The Neutristor is an ultra-compact, disposable, neutron generator 1,000 times smaller than the closest competitor, for use in energy exploration, and medical applications. 2012-2665P
For such revolutionary technology, their music sounds like it hasn't been updated since the 80s. I'm not complaining, though. I love it. It gives it a certain nostalgic campiness.
The output is way too small and short lived. You'd be better off with a regular neutron generator and frankly, there are already plans for just such reactors.
I'm pretty sure deuterium (D) is even rarer than helium (He). So while you can produce He from a D-D reaction, it would be the analogue equivalent of making lead from gold.
they say it doesn't contain radioactive elements, but then they say it uses H-2 (deuterium or idk how it's spelled) which is radioactive as far as i know.. correct me if i'm wrong please edit: i'm wrong
@@stellabckw2033 you get a tritium and a neutron when you smack the two tritiums together so you still end up with it but i guess it decays to deuterium and becomes stable again
@@willett786 True to a degree - but the people who have access to the rest of the components of the bomb, already have access to initiators that would cost far less than (massively) scaling up things like this I think.
How it can emmit nutrons for ever with limited amount of Deuterium in this small pack how it get extra continuous nutrons for long oppression ?? For example Crt can emmit electrons from its cathode for limitless time without being loose its whole electrons because electrons are continuously supplied by power supply and by outer layer of any object ??
It's a short duration 600 volt pulse that boils off deuterium from the "heater" and accelerates them to a target that's variously been described at titanium tritride or titanium deuteride. Personally, I'd have went with a different metal on one part and bumped the acceleration voltage up a couple of orders of magnitude or so and gotten a wee bit higher neutron flux, although at differing thermal levels.
It's not D-D fusion, it's D-D collision. Fusion would create millions of volts and lots of gamma, and anyone that close would be suffering nothing less than a sunburn. However, a source of just a few neutrons such as this could be a fantastic breakthrough where neutron sources are just too damn radioactive to have nearby.
It's a collision followed by fusion....you're fusing two nuclei together and expelling a neutron, this isn't a runaway reaction since it's not triggered thermally, it's a non-equillibrium process.
This does cause fusion, and yes you get a prompt gamma with each reaction. A few hundred of those per second would take days of continuous exposure to be lethal. Nuclear reactions do not depend on quantity, it's a fundamental process.
From a macroscopic point of view, in all directions, but in any given case, in the opposite direction of the neutron (and much slower) owing to conservation of momentum.
I worked in electronics for many years, never saw a metal film resistor that didn't have a connection between the connectors. More like an almost spark gap, save that this appears to be more like an electron gun modified to fire deuterium.
@@sidewaysfcs0718 not really, just hard to isolate a quark-gluon plasma and keep it that hot. Some thermodynamics law or something about no such thing as a free lunch. ;)
@@sidewaysfcs0718 yep. I'm not an expert but that's what Brian Greene has said in his books - that is quarks and gluons are trapped in their respective hadrons.
@@spvillano If you pull the quarks gluon - quark pairs apart that energy will be used to generate a quark for each of those "isolated" quarks. It's kind of like pulling a rubber band apart.
Sad. Useless for irradiating anything in bulk, so it's not a substitute for a sealed conventional neutron source or a typical generator. Interesting though.
Thing is, if they can start to fabricate these in bulk and miniaturise further, - possibly even encapsulating the entire product, it may be possible to end up with a layered / stacked device so that devices with 10X 100X output would be attainable. You then just use as many modules as required. I guess though at some point, a more conventional tube design gives a better neutron / cost yield. As you say interesting - and perhaps a technology that will yield more powerful devices at lower cost in the future. In the meantime, recovered radium (reclaimed and part purified from old watch and clock hands) and beryllium powder still gets the job done for tiny output requirements for amateur experimenters like myself.
That's like saying that a single transistor is useless because it won't process your word documents... These things are meant to be used in giant arrays.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 4:5, Jesus Christ is the only way, KJV....
