Author Topic: Arc Fission Reactor (Read 6436 times)

Artic_Knight · « **on:** December 08, 2009, 03:56:12 AM »

yes its the iron man reactor but heres a thought, you have a radioactive material that is used to power a steam turbine, well why not a electrical turbine?

a somewhat stable yet somewhat unstable material is created into a circle and then a super spark is used to jumpstart a reaction, the spark decays the material creating a larger spark or adding to the current spark. all of this is kept in containment by a magnetic field like would contain a plasma field. basically its a lightning bolt in a bottle traveling in a circle, the bolt itself would induce a electrical current in the containment electromagnets i would imagine which would help sustain the protective field. if a current is not induced then current could simply be tapped for that purpose. to reduce energy consumption in the magnetic field containing the spark reactor a capacitor could be added to create a ocilating field like a tesla coil.

science plausible or science busted?

onthecuttingedge2005 · « **Reply #1 on:** December 08, 2009, 04:32:02 AM »

this is for Beta and Alpha emitter type Isotopes.

a Beta emitter or an Alpha Emitter registers more radioactivity as a Gas than a solid, the solid structure of such radio emitters actually burdens its ability to penetrate its own solid structure.

Like fluorescent bulbs, if you place a beta sample into the tube it might fluoresce but if you convert that solid to a Gas you will get more ionization due from the extra radioactivity.

1 milligram of radioactive Beryllium gas is more radioactive than 1 milligram of solid radioactive Beryllium.

density is a major obstruction to these two forms of emitters.

Artic_Knight · « **Reply #2 on:** December 17, 2009, 08:47:38 AM »

yes i can see the physics as to why a solid would decay less than a gas, that makes good sense. my curiosity is its electrical decay. that same solid may not want to decay, it may be a radioactive isotope that is classified as safe even while in solid form. when it is "electrocuted" could that jar loose ions or electrons creating a stronger electric current? if so then the only thing holding the iron man reactor back is a combination of safe containment and prevention of runaway decay creating a uncontrollable amount of current.

ive seen plasma contained like water in a jar but im not sure if thats physically possible with electricity. if it is then it would certainly be through magnetism similiar to plasma containment im sure.

onthecuttingedge2005 · « **Reply #3 on:** December 17, 2009, 09:57:46 AM »

Quote from: Artic_Knight on December 17, 2009, 08:47:38 AM

yes i can see the physics as to why a solid would decay less than a gas, that makes good sense. my curiosity is its electrical decay. that same solid may not want to decay, it may be a radioactive isotope that is classified as safe even while in solid form. when it is "electrocuted" could that jar loose ions or electrons creating a stronger electric current? if so then the only thing holding the iron man reactor back is a combination of safe containment and prevention of runaway decay creating a uncontrollable amount of current.

ive seen plasma contained like water in a jar but im not sure if thats physically possible with electricity. if it is then it would certainly be through magnetism similiar to plasma containment im sure.

Lets go a little simpler here, if I added gases Tritium to a phosphor type light bulb and I added electricity, the ionizing efficiency would go up, so the light bulb would actually be brighter because of the higher lumens added by the radioactivity of the Tritium.

adding electricity to an EC decay emitter may result in faster decay because it is an 'electron capture' that results in the decay in the first place, EC usually results in positron emissions which can release gamma rays.

you might want to be careful when getting into this area.

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Arc Fission Reactor (Read 6436 times)

Artic_Knight

Arc Fission Reactor

onthecuttingedge2005

Re: Arc Fission Reactor

Artic_Knight

Re: Arc Fission Reactor

onthecuttingedge2005

Re: Arc Fission Reactor