Twitter
RSS

Muon catalyzed fusion for energy production

0
The nuclear fusion that takes place in the core of the Sun, where temperatures reach 15 million degrees Celsius, liberates enormous amounts of energy. We see the result of this energy liberation in the Sun’s glare. The elementary particle known as a muon, however, provides a means of achieving nuclear fusion at sub-zero temperatures. “Using muons, we can achieve nuclear fusion in a comparatively small facility at reasonable cost,” says Teiichiro Matsuzaki, director of the RIKEN-RAL Muon Facility. Matsuzaki and scientists at the facility have been conducting unique experiments as part of fundamental research into the use of muons to develop industrially viable nuclear fusion technology.

Learn more about muon fusion at this link

Soros

0
George Soros works under the belief that anti-semitism is caused by the existance of the Jewish religion, and secondary to that, Israel. In other words, this genius figured out how to cure hatred of Jews...Jews should just stop being Jews, is all! DUH!

Soros has funded pro-Palestinian groups. He also has curatorial control over documentaries at the Sundance Film institute. Prior to that, his Soros fund was the number one documentary fund in the world, with a focus on third world topics, a great number of which have been Palestinian propaganda.

*Obviously, this is a classic self-hater. Yes, Self-Shame=Self-hate. Here's a Jew who survived Holocaust, blames Jews/Israel for anti-semitism and distances himself from Jews.

Interview with Chief Rabbi Haleva

0
http://www.sabah.com.tr/2006/04/03/gnd105.html

I've translated that. If you have any questions regarding the translation , you may ask any time because there were some phrases. There was a critism sentence with the word donkey, I ,especially, was very careful with it.

Some of Jews from high society are willing to pay money in order to have their photos on magazines


Journalist: Jews are known to be people who are not always around , don’t speak very much, don’t declare anything which may damage the relations with the government, don’t get into politics. When it comes to Jews in Turkey, it is not the same, especially, for the ones in high society. They are on the front pages of magazines, they take place primarily in society news.

Ishak Haleva: Unfortunately, it is. Most of the people who take place in those kind of magazines are from the same environment. Some of them, in fact I shouldn’t say these but, are willing to pay money , just to see their photos here and there. All of them are for gaining fame, being seen. What is the need for too much show-off?

*Is it important to gain fame for Jews?

Haleva: No. These people are an apparant group, living together. Because of them, you may think that all Jews are rich. Besides, what is wealth? The one who has money, or the one who is contented with what he has? Show-off mentality is very popular among them. I want to give advice to them but I cannot see them. If they came to the synagogue, I’d tell them but they don’t. I had a conservative friend, he got very rich. He began to get along with that group. After a while, he said “I cannot get adapted to them.” and he came back.

*Why couldn’t he get adapted?

Haleva: His life went bad, his marriage ended. We’ve been already seeing the same around. Becoming distant to religious issues brings these. They fall into a gap. Some people fill the gap with reading and culture, these people fill it with nonsense.

*You say so,but most of the ones seen on the magazines are well-educated.

Haleva: It is worse. Excuse me, I will not keep myself, without money, you cannot even tie them to a barn, it’d be an insult to donkeys. They had a good education, but because of competing with each other, they cannot show good sides of their characters.


*I think you are pessimistic in this subject.

Haleva: However, I am not. I’m looking at the full part of the glass. But those people are in the same soup. So they treat each other well in the same environment/group. As they get older, they will understand the meaning of the moral/spiritual principles. If their base is strong, I don’t get afraid. It is a period, it passes. I’ve seen many dark/bad days. But when there is a storm, I get happ because storm diffuses the clouds.

Richest Jews in Britain

0
Russian oil tycoon and Chelsea Football club owner Roman Abramovich has kept his top position as the wealthiest Jew in Britain according to the Sunday Times. In its latest Rich List, Abramovich is said to be worth £10.8bn and is the second wealthiest person overall in Britain.

Fashion retail mogul Philip Green who along with his wife Tina owns a number of high street outlets including Top Shop and Bhs are worth £4.9bn.

Coming in at third place in Britain's wealthiest Jews are Indian-born brothers David and Simon Reuben who made their fortune through property.

Foreign exchange dealer Joe Lewis who also owns stakes in football clubs Tottenham and Glasgow Rangers and is a worth of £2.1bn.

Express Newspapers owner and operator of adult television Television X Richard Desmond is now said to be worth £1.9bn.

Lord Sainsbury, who has a Jewish family background along with members of his family who lend their name to the supermarket chain Sainsbury's is worth £1.6bn.

Zomba Records which counts Britney Spears as well as boyband N Sync was founded by South African Clive Calder who emigrated to London and is now worth £1.3bn.

Fashion retailer Bernard Lewis owner of the River Island chain along with his family is worth just over £1bn.

Alan Sugar, currently making a name for himself on BBC2's The Apprentice is worth £790m through property and computer interests.


by: Leslie Bunder

The International Jew

0
The International Jew is a four volume set of booklets or pamphlets originally published and distributed in the early 1920s by Henry Ford, an American industrialist. It provides some background understanding of the role of International Jew in world.
more at wiki
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion
New World order
the book at google
THE INTERNATIONAL JEW, THE WORLD'S FOREMOST PROBLEM

What would you do if you are a billionaire

0
There are *so many* really great and valuable potential projects that (a) nobody is investing in; (b) have an investment horizon that is tough because these are projects that will take a good 5 years, let's say, to get to where seeing a return is on the table. A good 10 years before you start to see the possibility of "done".

I would start an R&D lab but a very small one - perhaps 10 people - and while we'd try to have some positive income spin-offs each year from 0 onward, the goal would be to create the kind of environment where we can take off some of the bigger, long-neglected problems.

You kids these days don't know what's possible in a GUI framework. You don't know how to do language design, systems software generally, databases, file systems, or a whole lot of other basics. You've inherited really mediocre crap and you take for granted that that's where things are at. And the industry has ceased production of grey-beards. (Also: get off my lawn!)

"like tears in the rain", -t

Second lawsuit threatens Skype sale

0
IDG News Service - Another legal challenge threatens to derail eBay's planned sale of Skype to a group of investors, with the filing of a suit against Joost's former CEO.

Joost and Joltid, companies owned by the founders of Skype, filed a suit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against Michaelangelo Volpi and Index Ventures Management. The suit charges Volpi, who left Joost for Index earlier this year, with breach of fiduciary duty, interference with prospective business advantage, misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of confidence and civil conspiracy. Index is one of the organizations that agreed to buy a stake in Skype from eBay.

The suit asks that Volpi and Index be required to return confidential documents that were taken from Joost and that they be prevented from using any of the misappropriated trade secrets.

Volpi stepped down as Joost CEO in July and joined Index. Shareholders later voted him off the board of directors and removed him as chairman of Joost.

The suit in the chancery court follows one that Joltid filed earlier this week against Skype. That suit, filed in California, charges Skype, eBay, Silver Lake Partners and others with copyright infringement. The dispute concerns an agreement that eBay made when it bought Skype in 2005. The acquisition did not include Skype's peer-to-peer networking technology, which is owned by Joltid and was licensed to Skype.

Earlier this year Joltid terminated the license agreement. Joltid and Skype have since argued over the validity of the termination in courts in England.

Both suits filed this week appear aimed at derailing eBay's proposed sale of 65 percent of Skype to a group of investors led by Silver Lake.

While eBay did not immediately reply to a request for comment about the Joost lawsuit, earlier this week it said the transaction would continue. "We remain on track to close the transaction in the fourth quarter of 2009," the company said in a statement following the Joltid suit against Skpe.

source

Space does not exist, so time can

0
It is often said that in general relativity time does not exist. This is because the Einstein equations generate motion in time that is a symmetry of the theory, not true time evolution. In quantum gravity, the timelessness of general relativity clashes with time in quantum theory and leads to the ``problem of time'' which, in its various forms, is the main obstacle to a successful quantum theory of gravity. I argue that the problem of time is a paradox, stemming from an unstated faulty premise. Our faulty assumption is that space is real. I propose that what does not fundamentally exist is not time but space, geometry and gravity. The quantum theory of gravity will be spaceless, not timeless. If we are willing to throw out space, we can keep time and the trade is worth it.

Fotini Markopoulou
(Submitted on 10 Sep 2009)

Diamonds are for softies – boron is harder

0
You don't often break a diamond. So when in 2003 Dave Mao cracked a tooth of his diamond anvil, he knew something extraordinary must have happened. Together with his daughter Wendy and other colleagues at the Geophysical Laboratory of the Carnegie Institution for Science in Washington DC, he was using the device to test materials at pressures many millions of times higher than those at the Earth's surface - higher even than in our planet's core - by squeezing them between two tiny diamond jaws.

Behind the glitz, diamond is just a form of carbon. It is, however, by common consent the hardest material known. The substance in the Maos' test cell had also begun as pure carbon. It was plain old graphite - the soft, slippery stuff that is used for pencil leads and lubricants. Clearly, something had happened in the anvil cell to make it awesomely hard.

It seemed the Maos might accidentally have succeeded where many before had failed. Had they made the first superhard material that matched or even surpassed diamond? Probably not, as it turned out. Six years and several twists later, though, that feat might at last have been achieved, though not with pure carbon. If the latest reports are right, the hardness crown has changed hands at last.

Why the fuss? Diamond's hardness has served us well enough over the years. Diamond-studded saws and drills have been around since at least the time of the Napoleonic wars. They are not even particularly expensive any more, since researchers at the General Electric Company in Schenectady, New York, discovered in the 1950s that you can make synthetic diamonds by subjecting softer carbon-rich materials to immense temperatures and pressures.

Unfortunately, diamond doesn't always cut it. In particular, it does not cut steel: the carbon just dissolves in the hot iron, reacting to form iron carbide. This susceptibility to heat and chemical attack is one reason why we are on the lookout for alternatives to diamond, says Artem Oganov, a materials physicist at Stony Brook University in New York. Diamond is also electrically insulating, which can be a limitation. "It would be good to have a range of superhard materials that have other properties," says Oganov, such as metallic or semiconducting characteristics.

Finding rivals has been a frustrating business. In part that is because although all of us know a hard object when we bump into one, working out what makes things hard is - well, hard. "Intuitively, covalent bonds and high bond-strength are a requirement," says Mao. Covalent bonds are one of the ways in which atoms link up to build molecules, large and small. They form when the smeared-out cloud, or "orbital", occupied by an electron belonging to an atom overlaps with one belonging to another. In general, the better the overlap, the stronger the bond. Hardness typically seems to arise in materials that have strong, short bonds.

Most of us know a hard object when we bump into one - but not what makes it hard
So might there be some tweak to carbon's atomic arrangements that would optimise the strength of its bonds and make a material harder than diamond? In the late 1980s, Marvin Cohen, a materials physicist at the University of California, Berkeley, thought so. He theorised that the strong bonds linking atoms in a hypothetical crystalline compound of carbon and nitrogen dubbed beta carbon nitride should make it particularly hard. But despite extensive efforts, the material has been difficult to synthesise, and its hoped-for hardness has never been demonstrated.

And what of Dave and Wendy Mao's miraculously hardened graphite? Unfortunately, the usual technique for determining a material's structure - bouncing X-rays off the sample and looking at the resulting diffraction pattern - proved extremely difficult for the tiny quantities in the diamond anvil cell. Opening the device to take a closer look didn't help, either, because the material morphed back into graphite as soon as the pressure was released.

Whatever it is, a material like the Maos' altered graphite could have its uses. Imagine, for example, an impact-resistant "smart skin" that, while normally soft and flexible, becomes the hardest thing going under a large force. Until we know what a material looks like at the atomic scale, however, reliable fabrication remains a problem.

Mao and theorist Yanming Ma and colleagues at Jilin University in Changchun, north-east China, recently proposed that the transformed graphite has a structure they call monoclinic carbon. This M-carbon forms when graphite sheets buckle and form extra chemical bonds between the layers (Physical Review Letters, vol 102, p 175506). The resulting structure, they calculated, should be almost as hard as diamond - although not quite. It is also strikingly similar to a form of carbon made by shining strong laser light onto graphite, reported in May this year by Katsumi Tanimura and colleagues at Osaka University, Japan (Physical Review Letters, vol 102, p 087402). The Japanese team did not attempt to assess the hardness of their material.

This piece of unfinished business aside, only one material has been claimed so far to crack the diamond ceiling - diamond itself. A nanocrystalline form of diamond, sometimes called aggregated diamond nanorods, was described in 2003 by Tetsuo Irifune and his colleagues at Ehime University in Japan. Since then, Natalia Dubrovinskaia and her colleagues at the University of Bayreuth in Germany have found that a tip made of these nanorods could scratch regular diamond, seemingly indicating a greater hardness.

So much for carbon. But who says we need it? In a quest for completely different superhard materials, Richard Kaner at the University of California, Los Angeles, and his team have been exploring the nether regions of the periodic table. Their first stop was the element osmium, each atom of which has eight "valence" electrons available for covalent bonding - the highest number known. More electrons, they reasoned, meant stronger bonds and perhaps superhardness. In 2005 the strategy seemed to bear fruit as the team discovered that osmium diboride, a repeating structure of one osmium atom bound to two boron atoms, is indeed very hard - although still only about a quarter as hard as diamond.

Two years later, they claimed that rhenium diboride was even harder, though still not a match for diamond. Rhenium is osmium's neighbour in the periodic table, and although its valence electron density is smaller, crucially it could make shorter, and therefore stronger, bonds. Kaner's claim has not gone undisputed.

Meanwhile, attention was switching back to the lighter end of the periodic table, home to many elements that can form short, strong bonds. One such is boron, which sits just one berth over from carbon. The idea that boron has superhardness potential goes back at least to 1965, when Robert Wentorf, one of the General Electric team that made synthetic diamond, claimed to have made superhard crystals of boron at a pressure of 100,000 atmospheres and a temperature of 1500 °C. He couldn't work out what the material's structure was, though, and the idea was shelved for 40 years.

"People were basically scared of boron," says Oganov by way of explanation. Boron forms several complex structures that are hard to tell apart. What's more, it reacts with nearly everything, and even a trace of impurities can drastically change the structure and properties of the boron crystal.

It was only in February this year that a team led by Oganov published a structure for the superhard boron crystal - a repeating pattern of 28 boron atoms they called B28 (Nature, vol 457, p 863). In May, Dubrovinskaia and her team announced that they had made large crystals of B28 that were about half as hard as diamond (Physical Review Letters, vol 102, p 185501). Close, but still no diamond necklace.

Boron and on

Pure boron is not the last word, though. Boron nitride - in which boron is combined with nitrogen - forms analogues of all the known carbon phases. There is a soft variant called h-BN, which is made of sheets of hexagonal rings just like graphite, and finds similar use as a lubricant. Then there's cubic boron nitride, or c-BN, which has a structure similar to diamond, and for a long time has played second fiddle only to diamond in hardness.

There is a third version, too, known as wurtzite or w-BN, which is comparable to a diamond-like form of carbon known as lonsdaleite. It had been made since the 1970s by using high pressure or explosive shock waves to squeeze h-BN, but had only been fabricated in quantities too small for its hardness to be measurable by any conventional means. In 2007, however, Dubrovinskaia and her colleagues succeeded in making a mosaic of w-BN crystals which they claimed had a hardness comparable to that of diamond (Applied Physics Letters, vol 90, p 101912).

They thought that the material's hardness came about because its crystals were tiny - just 10 or so nanometres across. Many crystalline materials get harder as the grains that make up their crystals get smaller, because grain boundaries prevent the movement of defects in the packing of atoms. But earlier this year, Changfeng Chen of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, US and his colleagues offered another explanation. They think that w-BN may be inherently hard, because it can transform into another, stronger structure when another material presses into it. The pressure causes chemical bonds to flip into a different arrangement which looks like that of c-BN, but has its network of atomic bonds ideally positioned to resist stress (Physical Review Letters, vol 102, p 055503).

"It's a bit like someone changing their body posture in response to applied stress so that they can carry a higher load," says Chen. As a result, the material becomes even harder than diamond, at least in theory. What's more, Chen and colleagues figured that the same thing that happens to w-BN should happen for lonsdaleite, its carbon counterpart. That could actually be harder to scratch and indent than diamond itself.

Meanwhile Vladimir Solozhenko, now at the University of Paris, and his co-workers had the idea that it might be best to throw all the most promising elements that have popped up in most hard materials to date - carbon, boron and nitrogen - into the pot. In 2001 they reported that one particular combination, BC2N, has a hardness midway between c-BN and diamond (Diamond and Related Materials, vol 10, p 2228).

Until all such options have been explored, there is still plenty to play with, and no reason to think that diamond is as hard as it gets. In any case, new materials don't have to surpass diamond in order to be useful: c-BN has been used as an abrasive and in cutting tools for many years. Though only half as hard as diamond, it is by far the best material for grinding through steel.

It is true, too, that the real challenge in industries that use superhard materials, including construction, mining and aerospace engineering, is to find materials that are not just hard, but cheap and easy to make as well. In the end, perhaps, the real crown will go not to the material that cuts diamond, but to the one that undercuts it.

source

Synthetic diamond

0
Synthetic diamond is diamond produced in a technological process, as opposed to natural diamond which is created in geological processes. Synthetic diamond is also widely known as HPHT diamond or CVD diamond where HPHT and CVD refer to the production method, namely high-pressure high-temperature synthesis and chemical vapor deposition, respectively.

Numerous claims of diamond synthesis were documented between 1879 and 1928; every attempt has been carefully analyzed and none has been confirmed. In the 1940s, systematic research began in the United States, Sweden and the Soviet Union to grow diamond using CVD and HPHT processes. The first reproducible synthesis was reported around 1953. Those two processes still dominate the production of synthetic diamond. A third method, known as detonation synthesis, has entered the diamond market in the late 1990s. In this process, nanometer-sized diamond grains are created in a detonation of carbon-containing explosives. A fourth method, treating graphite with high-power ultrasonic radiation, has been demonstrated in the laboratory, but as yet there is no commercial application.

The properties of synthetic diamond depend on the details of the manufacturing processes, and can be inferior or superior to those of natural diamond; the hardness, thermal conductivity and electron mobility are superior in some synthetic diamonds (either HPHT or CVD). Consequently, synthetic diamond is widely used in abrasives, cutting and polishing tools and in heat sinks. Electronic applications of synthetic diamond are being developed, including high-power switches at power stations, high-frequency field-effect transistors and light-emitting diodes. Synthetic diamond detectors of ultraviolet (UV) light or high-energy particles are used at high-energy research facilities and are available commercially. Because of its unique combination of thermal and chemical stability, low thermal expansion and high optical transparency in a wide spectral range, synthetic diamond is becoming the most popular material for optical windows in high-power CO2 lasers and gyrotrons.

Both CVD and HPHT diamonds can be cut into gems and various colors can be produced: clear white, yellow, brown, blue, green and orange. The appearance of synthetic gems on the market created major concerns in the diamond trading business, as a result of which special spectroscopic devices and techniques have been developed to distinguish synthetic and natural diamonds.

more at wiki

Heavy than Air Flight

0
Most professional scientists though powered heavier than air flight was probably impossible. For example, Simon Newcombe, professor of mathematics and astronomy at
Johns Hopkins U, wrote in "The Independent" just three weeks before the Wright's first flight that powered flight was "impossible" and he suggested that it would only become
possible if new metals could be found. The same opinion had been expressed a year before in the "North American Review" by Rear Admiral George Melville, Chief Engineer of the US Navy.

Experts Say New Desktop Fusion Claims Seem More Credible

0
Scientists are again claiming they have made a Sun in a jar, offering perhaps a revolutionary energy source, and this time even some skeptics find the evidence intriguing enough to call for a closer look.

Using ultrasonic vibrations to shake a jar of liquid solvent the size of a large drink cup, the scientists say, they squeezed tiny gas bubbles in the liquid so quickly and violently that temperatures reached millions of degrees and some of the hydrogen atoms in the solvent molecules fused, producing a flash of light and energy.

"It can do some interesting science stuff as is," said Dr. Richard T. Lahey, a professor of engineering at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and an author of a paper describing the findings that will appear in the journal Physical Review E.

"Our interests are to see if we can't scale it up to something more exciting," he said.

The experiment could conceivably shrink the science of fusion — slamming hydrogen atoms together, producing heat and light — from giant, expensive reactors to the tabletop.

When this team of researchers made the same claim in an article in the journal Science two years ago, many scientists reacted with skepticism, even ridicule. But new experiments, using better detectors, offer more convincing data that the phenomenon is real.

"We've addressed all the issues and now they all speak for themselves with far greater intensity than they did before," said Dr. Rusi P. Taleyarkhan, the scientist who conducted the experiments at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee and is a professor of nuclear engineering at Purdue University.

Skepticism remains, but Dr. Lawrence A. Crum, a professor of electrical engineering at the University of Washington who was highly critical of the Science paper, said the new work was "much better" and deserved attention to determine whether the effect could be reproduced.

"It's getting to the point where you can't ignore it," Dr. Crum said.

For decades, physicists have dreamed of harnessing the ferocious alchemy of the Sun as a clean, limitless energy source. Most experiments have been conducted in giant, expensive reactors using magnetic fields to confine the ultrahot gases.

In contrast, the new experiment, which cost less than $1 million, uses the power of sound to create energy comparable to the inside of stars.

To many scientists, however, the phenomenon, nicknamed sonofusion, bears uncomfortable similarities to "cold fusion," which has now been discredited.

Sonofusion has already achieved more scientific respectability than cold fusion ever did, with two articles published in major journals.

And unlike cold fusion, sonofusion is based on known science. Scientists have long observed a phenomenon known as sonoluminescence, in which a burst of ultrasound causes a bubble in a liquid to collapse and emit a flash of light; some have speculated that the gases trapped in the collapsing bubbles could be heated to temperatures hot enough for fusion to occur.

Still, controversy enveloped the Science paper two years ago. The new research by Dr. Taleyarkhan and Dr. Lahey provides a much clearer picture of neutrons that are ejected when fusion occurs.

Many scientists like Dr. Glenn Young, head of the physics division at Oak Ridge, said the experiment was solid, but still incomplete.

"Neutrons are slippery little rascals," he said. "They can fool you. They can bounce and show up around corners you don't expect."

New York Times | March 3, 2004

Desktop nuclear fusion demonstrated

0
An astonishingly simple demonstration of nuclear fusion in a tabletop device has been performed, involving heating an ordinary crystal soaked in deuterium gas.

While the technique is unlikely to lead to power generation, such a device could act as a portable source of neutrons for analysing materials and medical imaging, and perhaps even spacecraft propulsion.

The key to the system is a crystal made of lithium tantalate. The crystal is asymmetric and, as a result, heating the material causes positive and negative charges to migrate to opposite ends of the crystal, setting up an electric field. The phenomenon is known as the pyroelectric effect.

In 1992, James Brownridge at the State University of New York in Binghamton, US, used crystals of lithium tantalate to generate X-rays by heating the crystals to about 100ºC in a dilute gas. The resultant electric field strips electrons from the gas molecules and accelerates them to huge energies. The electrons then collide with stationary nuclei in the crystal and generate X-rays.

When Seth Putterman at the University of California, Los Angeles, US, heard of the phenomenon a few years ago, he immediately realised that the electric fields were powerful enough for nuclear fusion to occur, specifically to fuse nuclei of an isotope of hydrogen called deuterium.

Strong case
To test whether these fields could indeed cause nuclear fusion, Putterman and UCLA colleagues Brian Naranjo and James Gimzewski first bathed a crystal of lithium tantalate in deuterium gas. The setup was then cooled to -33ºC and then heated to about 7 ºC over three and a half minutes.

The resultant electric field accelerated deuterium nuclei over a distance of 1 centimetre to energies in excess of 100 kiloelectronvolts. The accelerated nuclei then collided and fused with deuterium nuclei that had permeated the surface of the crystal lattice. The fusion produced 400 times more neutrons than found in background measurements.

Fusion science is littered with hype and over-optimistic claims, but Putterman has convinced his peers that something interesting is going on. "They make a very strong case for having seen fusion," says Nigel Hawkes, a nuclear physicist at the National Physical Laboratory in Teddington, UK.

But he is cautious about the potential for desktop neutron machines: "It's too early to say where this might lead."

Microthrusters
One problem is the small number of neutrons the experiment produces - a few hundred per second. A commercial neutron generator would need to produce at least tens of millions of neutrons per second.

Today, neutrons are created in nuclear reactors or particle accelerators which can cost millions of dollars to build and maintain. The prospect of a desktop alternative is a powerful incentive to continue the research and Putterman's team hopes to increase the yield by operating at lower temperatures and by using an array of crystals.

Putterman also suggests the crystals could be used as microthrusters for tiny spacecraft. By accelerating deuterium in one direction, the spacecraft would be propelled in the opposite direction.

18:00 27 April 2005

Sonoluminescence

0
The effect was first discovered at the University of Cologne in 1934 as a result of work on sonar. H. Frenzel and H. Schultes put an ultrasound transducer in a tank of photographic developer fluid. They hoped to speed up the development process. Instead, they noticed tiny dots on the film after developing and realized that the bubbles in the fluid were emitting light with the ultrasound turned on. It was too difficult to analyze the effect in early experiments because of the complex environment of a large number of short-lived bubbles.

In 1989 a major advancement was introduced by Felipe Gaitan and Lawrence Crum, who produced stable single-bubble sonoluminescence (SBSL). In SBSL, a single bubble, trapped in an acoustic standing wave, emits a pulse of light with each compression of the bubble within the standing wave. This technique allowed a more systematic study of the phenomenon, because it isolated the complex effects into one stable, predictable bubble. It was realized that the temperature inside the bubble was hot enough to melt steel. Interest in sonoluminescence was renewed when an inner temperature of such a bubble well above one million Kelvin was postulated. This temperature is thus far not conclusively proven, though recent experiments conducted by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign indicate temperatures around 20,000 Kelvin. Research has also been carried out by Dr. Klaus Fritsch of John Carroll University, University Heights, Ohio.

The US Navy studied propeller-induced sonoluminescence during the Cold War.


Theory of Operation

Single bubble sonoluminescence (SL) is the spontaneous emission of picosecond pulses of broadband light from a micron-size gas bubble levitated in water by the application of an external sound field.The bubble expands and contracts in phase with the oscillating pressure field.

Much of the recent work on single bubble sonoluminescence has been concerned with the dynamics of the bubble motion and the detailed spectrum in the 200 to 700 nm range using a variety of gas mixtures as the contents of the sonoluminescing bubble. Recent theoretical work with shock wave focusing in the bubble has given peak temperatures up to 10^9 K, while other estimates place the peak temperature in the range of 10^4 to 10^6 K.

Regulators closed three more banks Friday

0
SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Regulators closed three more banks Friday, 11th September bringing the 2009 total to 92.


Closings announced by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.:

Chicago-based Corus Bank, (CORS 0.26, -0.07, -21.26%) which had $7 billion in assets and $7 billion in deposits as of June 30, the FDIC said. The bank's deposits have been assumed by MB Financial Bank, the FDIC added. MB Financial (MBFI 17.03, +0.52, +3.15%) will pay the FDIC a premium of 0.2% to assume all of the failed bank's deposits, and has agreed to purchase roughly $3 billion of its assets, "comprised mainly of cash and marketable securities," the regulator said. Reports of Corus Bank's failure had surfaced earlier Friday. The Corus failure will cost the federal deposit-insurance fund $1.7 billion.

Venture Bank, Lacey, Wash., which as of July 28 had total assets of $970 million and total deposits of $903 million according to the FDIC. The FDIC said First-Citizens Bank & Trust Co., Raleigh, N.C., will assume all of the deposits of Venture Bank; will buy $874 million of the assets and entered into a share-loss transaction for $715 million of the assets. The FDIC said it will retain the remaining assets for later disposition. It estimated the cost to the deposit insurance fund at $298 million. Venture Bank, based in an Olympia suburb, is the third in Washington to fail this year and the first since Westsound Bank in Bremerton on May 8.

Brickwell Community Bank, Woodbury, Minn., which had $72 million in assets and $63 million in deposits as of July 24, according to the FDIC. Its deposits have been assumed by Mitchell, S.D.-based CorTrust Bank. Brickwell, based in a Minneapolis-St. Paul suburb, is the third bank to fail in Minnesota this year and will cost the deposit-insurance fund $22 million.

The closures have cost the federal deposit-insurance fund more than $1.7 billion as the credit crisis continues claiming victims.

Links

0