Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-26-2019 1:53 PM
31 online now:
caffeine, DrJones*, dwise1, Lammy, PaulK, ringo, Stile, Tanypteryx, Taq, Theodoric (10 members, 21 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: ooh-child
Post Volume:
Total: 854,827 Year: 9,863/19,786 Month: 2,285/2,119 Week: 321/724 Day: 46/114 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
Author Topic:   Billion Degrees! Have we stumbled upon something new?
cavediver
Member (Idle past 1816 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 16 of 22 (294212)
03-11-2006 4:08 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Percy
03-10-2006 2:35 PM


Re: new physics
The article makes it sound like the mystery of where the additional energy came from is the item of most significance, but we can probably safely assume that the "no free lunch" laws of thermodynamics still hold, and if we assume there's no new physics (I mean fundamental physics, not "Gee, we had no idea particles in microturbulent magnetic fields at high temperatures would behave this way") then the most interesting result is the ability to achieve temperatures of billions of degrees, because it's the inability to continuously maintain very high temperatures that has kept fusion from becoming a commercial possibility for power generation.

This is certainly the important point in all of this. And magnetohydrodynamics at these temperatures is the "new physics", not, as you point out, some new fundemental physics. I don't think we're tapping the vacuum energy yet :)

There is no point at all talking about these particular temperatures in relation to modifying decay rates on earth. If such temperatures could exist external of some extreme containment, there would be no earth to worry about!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Percy, posted 03-10-2006 2:35 PM Percy has not yet responded

  
sinamatic
Member (Idle past 2317 days)
Posts: 67
From: Traverse City, MI usa
Joined: 03-10-2006


Message 17 of 22 (297197)
03-22-2006 3:34 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jazzns
03-09-2006 4:07 PM


Jazzns writes:

Scientists at Sandia National Labs were able to heat gas up to massive temperatures. The thing that is more interesting then actually heating something over a billion degrees is that theoretically there is some extra source of energy involved in achieving these extrodinarly lofty temps.

Can anyone tell me how they measured the heat of the gas? Pressure?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jazzns, posted 03-09-2006 4:07 PM Jazzns has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Jazzns, posted 03-22-2006 8:27 AM sinamatic has not yet responded

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 2084 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 18 of 22 (297248)
03-22-2006 8:27 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by sinamatic
03-22-2006 3:34 AM


Based on the newsletter I read they claim they could calculate the temperature based on the energy/frequency of the particles. I don't know how they can capture that information but apparently they can.


Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)
This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by sinamatic, posted 03-22-2006 3:34 AM sinamatic has not yet responded

  
ramoss
Member
Posts: 3110
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 19 of 22 (297255)
03-22-2006 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Jazzns
03-10-2006 11:52 AM


Re: Bump - Anyone fascinated by this?
I would like to see it repeated by a number of indepenant sources first.

The heat was highly localized, and they read the information wrong.

I keep on thinking of the 'cold fusion' experiments. I think this lab is of better quality than the university of Utah though, and they waited until they had a paper to publish to announce it.

It MIGHt be a more economical way to start fusion reaction in the long run. The problem with starting a fusion reaction with lasers is the intenstiy of the beams and the precision that is needed.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Jazzns, posted 03-10-2006 11:52 AM Jazzns has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Jazzns, posted 03-22-2006 10:02 AM ramoss has not yet responded
 Message 21 by Modulous, posted 03-22-2006 10:20 AM ramoss has responded

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 2084 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 20 of 22 (297270)
03-22-2006 10:02 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by ramoss
03-22-2006 8:46 AM


Re: Bump - Anyone fascinated by this?
I agree that I would like to see it duplicated at another facility before I buy the t-shirt but coming from SNL I tend to trust the info a little bit more. SNL is absoutly tedious about managing its public perception and, because of the work done there they don't have to share info about results with anyone except uncle sam, the fact that they would put this out publically gives me confidence that at least they are convinced that they result is accurate.

I am excited about the possibility that something like this might be the key that unlocks the door to fusion because it seems that a rig like the Z-Machine is much simpler than the MASSIVE lasers currently being built to induce fusion where there is no guarantee of getting a positive return.


Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)
This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by ramoss, posted 03-22-2006 8:46 AM ramoss has not yet responded

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 277 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 21 of 22 (297273)
03-22-2006 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by ramoss
03-22-2006 8:46 AM


information reading
The heat was highly localized, and they read the information wrong.

What do you mean?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by ramoss, posted 03-22-2006 8:46 AM ramoss has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by ramoss, posted 03-22-2006 1:56 PM Modulous has not yet responded

  
ramoss
Member
Posts: 3110
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 22 of 22 (297330)
03-22-2006 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Modulous
03-22-2006 10:20 AM


Re: information reading
They bsically read the tempature by the way the fields collapsed.. and I am just wondering if there is methology they are doing incorrectly.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Modulous, posted 03-22-2006 10:20 AM Modulous has not yet responded

  
Prev1
2
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019