Calculating the Potential of a Beryllium Beam for Energy Generation

  • Thread starter vlamir
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Beam
In summary, your recent calculations show that the structure of fullerens and nanotubes is more complex and graceful than the official paradigm of quantum chemistry suggests. However, your idea to create a photon mover based on the beryllium projector is not feasible due to the inefficiency of the engine.
  • #1
vlamir
149
0
Recently I have made some calculations for reaction:
LiD + gamma –> Be + gamma –> EM-energy
As result, the interesting engineering idea has appeared. But, maybe, it is only fantasy.

http://vlamir.nsk.ru/THE_BERYLLIUM_BEAM_e.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
The next problem, which has the direct attitude to the design of beryllium projector, has arisen because of the false theory of the structure of fullerens and nanotubes.
Our own calculations have shown, that the real structure of fullerens and nanotubes is more complex and graceful, than it is offered by the official paradigm of quantum chemistry.
The results of our small research are stated here:
http://vlamir.nsk.ru/WHAT_DIAMOND_SPEAKS_ABOUT_e.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3
In our last work concerning alternating transformations “an energy <=> a matter” you can see one more cycle:
protium + gamma => electron and positron –> acceleration in the accelerator on counter beams => proton or antiproton
http://vlamir.nsk.ru/THE_MOST_IMPORTANT_QUANTUM_NUMBER_e.pdf

Further, there is an assumption about existence of reaction:
LiD + pressure => Be + gamma => protons and antiprotons => annihilation => EM–energy
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #4
vlamir said:
In our last work concerning alternating transformations “an energy <=> a matter” you can see one more cycle:
protium + gamma => electron and positron –> acceleration in the accelerator on counter beams => proton or antiproton

vlamir,

Your "reaction" protium + gamma --> electron + positron

violates some a basic physical laws: Conservation of Baryons and
Conservation of Leptons.

Protium, i.e. "light hydrogen", consists of one proton [ a baryon ] and an
electron [ a lepton ].

Therefore, the reactants consist of 1 baryon and 1 lepton.

The products consist of an electron [ lepton number 1 ] and a
positron [ lepton number -1 ].

Therefore, after the reaction you have 0 baryons and 0 leptons,
whereas before you had 1 each of baryon and leptons.

Therefore, your postulated reaction doesn't conserve baryon and
lepton numbers in contradiction to the laws of Physics.

Dr. Gregory Greenman
Physicist
 
  • #5
Dear Dr. G.Greemam,
Thanks for your reply.
I know the modern physics of elementary particles rather well. But, also, I see many contradictions in this paradigm. Therefore, I have followed the example from my model – from polytronic model of atomic structure. Probably, I should make one more figure and show, that frame of protium (baryon) does not disappear after radiation of electron and positron.
The polytronic model is constructed on the law of conservation of energy.
 
  • #6
vlamir said:
Dear Dr. G.Greemam,
Thanks for your reply.
I know the modern physics of elementary particles rather well. But, also, I see many contradictions in this paradigm. Therefore, I have followed the example from my model – from polytronic model of atomic structure. Probably, I should make one more figure and show, that frame of protium (baryon) does not disappear after radiation of electron and positron.
The polytronic model is constructed on the law of conservation of energy.

vlamir,

Any model that you propose has to not only obey the law of conservation
of energy - but you must also conserve both linear and angular momentum,
as well as baryon and lepton numbers.

Dr. Gregory Greenman
Physicist
 
  • #7
It is clear, Morbius!
At collision of particles the quantities of the linear and angular momentums are redistributed, and the amount of movement remains constant.
However, all this isn’t so simple.
The physical sense and mathematical expression for any momentum (mechanical, magnetic, electric) should enable for direct calculation of forces of interaction between particles and for dynamics of process of collision.
Unfortunately, the modern theoretical physics does not devote to this question of due attention.
But, as, we are in subforum Nuclear Engineering the suggested theme of Beryllium beam, does not demand the careful analysis of the momentums.
I have analyzed an opportunity of creation of the photon mover on the basis of the beryllium projector and have understood, that such engine will be very inefficient. More effective would be use of interstellar matter and energy.
 

Related to Calculating the Potential of a Beryllium Beam for Energy Generation

1. What is the potential energy of a beryllium beam for energy generation?

The potential energy of a beryllium beam for energy generation depends on several factors such as the mass and velocity of the beam, as well as the strength of the electric and magnetic fields used to accelerate and focus the beam. The potential energy can be calculated using the formula PE = qV, where q is the charge of the beam and V is the potential difference between the starting and ending points of the beam's path.

2. How is the potential energy of a beryllium beam calculated?

The potential energy of a beryllium beam can be calculated using the formula PE = qV, where q is the charge of the beam and V is the potential difference between the starting and ending points of the beam's path. This formula takes into account the electric potential energy of the beam as it moves through the electric field created by the potential difference.

3. What is the role of beryllium in energy generation using a beam?

Beryllium is used as the material for the beam itself due to its unique properties such as high melting point, low density, and high strength. These properties make it ideal for creating a beam that can withstand the high temperatures and pressures involved in energy generation. Beryllium also has a low work function, meaning it requires less energy to emit electrons, making it efficient for use in energy generation.

4. How does the potential of a beryllium beam affect energy generation?

The potential of a beryllium beam is a crucial factor in energy generation as it determines the amount of energy that can be extracted from the beam. A higher potential leads to a greater potential energy of the beam, which can be converted into usable energy. Additionally, the potential also affects the speed and direction of the beam, which can impact its efficiency and effectiveness in energy generation.

5. What are the advantages of using a beryllium beam for energy generation?

There are several advantages to using a beryllium beam for energy generation. One of the main advantages is its high efficiency due to its low work function, meaning less energy is wasted during the generation process. Beryllium also has a high melting point, making it suitable for use in high-temperature environments. Additionally, its low density makes it lightweight and easier to manipulate, improving the overall performance of the energy generation system.

Similar threads

Could Induced Fission Be Achieved by Combining Proton and Electron Beams?
    • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
5
Views
2K
Fusion tritium problem solution?
    • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
9
Views
2K
I Queries on the operation of the LHC with pilot beams before Run 3
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
868
Supporting structures used in machines/production lines
    • Mechanical Engineering
Replies
12
Views
1K
A Pandora's Box: Carbon-14 vicious cycle from transmutation
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
178
Exploring Neutron Beam Generation via Compact Neutron Generators
    • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
4
Views
3K
I Potential energy of spin anti-alignment
    • Other Physics Topics
Replies
14
Views
2K
B Compensating for a bias - a simple geometry/algebra problem:
    • General Math
Replies
1
Views
1K
I Mach-Zehnder interferometer, but with an entangled beam?
    • Quantum Physics
Replies
33
Views
2K
B Which one is more efficient in generating high energy Gamma rays?
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top