Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

muriel_volestrangler

(105,984 posts)
24. Does anyone have the faintest idea what process is being claimed here?
Thu Nov 7, 2013, 12:52 PM
Nov 2013

I have no idea why firing a laser at thorium would release huge amounts of energy, allowing you to power the laser to continue to fire it, and push the car too. Neither does this guy, who tried some calculations just to justify the '8 grams' claim:

Uranium in a reactor produces about 20 terajoules of energy per kilogram. For comparison, gasoline gives you about 48 megajoules per kilogram. That means uranium gives us about 425,000 more power per kilogram than gas. Let’s assume thorium will give us roughly the same ratio. That means one gram of thorium would be like 425 kg of gas. Gas has a density of about 2.7 kg per US gallon, so that 425 kg of gas is equivalent to 156 gallons.

That’s way short of Stevens’s claim of 1 gm of thorium being equivalent to 7,500 gallons of gas. For that to be true, his laser-induced power output has to be fifty times more energy efficient than nuclear fission. That is an extraordinary claim, to put it mildly, and he’s offered no proof and precious few details.

Looking through his other claims, it sounds as if he glued together actual science together as if making a collage for kindergarten, regardless of whether the results made sense or not. You could in theory make an actual thorium laser, though that’s not what he’s doing. You can use a particle accelerator to drive a nuclear reaction by knocking neutrons out of other particles, though again that’s not what Stevens is doing despite him adding “accelerator-driven” to the description of his process. You can even induce nuclear reactions using super-powerful lasers, but Stevens says he’s not inducing fission.

So to sum up: Stevens isn’t claiming to have made a nuclear-powered car. He’s claiming to have made a steam-powered car where the steam is heated up when he shines a laser on thorium. I don’t know of any physical process that would let you get more heat energy out of the thorium than you’d spend on making the laser go. For his process to be so awesome that it would power a car for some 200,000 miles on a single gram of thorium, he’d have had to come up with something that’s fifty times more powerful than a nuclear reactor. And he hasn’t released any papers, only press releases. That’s 3 out of 3 red flags for the research not being real.

http://granades.com/2011/09/16/in-which-i-use-scientific-reasoning-to-doubt-the-thorium-powered-car/

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Won't take long for CFLDem Nov 2013 #1
Sorry, but bunk johnd83 Nov 2013 #2
100% WRONG!! PamW Nov 2013 #5
I think you misunderstand my point johnd83 Nov 2013 #7
100% WRONG PamW Nov 2013 #16
The thorium reactors use a particle accelerator johnd83 Nov 2013 #17
WRONG AGAIN!! PamW Nov 2013 #20
There is plenty of water to moderate neutrons in a damaged reactor johnd83 Nov 2013 #25
Reactor Physics 101 PamW Nov 2013 #29
The other advantage of thorium is the decay products become inert much faster johnd83 Nov 2013 #30
Actually it is NOT a huge assumption... PamW Nov 2013 #35
I still don't understand your point johnd83 Nov 2013 #36
Criticality in non-operating - but NOT in melted. PamW Nov 2013 #39
You are 100% WRONG johnd83 Nov 2013 #38
100% WRONG!!! PamW Nov 2013 #40
Yes, I was going to remark about the five ton engine it would take Warpy Nov 2013 #27
I want a nuclear vacuum cleaner! longship Nov 2013 #3
Those are different technologies johnd83 Nov 2013 #4
Yup! They are talking about a Sterling engine now. longship Nov 2013 #6
The Voyager spacecraft only hase a few hundred watts of power johnd83 Nov 2013 #8
Voyager has shut down its cameras. Long ago. longship Nov 2013 #9
I think for the next 100 years or so it is going to be mostly manned/unmanned craft johnd83 Nov 2013 #10
Fusion, unfortunately, is probably a long way off. longship Nov 2013 #11
Fusion power is not really that far off johnd83 Nov 2013 #12
But the technology is not yet practical. longship Nov 2013 #13
The technology I linked to is a magnetic containment plasma system johnd83 Nov 2013 #14
Yes! And I've heard of another in Europe. longship Nov 2013 #15
Correct. PamW Nov 2013 #22
Fusion propulsion is a lot easier than electricity generation bananas Nov 2013 #18
If you're going to use it for propulsion, yes. longship Nov 2013 #19
Not quite... PamW Nov 2013 #21
I never said that one would get to light speeds. longship Nov 2013 #23
Look at momentum per unit energy PamW Nov 2013 #41
Thanks. longship Nov 2013 #42
That's if your concern is momentum per unit energy; but often it's not, in rockets muriel_volestrangler Nov 2013 #43
Let's examine TOTAL mass.. PamW Nov 2013 #44
Well, yes, that's the point - you use nuclear power, or solar (ie external) muriel_volestrangler Nov 2013 #45
IF Polywell Fusion works VASIMIR is DOA FogerRox Nov 2013 #46
Does anyone have the faintest idea what process is being claimed here? muriel_volestrangler Nov 2013 #24
I didn't get that either johnd83 Nov 2013 #26
"And he hasn’t released any papers, only press releases." arcane1 Nov 2013 #28
I'll try to post on it later - basically, you can increase decay rate by jiggling it with a laser bananas Nov 2013 #33
Finally found a somewhat relevant hit bananas Nov 2013 #34
Thanks - that gives us a theory that the laser is relevant muriel_volestrangler Nov 2013 #37
Oh, I agree, it's as credible as his "USEING HELYXZION TECHNOLOGY WE CAN CURE “ALL” DISEASE" bananas Nov 2013 #48
I forgot that one. kristopher Nov 2013 #49
Not the faintest. FogerRox Nov 2013 #47
It won't work, period. NNadir Nov 2013 #31
Why, Are we still thinking in individual cars, individual propulsion systems, ... CRH Nov 2013 #32
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Thorium vehicle will run ...»Reply #24