Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home


Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.
read/discusswinners

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Ryoji Furui: on 6/5/14 at 23:19pm UTC, wrote i just found a paper describes which fuel can be more better ratio with...

Ryoji Furui: on 6/5/14 at 22:20pm UTC, wrote Dear Arthur Woods, Thank you for reading my essay. I believe fusion comes...

Arthur Woods: on 6/5/14 at 13:03pm UTC, wrote Dear Ryoji Although I am a fan of Space Solar Power as a nearer term...

Colin Walker: on 6/2/14 at 19:18pm UTC, wrote Dear Ryoji, Thanks for that clarification. My 2012 essay gives an...

Ryoji Furui: on 6/1/14 at 23:48pm UTC, wrote Dear Colin Walker, thank you for your comment with scanned document. i am...

Colin Walker: on 6/1/14 at 22:36pm UTC, wrote Dear Ryoji Furui, I have a comment about your referenced paper "Energy and...

Peter Jackson: on 5/29/14 at 10:55am UTC, wrote Ryoji, Thanks for your kind comment. I should say I've also found plasmons...

James Hoover: on 5/28/14 at 18:30pm UTC, wrote Ryoji, I used quantum entanglement as an explanation for teleporting in my...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Steve Dufourny: "is it just due to a problem when we utilise names of persons?" in Mass–Energy Equivalence...

Steve Dufourny: "why the post about the team of Nassim and his friends cannot be accepted..." in Mass–Energy Equivalence...

Steve Dufourny: "Hi Rob,Eckards, Dear Rob,it is well said all this indeed.Friendly" in First Things First: The...

Georgina Woodward: "I suggested the turnstiles separate odd form even numbered tickets randomly..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Georgina Woodward: "Robert, I'm not sure that the 'thing as it is' is irrelevant. I can..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Robert McEachern: "Eckard, "You referred to..." I was referring only to my final comments..." in First Things First: The...

Steve Dufourny: "lol no indeed it is not a lot,like I said I liked your general ideas.I have..." in The Demon in the Machine...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.


FQXi FORUM
October 17, 2019

CATEGORY: How Should Humanity Steer the Future? Essay Contest (2014) [back]
TOPIC: Have We Found a Breakthrough on Potential Catastrophes? by Ryoji Furui [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Ryoji Furui wrote on Mar. 5, 2014 @ 15:53 GMT
Essay Abstract

In this essay, I propose how to put nuclear fusion to practical use by introducing a "technology", so it is the description of a revolution in energy, which I strongly believe will come.

Author Bio

Born in Himeji, Japan 1974. An amateure theorist or an amateure artist who tries to say something in scientific logic. Joined the contest in 2012 and this is the second time. Personal site: http://www.ryoji.info

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Vladimir F. Tamari wrote on Mar. 6, 2014 @ 11:49 GMT
Dear Ryoji

I read your paper with interest. Energy is certainly one of the problems facing future generations. Without mentioning it perhaps you were thinking how the case of the meltdown of the Fukushima reactor should encourage us to find a safer source of nuclear energy. At what temperature will graphene act as catalyst for fusion to occur? Is your scheme "cold fusion"? Here is the website of the Japane Cold Fusion Society. http://jcfrs.org/indexe.html

Good luck in your work

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Ryoji Furui replied on Mar. 7, 2014 @ 00:09 GMT
Vladimir,

thank you for reading.i was putting a comment about earthquake had triggered fukushima accident in my early draft of this essay because i thought graphene novel was happened in the same year.another plan to mention it was that how fusion with graphene could help clean up there. if fusion goes to higher energy output with enriched state and is possible to melting whole reaktor of...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on Mar. 10, 2014 @ 17:13 GMT
Dear Ryoji,

I liked the presentation and the clarity of your splendid essay. May I please make a small comment about it?

You wrote: “As a result, nuclear fission is safer and cheaper…” And that is why it will probably not be adopted.

Solar energy is the safest and cheapest fabricated energy of all to supply. A thousand solar power plants using groups of 100 foot diameter convex lenses suspended over hundreds of constructed reservoirs of imported seawater could be easily built in the Mexican Desert. These solar power plants could possibly power enough dynamos to serve the electricity needs of all of the Americas. But billions of dollars of profit are made for the few corporations that own the fossil fuels enterprises. Big Corp will never give those profits up.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Ryoji Furui wrote on Mar. 11, 2014 @ 00:20 GMT
Dear Joe,

thank you for your comment. your opinion is really a missing point in my essay or i should have add more words. if nuclear fusion age really came, oil industry would be demanded the change of its power supply share (and could reduce co2 globally). We need to support to those negative changes as its change would be felt positive to anyone. and i believe it would be capable...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Apr. 19, 2014 @ 09:41 GMT
Dear Ryoji,

I totally agree with you, as a power engineer (specialty - power stations ) that the problem of clean energy is one of the most important for the future of Humanity . Your essay confirms the important idea that all alternative ideas need to be collected in the global community. Obviously , we need a World Bank ideas under UN auspices.

I agree with your conclusion: «I further think this effort should never end, just as humanity has kept believing in religions or ethics or whatever has worked and kept respecting their growth beside the development of science. I believe we would never lose them as humanity continues to create new technology.»

Humanity needs open competition for new ideas, the creation of the World Search and selection of new knowledge.

I wish you good luck!

All the Best,

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Ryoji Furui replied on Apr. 19, 2014 @ 16:23 GMT
Vladimir,

Thank you for reading and giving your comment.

My major at uni was business and I should learn more economics there and should be able to include more insights of world economy at the last section in my essay.

as UN report tells the global income inequality Gini coefficient in 2005, for all human beings taken together, has been estimated to be between 0.61 and 0.68...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Domenico Oricchio wrote on Apr. 22, 2014 @ 14:57 GMT
Thank you Ryoji for read my essay.

I am not an expert of graphene, but I am thinking that the plasmon is an oscillation of electrons, so that I see complex to break an uranium nucleus with electron, actually only slow neutron are used in fission.

In principle an eccitation of uranium nucleus can be obtained with other neutral particles like photons (laser fission?), but there is not chain reaction (new neutral particle from the break nucleus that break other with a multiplication) with photons.

So I think that can be interesting a doping of graphene with uranium to measure the interaction of phonons with uranium (if the doping from absorption give plasmons in graphene, then the plasmon can give emission), but each energy production can destroy the graphene structures, so that I think that it is not an effective method to produce energy, this is one of my problems.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Ryoji Furui replied on Apr. 22, 2014 @ 22:35 GMT
Dear Domenico Oricchio,

Thank you for your comments.

Plasmon can obviously deserve for a booster at a certain energy level includes fission. So graphene or carbon nano tube can be considered as worth materials for gaining energy level.

On the other hand, my prediction in 2006 expects another booster as you already read. Graphene will certainly break at hot plasma state. but like we keep sending air with fuels to the engines, we can keep sending graphene to fusion reactor (fission nucleus are too heavy for carbons to hold?). that is how we can keep fusion continue to burning, I think

by the way, if we can observe critical after injecting neutron (or whatever) to the lowest temperature crystalized fuels, I think we can make a incense like self burning product with a certain balance of scales and dense. Am I dreaming too much?

regards,

ryoji

Bookmark and Share



Hoang cao Hai wrote on May. 14, 2014 @ 02:19 GMT
Dear Ryoji Furui

Your solution may still need more time and effort to apply but your attention to energy issues is very valuable -10 points to cheer for your passion.

Hải.CaoHoàng

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Ryoji Furui replied on May. 16, 2014 @ 23:10 GMT
Dear Hải,

Grad to meet you here again!

My idea is based on some decades period as this contest suggests.

I will read yours soon!

Thank you,

Ryoji

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on May. 26, 2014 @ 07:21 GMT
Ryoji,

Fusion seems to be the most practical solution, considering that hydrogen is the most plentiful element in the universe. Do they now mix graphene with other fuels with the current laser and plasma attempts? Will this reduce the ratio of power applied vs energy garnered?

My essay speaks of looking beyond scientific orthodoxy and within the neural universe of the brain for the vision and imagination suggested by Einstein.

I would like to see your comments on my essay.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Ryoji Furui replied on May. 26, 2014 @ 20:54 GMT
Dear James,

Thank you for your comments.

I just checked the internet and found a paper proposing plazma with fullerene (a kind of carbon nano tube). we just can read only abstract without subscription however it seems to explain more about plasmon can work as fusion booster?

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/241161641_C6
0-fullerene_composite_plasma_jets_formation_and_acceleration
_for_application_to_disruption_mitigation_and_magneto-inerti
al_fusion

I will read your essay and post comment soon.

ryoji

Bookmark and Share


James Lee Hoover replied on May. 27, 2014 @ 04:48 GMT
Ryoji,

Some interesting slides on plasma jets that you would understand better than I. http://www.washacadsci.org/capsci08/presentations/ASTIWither
spoon.pdf.

The time is growing short, so I am revisited to make sure I've rated all. I noted that I rated yours on 5/26.

Fusion, the reason we are the "stuff of stars," is a quite important study.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

James Lee Hoover replied on May. 28, 2014 @ 18:30 GMT
Ryoji,

I used quantum entanglement as an explanation for teleporting in my novel, Extraordinary Visitors. I thought this science fiction might lend credibility for a type 0 civilization compared to a type 2 ET.

Thanks for reading and commenting on my essay.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on May. 26, 2014 @ 14:25 GMT
Ryoji,

I could not agree more that solving the apparent 'chasm' between quantum and classical physics is the most important and fundamental way the safe future of mankind can be secured, including through fusion. Indeed that's true whether or not your detailed proposals prove viable. Graphine certainly seems to have good potential.

I've studied nuclear tokamaks in detail from fusion science to cosmic scale and found them fundamental and critical. Also surface plasmons, which as you suggest are very poorly understood and described in the various branches of classical physics, with no quantum analogue. I've actually derived a coherent theoretical model which is consistent with your thesis and includes active galactic nuclei, better known in doctrinal astronomy and theory as super massive black holes. You'll find my recently accepted paper on that in preprint here along with previous essays; https://www.academia.edu/6655261/A_CYCLIC_MODEL_OF_GALAXY_EV
OLUTION_WITH_BARS
. The helcoil acceleration process, pure plasma and re-ionization are discussed in detail.

My previous 3 essays (all top 10 scorers) give the background ontology, but this year describe a shockingly simple classical derivation of QM itself, proved geometrically and (see end notes) experimentally. The real problem preventing progress is rigid adherence to old doctrine preventing even the assessment of new derivations. But we can only keep improving our descriptions. I think both our essays are worth the top score and anticipate you will agree. Are you aware of any use of graphine in fusion experiments to date?

Very best wishes

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Ryoji Furui replied on May. 26, 2014 @ 21:06 GMT
Dear Peter,

Thank you for reading my essay. It was tough moment to write this essay without enough information but i need to build my ideas within my capacity. I just found a paper related plasmon and fusion as mentioned at previous my comment.

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/241161641_C6
0-fullerene_composite_plasma_jets_formation_and_acceleration
_for_application_to_disruption_mitigation_and_magneto-inerti
al_fusion

I will read your essay carefully and post at your thread.

wish you good luck.

ryoji

Bookmark and Share


Peter Jackson replied on May. 28, 2014 @ 17:14 GMT
Ryoji,

Thanks, you should also explore the arXiv archive which contains many very credible papers. Look up both nuclear tokamaks and AGN's. You did an excellent job considering your experience, but there's a vast amount to learn. I look forward to your comments on mine, which seems to be sinking so needs the points.

You just need to ask yourself; does Earth spin clockwise or anti-clockwise? You'll find it's BOTH! I pont out QM only really says we can only 'measure' one direction at a time! Then think hard from the positions of observers in space, measuring rotational speed at varying latitudes. Plotted against the angle from the centre of e Earth to the line of latitude you'll find a cosine curve!

Best wishes

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Peter Jackson replied on May. 29, 2014 @ 10:55 GMT
Ryoji,

Thanks for your kind comment. I should say I've also found plasmons very poorly understood with at least two disparate descriptions from the non 'joined-up' physics' we currently employ. Invoking two-fluid plasma's as a frame transition and Raman scattering makes the whole picture coherent, explaining the process at Maxwell's transition zone. But that's all a bit technical. The 'one step at a time' approach of learning to put puzzles together is essential.

I've now scored your essay, the low number means it was to good effect, I seem to have the highest so it takes high scores to have any effect. None the less I hope you can score it before the deadline. At least Bob and Alice have attracted much interest in comprehensible QM.

Well done, and best wishes

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Georgina Woodward wrote on May. 27, 2014 @ 02:11 GMT
Hi Ryogi,

I enjoyed your essay, it is well written and easy to understand. I do hope that fusion technology is successfully developed as it is so much more desirable than nuclear fission. A better direction to go than more fission plants.

The nearest I have come to anything like this is making flour bombs for the education and entertainment of my school students and own children. It still amazes me how much energy is released from a small puff of flour.

Do you have plans to try out your proposed procedures or are you waiting to see if someone else does?

Regards, Georgina

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Ryoji Furui replied on May. 28, 2014 @ 16:44 GMT
Dear Georgina,

Thank you for your comment.

I am not sure if I get into fusion site, but i would learn more what happened actually.

Ryoji

Bookmark and Share



Colin Walker wrote on Jun. 1, 2014 @ 22:36 GMT
Dear Ryoji Furui,

I have a comment about your referenced paper "Energy and Spacetime". At the beginning of section 4 on page 3 you give a formula for the "total relativistic energy of M" and show that momentum is not conserved. If a graviton acts like a photon on absorption then the formula is wrong and should be E = m_o + p = gamma m_o to conserve momentum.

The first couple of pages of this material on collisions which is taken from a text on relativity by A.P. French explains the details. I particularly like French's rationally skeptical attitude towards the conservation laws, calling them 'statements' instead.

It may be that a graviton is essentially different and your formula is correct. It seems to me the only reason to call your formula (which is a standard one) "wrong" is that it does not conserve momentum. At any rate, I found your idea that there is an oscillation between material and non-material energy very interesting and something worth playing with.

Best regards,

Colin

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Ryoji Furui replied on Jun. 1, 2014 @ 23:48 GMT
Dear Colin Walker,

thank you for your comment with scanned document. i am just preparing for playing music at a bar as a dj but my head should be away from sounds once.

i suggest gravitons which total property is represented as $p$. when considered photon, it can be treated as a single property $p$. however i suggest gravitons can be divided to $g$ as energy (diagonal elements in 4d flame) and another which is regarded as momentum (non-diagonal elements) so this momentum is derived by $p-g$. I would like to show you my document during the contest 2012 which tells gravitons with chart. http://fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/comparison2.pdf

not sure this explains better but i will read your documents well soon and will post at your thread.

wish you good luck!

ryoji

Bookmark and Share


Colin Walker replied on Jun. 2, 2014 @ 19:18 GMT
Dear Ryoji,

Thanks for that clarification. My 2012 essay gives an exponential potential energy function which is slightly different from Ernst Fischer's conventional general relativity form and it will be interesting to see what difference that would make. I think it is actually the function Fischer was arguing for as I mentioned in the comments section of his essay.

An implication of general relativity failing to pass an upcoming test could be the elimination of the possibility of black holes or the big bang, and would support your conclusion about the universe being eternal.

Best wishes,

Colin

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Arthur R. Woods wrote on Jun. 5, 2014 @ 13:03 GMT
Dear Ryoji

Although I am a fan of Space Solar Power as a nearer term solution to the energy issue, I see fusion eventually coming online later this century and I believe fusion will be essential for further space exploration. In my essay, I talk about using extraterrestrial resources located near Earth to help satisfy the growing needs of humanity. Indeed, one of these resources is Helium-3 which is plentiful on the Moon but rare on Earth.

A very good book on the potential of Helium-3 and fusion is: Return to the Moon: Exploration, Enterprise, and Energy in the Human Settlement of Space by former astronaut Harrison Schmitt

Have you considered Helium-3 in your work?

Best regards

Arthur

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Ryoji Furui wrote on Jun. 5, 2014 @ 22:20 GMT
Dear Arthur Woods,

Thank you for reading my essay. I believe fusion comes first within a few decades and it will support space activities as electric power supply and rocket engines.

I will check helium-3 reaction more later.

regards,

ryoji

Bookmark and Share


Author Ryoji Furui replied on Jun. 5, 2014 @ 23:19 GMT
i just found a paper describes which fuel can be more better ratio with graphene in fusion reaction.

http://arxiv.org/abs/0705.3130

not sure why i could not find it till now but it states something really interesting and fuel is better to be light so hydrogen seems to be best fuel. I think it is the same logic of my respond to Domenico's post above.

Ryoji

Bookmark and Share



Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.