Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!dcdwest!ittvax!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!gwyn From: gwyn@brl-tgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) Newsgroups: net.physics Subject: Re: Ball lightening Message-ID: <9585@brl-tgr.ARPA> Date: Fri, 29-Mar-85 14:07:32 EST Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.9585 Posted: Fri Mar 29 14:07:32 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 2-Apr-85 00:20:21 EST References: <56@tekig5.UUCP> Organization: Ballistic Research Lab Lines: 20 > ... Somebody recently claimed that Maxwell's equations > won't allow for a spherical electromagnetic field ... This doesn't appear to have anything to do with ball lightning, though. One does not see the field, but rather ionization paths of the air. > ... a possible containment mechanism for > nuclear fusion ... The problem really is that plasma is inherently unstable; its natural tendency is to undergo oscillations. Trying to contain plasma for very long seems to be fighting Mother Nature. How about working on a continuous-flow process? Get some top-notch chemical engineers in on the system design. This reminds me of Robert Goddard's WWI rockets, which injected a sequence of solid-fuel pellets into the combustion chamber. He later caught onto the idea of liquid propellant and radically altered the nature of rocketry thereby. Perhaps the fusion-via- pellet-implosion people should think about this..