Talk:Single-Pointed Magnetic Confinement: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Talk:Single-Pointed Magnetic Confinement (view source)

Revision as of 13:19, 1 June 2020

609 bytes added , 1 June 2020

no edit summary

Solo55

76

edits

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 but I lack the technical means and knowledges to find out which could be better, if any.
-[[User:Solo55|Solo55]] ([[User talk:Solo55|talk]])13:52, 29 February 2016 (CET)
+[[User:Solo55|Solo]] ([[User talk:Solo55|talk]])13:52, 29 February 2016 (CET)
 Sorry. where I said in last post "or a multi-phase pulsating direct current" I mean "or a multi-phase full-wave rectified alternating current".
@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 [[User:Solo55|Solo]] ([[User talk:Solo55|talk]]) 17:07, 4 March 2016 (CET)
-I think it's clear that, if it were possible, it would work with a multi-phase a.c only.
+now I think it's probably clear that, if it were possible, it would work with a multi-phase a.c only, since a pulsating d.c. or a full-wave rectified a.c. would produce divergent B-field lines from the central area of confinement.
-a pulsating d.c. or a full-wave rectified a.c. would produce divergent B-field lines from the central area of confinement.
-then, it seems that the problem with a multi-phase a.c. lies in the balance between the applied electric current and the magnets inductance to achieve a minimal useful frequency.
-in spite of the apparent current tendency to think that "more is better" and even "much more is best" respecting linear devices, perhaps "slightly less is more" in the case of the A models here proposed.
---[[User:Solo55|Solo]] ([[User talk:Solo55|talk]]) 14:39, 25 September 2016 (CEST)
+then, it seems that the problem with a multi-phase a.c. lies in finding the proper balance between the applied electric current and the magnets inductance to achieve a minimum of useful frequency to confine relatively the D-T mixture at the central area of the devices and to induce it a certain '''spin'''.
+in spite of the apparent current tendency to think that "more is better" and even "much more is best" respecting many linear devices, perhaps "less is more" in the case of the A models here proposed.
+[[User:Solo55|Solo]] ([[User talk:Solo55|talk]]) 21:18, 25 September 2016 (CEST)
+All previous hypotheses are wrong.
+They are no more than speculations with no technical basis.
+It seems that the proposed configurations require a very different approach.
+Though these magnets seem to generate a null field at the central area,
+direct current would produce confinement losses when applied to them
+or, at their best, particles recirculation with a same loss as a result.
+--[[User:Solo55|Solo]] ([[User talk:Solo55|talk]]) 13:18, 1 June 2020 (CEST)