It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Hydrogen Fussion Reactor Tested In Labs?

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 02:56 AM
Yeah, I recently was talking with a friend who used to be a special ops agent in the army. Well we were talking about the government, technology, and such and we got on the topic of a new energy source to replace petroleum. He told me that he visited the Los Alamos Labs in New Mexico, where we live, for a confidential guide throughout the labs. He said he saw an actual working hydrogen fusion reactor which used lasers and mirrors to reflect a beam 27 different ways before being shot into a vaccum with a hydrogen ion in the center. The result was a brilliant reaction from within the vaccum in the form of a bright light. I presume this would be the hydrogen ion after the laser hit it. I guess a constant flow of the laser beam would be needed in order to keep the ion going but it supposedly created an amazing amount of energy. He was told it produces about as much energy as a small nuclear reactor
I'm thinking the energy is in the form of heat and electricity. The guide told him that little or no radiation was a side effect of the fusion so its pretty safe. He said it was called a N.I.F.F reactor. I dont know what it stands for but it'd be interesting to find out about this. I was wondering if anyone had heard of or knew anythign about this type reactor before. The possibilities for this kind of reactor would be limitless.

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 08:45 AM
Fusion has been done in the labs for years - The problem developing a reactor that can keep the reaction going long enough and to get out more energy than you put in (one main problem being the powerful magnetic containment field needed) to to make it commercially viable.

Check out the ITER Home page for more information on the next generation fusion reactors

JET home page for the current world leader reactor based at Oxford (UK)

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 10:04 AM
Someone once said "Hydrogen fusion is the energy source of the future, and it always will be."

While that may be a bit harsh, it's interesting to realize that we have been trying to develop fusion as an energy source for about fifty years and haven't gotten anywhere yet.

One reason for this is that it takes a remendous jolt of energy to start the fusion process going. The way we did it in the fifties was to use an atomic bomb as a trigger, which worked fine if you want all your fusion energy at once, but we're actually more interested in sustainable power than a hydrogen bomb.

Another reason is that, as my colleague Popeye explains, the fusion process itself provides such a high degree of heat that no physical material can contain it; we need to use a magnetic-force "bottle" to do so. This can be done, but it takes a tremendous amount of energy to start and maintain this "bottle". As a matter of fact, we haven't been able to maintain a fusion reaction for very long, nor have we been able to even "break even" in the power output versus power requirement area.

The above is for high-temperature fusion; fifteen or so years ago, a couple of researchers announced that they had developed a cold fusion approach; however, the experiment was not repeatable, and most people believe that it has not happened yet.

I believe we need to keep working on both the theoretical and engineering aspects of hydrogen fusion, because it certainly would be the ultimate power source based on our knowledge of the Universe. But we also need to realize that our continual hydrocarbon burning is driving us to both penury and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; we must develop alternate energy sources now which work now.

Hydrogen fusion, unfortunately, is not one of those sources.

[edit on 6-1-2005 by Off_The_Street]

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 01:25 PM
Ahh I see. Thanks for the info guys. I guess I kinda figured it wasn't a breakthrough process/reactor since my friend didn't have super high clearance or anything. It's sad that hydrogen fusion probably will never be a practical energy source. I still look foward to see how the world will solve the energy crisis. Any thoughts.

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 04:02 PM
Halcyon, I have made a couple of posts in the alternative energy research forum ( near the bottom of the thread.

I'd like to hear everyone's input so I can steal it and transfer it over there. Take a few minuts and check it out.

I don't think we should give up on hydrogen fusion by any means; I think it has tremendous potential. Admittedly, it's a witch getting it to work, but if we can do so cost-effectively, what a breakthrough that would be!

But in the interim, it looks to me that the only valid alternative to burning hydrocarbons is to burn uranium. Of course, fission, although safe and getting safer, still has one major problem: what do we do with all the waste?

posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 06:21 PM
Topic sparked my interest so i did a little 5 minute home research project.

Here's the total url

TONS of info, links, references. The information is there - let's see if we can turn it into knowledge.

Thought it was interesting to point out their experiment.

"Experimental set-up and observations"

"Fleischmann and Pons reported more energy coming from their electrolysis cell than they contributed.In their original set-up, Fleischmann and Pons used a Dewar flask (a double-walled vacuum flask) for the electrolysis, so that heat conduction would be minimal on the side and the bottom of the cell (only 5 % of the heat loss in this experiment). The cell flask was then submerged in a bath maintained at constant temperature to eliminate the effect of external heat sources. They used an open cell, thus allowing the gaseous deuterium and oxygen resulting from the electrolysis reaction to leave the cell (with some heat too). It was necessary to replenish the cell with heavy water at regular intervals. For the temperature observations to be meaningful the cell must be kept at a uniform temperature. Rather than using a mechanical method of stirring, sparging with the generated D2 gas was done to equalize the temperature "when necessary"; however, the efficacy of this method of maintaining the cell at a uniform temperature would later be disputed. Special attention was paid to the purity of the palladium cathode and electrolyte to prevent the build-up of material on its surface, especially after long periods of operation.

The cell was also instrumented with a thermistor to measure the temperature of the electrolyte, and an electrical heater to generate pulses of heat and calibrate the heat loss due to the gas outlet. After calibration, it was possible to compute the heat generated by the reaction.

A constant current was applied to the cell continuously for many weeks, and heavy water was added as necessary. For most of the time, the power input to the cell was equal to the power that went out of the cell within measuring accuracy, and the cell temperature was stable at around 30 C. But then, at some point (and in some of the experiments), the temperature reportedly rose suddenly to about 50 C without changes in the input power, for durations of two days or more. The generated power was calculated to be about 20 times the input power during the power bursts. Eventually the power bursts in any one cell would no longer occur, and the cell was turned off.

Pons and Fleischmann also initially reported that a cell was generating 2.45 MeV neutrons at a rate three times the natural background rate. There was, however, no equipment directly measuring neutron energies, and this report was based on a mistaken inference from a gamma-ray spectrum. The most spectacular result they reported was that in one cell the most of the electrode melted and part of it vaporized, destroying the cell and the fume hood enclosing it.

In the months after the initial report went public, a physicist colleague of Pons at the University of Utah, Michael Salamon, was invited into Pons' laboratory. In the five week period he and his research group observed the cells, no fusion products were detected. Pons stated that none of the cells were actively producing the excess heat at the time those observations were taking place, except during one two-hour period during which the detection equipment was unable to function because of a power failure. As neutron irradiation would produce small amounts of 24Na in the detector, Salomon quickly performed an analysis for that product, and found no amount consistent with power production of more than one microwatt. When Salomon and his co-workers had published their results in the journal Nature, each of them received a letter from attorney C. Gary Triggs, declaring that the "paper as published was untenable" and that it should be "voluntarily retracted." Triggs had, he said, been instructed by his clients "to take whatever action is deemed appropriate to protect their legal interests and reputations." Salomon and other scientists, perceiving this as an unprecedented threat against open scientific controversy, rejected the claims categorically and angrily; later, the threats were largely withdrawn."

[edit on 6-1-2005 by Aether]

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 09:55 PM
There is also some information at about cold fusion. This guy(in france i think) checks out all sorts of claims of free-energy, cold fusion, gravity, etc., to set the record straight. He does have a section dealing with cold fusion researches. I tried the Bingo Fuel 'reactor' (not cold fusion, produces methane gas for fuel from water) and almost set my hair on fire as a very large capacitor in my homemade power supply blew up in my face! I had an open circuit when I connected the power, not a smart thing to do. I actually got it to work for about 5 seconds before the carbon rods eroded away, which is one of the problems with these devices. You could smell the methane(fart smell) being produced. JLNLabs has some video of a generator that they got to work, but not very long due to the carbon rods keep burning up. Needless to say DO NOT try anything you see on that site unless you are very experienced in electricity and electronics, you could get hurt very badly.

posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 10:57 PM
im sure that the military has fully functional fusion reactors los alamos is a government lab so anything developed there is probably cassified what is publicly known about that kind of technology is nothing compared to was has been classified.

petrolium products are so important to so many of the highst ranking people in the US and many other countrys that fusion and other similary energy technologies will remain classified. if they were to be release to the public and commercially used then oil and gas would be come usless causing alot of people to lose all their money including the president bush his friends and family who own oil companies.

posted on Jan, 22 2005 @ 10:50 AM
Fusion is simple. I can build a fusor that uses deuterium and produces successful fusion. The trick is getting the output higher than the input. Once you do that, you're a billionaire and you saved the world from its energy crisis.

posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 10:43 AM
Theres at least one energy source form that is globally funded. --> Getting water to energy in simple terms, cost of this research has been too much for countrys so its research and developed as joint operation by various countrys, US, Japan, Canada, EU countrys, China, Russia and there might come two prototype plants in future as result of not getting agreement on placing the plant to France or Japan and EU has decided to even provide funds all of its own to build plant in France if others decide Japan, so there might be two prototype versions in some future of this plants, hopely chance of success increase as countrys start to race for this possible infinite energy source. But generally this development just shows that soon hopely many countrys get out of this envious circle of energy politic, that was one of the reason in WWII also. Of course to get it in commercial market even after having working plant might take long, still some light on tunnel.

Im bad at chemics / physics in english, so i dont even try to explain in english.

[edit on 24-1-2005 by Observer83]

posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 11:53 AM
Interestiing story on Fusion here.

So basically all we need now is a new material to line the reactor to counter the corrosive effects of the 100 million degree reaction. Also according to the article, ITER is theorized to create 4x more energy then it takes to power the magnetic fields to contain the Plasma, we are getting close people I can just feel it. Maybe line the reactor with a Nanocomposite, thought should do the trick.

posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 06:06 PM
reply to post by Off_The_Street


posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 11:46 PM
sandia labs has been testing a device that handles large amounts of current described as a large looking lifesaver candy capable of extremely fast switching cooled by sea water producing large amounts of containable hydrogen in gas form doe funded and device is patented

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 05:08 PM
reply to post by sardion2000

We've already got it.

Fusion is remarkably simple - far more simple than fission. The problem is the approach that the civies have been using. It's akin to smacking two marbles together with a sledge hammer. It's rather straight-forward.... but it's a very costly endeavor for what you get.

The answer to the problem is deceptively simple. You don't collide the two nuclei at all - you bring them together.

I know that sounds like some sort of saying from a fortune cookie - but it's true. How did we solve the problems of fission? We stopped trying to blast the damned things with electrons and make them explode, and let their own decay cause a critical chain reaction. Nuclear weapons are so simple in operation that it's scary.

Now... the trick for you civies to figure out is how to get a young, creative mind to figure out how to simply bring those hydrogen atoms together as opposed to bludgeoning them around like a rabid bull .... -and here is the important part - and not be hired or otherwise coerced by the energy companies and/or defense contractors looking for their next breakthrough on some system they are designing.

Good luck with that last part.... and good luck smacking your marbles around with a hammer. "You must learn to work in harmony with nature." The solution is always far more simple than it appears, and it's always almost magic in the way it all falls into place.

new topics

top topics


log in