Navy was certainly willing to fund these fusion energy projects but the politics of it all prevented them from getting these research projects the funding they needed to progress.

        This same problem has come up for alternative vehicle fuels. There's a US Navy project to synthesize hydrocarbon based aviation fuels using hydrogen and carbon from seawater (with the carbon being from CO2 dissolved in the water). There's a project under the USAF investigating biomass based aviation fuels. There's a project under the US Army researching bio-diesel and another project funding durable solar panels for electricity in far off places. You'd think these would fall under the Department of Energy but they are not interested. If these projects are to reach industrial scale then they need funding that it seems the Department of Energy is not willing to provide, and Congress isn't too keen on increasing the budget for the DoD to properly fund these projects either.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by lgw ( 121541 )

      There are plenty of working fusors that aren't net generating power, but useful for other things, like neutron sources. I suspect this is another of those.

    • Yeah, maybe this is what Boris Johnson was talking about...

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Shaitan ( 22585 )

      "P.S. A slim possibility: a covert group developed fusion technology, and the Navy is about to release it. It's barely possible that a covert group could have advanced the state of the art by 20 or 30 years in secret. It doesn't seem very likely, but I would be delighted to be wrong about this. Fusion power would be world-changing in good ways."

      Probably not but it is possible. I'm too lazy to hunt it down but I recall also seeing that the patents from this researcher were granted because brass at high comma

    • I went to the "War Zone" article, wanting to find out what I could about the claimed technology. In the article it provides some links to the inventor, Salvatore Cezar Pais, previous work. You see Pais's previous work provides the technical basis for this new breakthrough. The works cited are a) High Frequency Gravitational Waves - Induced Propulsion [sae.org] and a room temperature superconductor [google.com].

      That's right, his incredible new patent is bolstered by two other technologies he has developed, which have the defect of

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Seriously though, why file a patent on something you probably can't even test before the patent expires? Seems like the only reason is to create prior art.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Shaitan ( 22585 )

      "The fact that they’ve left this detail out piques my curiosity almost enough to follow the link and look at the source, but... not quite. I’ll hold off until they’ve demonstrated a successful prototype. (That would have been mentioned too, I suspect, had they done so, wouldn’t it? Did I miss it?)"

      No, you are thinking like this is a civilian project. This isn't a navy funded civilian project this is the Navy patenting something. They likely wouldn't actually want someone to be able t

    • Re:Exhaust? (Score:4, Informative)

      by cachorro ( 576097 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @03:50AM (#59298928)

      Don't worry so much about the xenon fusing. Heroic measures are necessary to get two hydrogen nuclei close enough together to fuse since each proton in the hydrogen is trying to repel the other one electrically. The repulsion between xenon and hydrogen would be 54 times stronger. The repulsion between two xenon nuclei would be 2916 times stronger than the repulsion between hydrogen nuclei (and only a real star can be that heroic).

      FWIW, I have worked in fusion research.

    • Yes, two atoms of H-2 fuse into a single atom of He-4. No other product of deuterium fusion is feasible; any other product that's even possible, such as H2+H2=He3+n, would require knocking a neutron out of a stable H-2 or He-4 nucleus, which isn't going to happen unless you're trying really hard to specifically do it.

      The fusion of any elements larger than iron doesn't happen outside of the explosion of a star, so nothing is going to happen to the xenon. Even if you got enough energy into an H-1 or H-2 nu

  • Sound familiar (Score:3)

    by Jerry ( 6400 ) on Friday October 11, 2019 @10:38PM (#59298488)
    A couple of decades ago the US gov patented 21 medical uses for Marijuana, probably to prevent its use as a medicine.

    ,/p> This compact fusion reactor reeks of patent trolling.

    MetisPartners defines patent trolls as: 'A non-practicing entity (“NPE”) or patent troll, as it is sometimes pejoratively called, is an entity which enforces patent rights against alleged infringers in an attempt to collect licensing fees, but which does not manufacture products or supply services on the back of these patents. They frequently take out or buy generalised patents – often on widely available technology – and then demand money from companies who use or offer it. This “legalised extortion,” as some call it, also means that companies are spending more time and money defending themselves against these infringement lawsuits rather than using those resources for R&D and innovation."

    The Navy, IF IT COULD develop a Terrawatt compact fusion reactor that could fit in a boat or a plane or a tank, would have already made it. Since they haven't done the Navy is being a patent troll. Their patent is overly broad and generalized. Components are discussed as being independent, so if someone creates a compact fusion reactor with a component or methodology similar to anything in the patent the gov could step in and take the whole thing. "You prevent plasma quenching by using a vibrator, so your device belongs to us". Ditto for a rotating magnetic field in one to six planes.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by janimal ( 172428 )

      Looks like this might be a significant evolution of the Polywell [wikipedia.org] idea. If you consider three pairs of opposing "crossduct" cones (the patent says "at least two" haha), the contraption would have the same effective geometric shape as the polywell, i.e. a cube.

      I'm not sure about the troll comment, however, since such a move would prevent Western companies from developing the idea, while giving Russian and Chinese basically free reign to explore it for their own purposes.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Shaitan ( 22585 )

      "Since they haven't done the Navy is being a patent troll."

      What makes you think that either you or I would know if they did? They would be using that subs and subs technology is some of the most highly classified bits they have.

  • Almost exactly 5 years ago... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by willy_me ( 212994 ) on Friday October 11, 2019 @10:48PM (#59298514)

    there was a post on /. about Lockheed claiming to have a 7 by 10 fusion reactor in the works - see here [slashdot.org]. Is it possible that these are one in the same? Has anything changed in 5 years? I always did wonder what had become of the Lockheed project.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by HiThere ( 15173 )

      There are several companies claiming to have a fusion reactor "right around the corner". Some are big, some are small, none are currently working. Dunno what this means. It could mean lots of companies are looking for funding, but it could be real, or nearly real, and one or more could be successful. Since they all seem to be using different approaches, the success of one shouldn't block the success of the others.

      OTOH, it could be "summer season" stuff. Or it could be Kornbluth style "Summer Season".

    • Googling "Lockheed Martin fusion reactor" turns up this article [thedrive.com] from July of this year (2019 for people looking at this in the future).

      My favorite bit?

      Despite slower than expected progress

      But they use superconducting coils, so this isn't the same.

  • On a couple minutes look at the patent... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Ungrounded Lightning ( 62228 ) on Friday October 11, 2019 @11:10PM (#59298578) Journal

    I'm trying to figure out what they're allegedly doing. This is what it looks like to me (on a couple minutes look so don't be surprised if it's totally bogus):

    The counter-rotating gadgets throw field lines across to their opposite number. (It looks like they can do this by either having magnetic coils on their surface or being charged and starting to spin). At least some of the lines amount to a cylinder around the space where the reaction will take place.

    Once there is a conductive plasma in the chamber (not hard to make happen), moving field lines create eddy currents in it, which tend to keep the lines from just reconnecting differently by opposing their motion when they try.

    Some fuel plasma is injected into the space between the two gadgets and within the (outer part of the?) sheaf of field lines that connect them, firing it through holes closer to the axis of the gadgets than what is making the fields that form the walls of the magnetic pipe that forms the soon-to-squeeze chamber.

    Then they spin the two gadgets in opposite directions, really fast and hard, and quickly accelerating. This wraps up and squeezes down the magnetic field lines - like wringing a washcloth. The twisted field created squeezes the fuel REAL HARD and the fast-moving field induces eddy currents in the plasma - which both heat it and resist the closing in of the field. But the field keeps getting wound tighter, squeezing and heating the plasma ever harder.

    Eventually this breaks down and the plasma gets out. BANG! But by then it's been squeezed hard enough and hot enough for long enough that it's fused a bunch. The BANG is a LOT more energetic than what went into ionizing the gas, creating the magnetic field, and twisting it down until the instabilities made the magnetic rope with the fuel bubble in the middle come apart.

    Then stop the spinners and repeat.

    (The "vibration" seems to be an alternative to a spin. Maybe it's doing a crack-the-whip into the middle? I recall a recent answer to the "Why is the solar corona hotter than the surface below it - by a BUNCH?" question: "Because the arcs of magnetic field vibrate - hum - which heats the plasma within and around them.")

    Most of the fusion devices to date seem to be attempting to put the core of a sun into a bottle. This one looks like it's trying to bottle a solar flare.

    • Sometimes thinking different works, sometimes it doesn't.

    • On thinking about that, I realized he couldn't be doing the washcloth-squeeze with the described equipment, because the charge on the rotors would be astronomical to get the field strengths he describes.

      A (little!) more looking (so this ALSO might be bogus) makes it look like he's trying to pump up a current in a self-confining plasma structure, using rapidly changing magnetic fields, pumping it a little with each cycle and speeding up the cycles as the current - and an oscillation - in the plasma structure

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Pretty sure to file a patent you need to be able to demonstrate a working prototype.

      They dropped that a LONG time ago - after the patent offices filled up with prototypes early in the country's history. (A lot of those prototypes are in the Smithsonian - "The Nation's Attic")

      Now you only need to present one to patent a perpetual motion machine. (It was easier for them to demand a model than to keep arguing over the rule against them. But if anyone DOES present one they're set. Meanwhile, as Homer says:

  • "These systems would be strategically placed on an intergalactic craft."

    https://www.nextbigfuture.com/... [nextbigfuture.com]

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Mal-2 ( 675116 )

      If real, these will show up on the high seas too. Even if they can simply replace existing nuclear reactors on subs and carriers, they'll have a home. It might even prove a good way to extend the useful lifetime of such craft, just by decking them out with railguns and lasers and the power to run them.

    •   It's recently been renamed to SpaceForce.

    • Hold on cowboy!
      Not that fast!!

      Should we not try interplanetary first and evolve to interstellar before we try intergalactic?

  • Scammers are everwhere (Score:3)

    by AndyKron ( 937105 ) on Saturday October 12, 2019 @05:54AM (#59299092)
    If they don't have a working model then they're full of shit and shouldn't be granted a patent. And why is the Navy filing patents anyway?
  • This patent is based on John Titor's time machine [abovetopsecret.com]. Like, the guy used the Usenet forum postings and just paid the $5,000 and filed it. I personally know this guy; even though I'm ashamed to admit it. He's also a predatory rapist who drugged several woman and spent time in jail [heavy.com]. He did this after he moved away, but we always had suspicions around his parties and other activities when he lived in Tulsa [facebook.com]. He purchased his doctrant from a degree mill (scroll down to the "Trinity & Lexington Universities - [linkedin.com]
  • US patents have a lifetime of 20 years from the filing date. Design patents have a 15 year lifetime. So, if you want to make and sell this device without paying the patent holder, if payment is accepted, one needs to wait awhile. That should be plenty of time for the Navy to manufacture or have manufactured the device. If the devices don't show up in that time, well, the device is either a dud or better designs available that may work.

Slashdot Top Deals

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (10) Sorry, but that's too useful.

Close