two schools of thought
|fusor post Farnsworth||tiny apertures for fuel ions to enter cathode space|
|one of many fusors built by Farnsworth employing the larger aperture for protons to exit cathode space||
Farnsworth's design: small apertures (orange arrow) for entry of fuel ions & large apertures (blue arrows) for protons to reach anode wall
Farnsworth is the originator of this electrostatic confinement for
fusion, and was aware there are two parts of the fusion product,
neutrons, and protons, there are four
likely fusions occuring. the large openings in the cathodes he
built were there to allow the protons to reach the physical anode.
the physical anode is positive relative to the cathode which could run
100kv or more. the protons are inherently positive in nature.
as the proton nears the anode wall, its positive charge repels the
proton, slowing it down, this means the proton is doing "work" and the
effect is to charge the anode further. as the reaction increases
in power (density) the effect on the anode will actually exceed what the
power supply is generating, and the process sustains itself ... as this
increases, the charge exceeds the power supply voltage and surplus
energy results; this can be used to power other things. since the
proton component is roughly half the fusion product, that becomes a huge
amount of electricity ... the fusor is producing electricity directly
the largely closed cathode that the "apprentices" propose ignores the proton which, if it is allowed to impact the cathode, subtracts from the negative charge and actually increases loss in efficiency. Why Meeks made his comment about ignoring the proton is a bit of a mystery to me.
This has to be due to one of the following:
(1) Meeks has fabricated his fusor neutron counts, and really had a poor
(2) Meeks did some other change perhaps one he was not aware of that allowed him to show good fusion performance.
(3) something no one understands is at work here. which is an arguments for re-visiiting the research.