
12-Year-Old Claims to Have Achieved Nuclear Fusion at Home (2018) - richardhod
http://www.fusor.net/board/viewtopic.php?t=12115#p78866
======
petermcneeley
This looks to be a
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor) and
is a very common hobby fusion project. A very powerful electric field drives
the fusion. No positive energy output from this style of device has ever been
reported.

~~~
mrfusion
There’s really no reason positive energy output should be impossible though? I
guess it’s just a really inefficient design?

~~~
wahern
It is impossible:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor#Radiation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor#Radiation)
The issue is bremsstrahlung radiation. I only have high-school physics
education, but AFAIU basically because the charged particles are constantly
turning inward, the constant negative acceleration radiates energy away. The
faster the particles move in the device, the harder the deceleration, the more
energy they give up relative to the input energy. These losses overcome the
system before the break-even point. The same process limits the energies that
can be achieved in non-linear particle accelerators, like the Large Hadron
Collider; it's why the accelerator ring diameter has to grow to achieve higher
particle energies. The LHC has a circumference of 27 kilometers. Fusors are...
slightly smaller. You don't really need to do the math or understand the
physics to appreciate that Fusors are a dead-end.

It's worth reading the whole article. The Fusor design has a long and
fascinating history. One of the original inventors, Farnsworth, invented
television.

~~~
coolaliasbro
"...it's why the accelerator ring diameter has to grow to achieve higher
particle energies. The LHC has a circumference of 27 kilometers."

Please humor me. Does this mean that if the LHC had x diameter, it would
perform the same if it was 1km in circumference?

~~~
wahern
Bad choice of phrasing on my part as diameter is ambiguous. Also I could only
find a reference for the circumference and was too lazy to derive the diameter
from the circumference to avoid the ambiguity by making it clear which
diameter I was referring to. (EDIT: Diameter is ~8.6km: `echo
"pi=4*a(1);27/pi" | bc -l`.)

It's not the diameter of the tube but the diameter of the circular path the
particles follow through the ring. The greater the circumference the less the
relative angular acceleration (i.e. shallower curvature). To accelerate
particles even faster without giving up most of the extra input energy to
bremsstrahlung radiation you must increase the circumference to maintain the
same relative angular acceleration.

It's Friday and math[1] and physics is not something I can do off the top of
my head so at this point it's better if someone else step in. I won't be able
to describe it correctly without relearning half of this stuff myself.

[1] I mean... the algebra and geometry is rather trivial but it'll take some
effort for me to correct and make more precise the terminology and formulas.

~~~
thaumasiotes
> Also I could only find a reference for the circumference and was too lazy to
> derive the diameter from the circumference to avoid the ambiguity by making
> it clear which diameter I was referring to. (EDIT: Diameter is ~8.6km: `echo
> "pi=4*a(1);27/pi" | bc -l`.)

...is the LHC track a circle?

~~~
rnestler
Not a perfect circle. It consists of multiple arc segments and the detectors
which are straight. See also [https://home.cern/science/accelerators/large-
hadron-collider](https://home.cern/science/accelerators/large-hadron-collider)

------
geoelectric
Worth mentioning there are a number of hobbyists/enthusiasts doing this, and
there's no reason to be skeptical about the result itself. The link in this
post is deep in the same site, but
[http://www.fusor.net/board/index.php](http://www.fusor.net/board/index.php)
is pretty active.

This particular achievement is notable because Jackson Oswalt might have been
the youngest person to home-build a fusor, or at least the youngest to have
spoken up about it.

Also worth noting that this is a year old. Looks like he's been plugging at it
since then:

[https://www.foxnews.com/science/teen-builds-working-
nuclear-...](https://www.foxnews.com/science/teen-builds-working-nuclear-
fusion-reactor-in-memphis-home)

~~~
jcims
I worked with a young guy that built one of these in high school. About a year
after we parted ways I was just randomly considering how long various things I
built would last. Then it occurred to me that the hydrogen atoms that he
snapped together and let loose are still likely floating around out there, and
could conceivably be in the same configuration a hundred billion years from
now.

~~~
tylerhou
Don't feel bad -- it's very possible some of the CO2 that you breathe out
every day will still be in the same configuration a hundred billion years from
now as well.

~~~
Symmetry
Nah, CO2 is absorbed by rock weathering and released by vulcanism. There are
currently 740 gigatons of CO2 in the atmosphere and 1 of those is absorbed
every year by rocks. you should expect that most of the molecules he exhales
are going to be gone in just a millennium.

~~~
tylerhou
The average human exhales around 2.3 pounds of CO2 per day [0]. That means
that in a lifetime (70 years), a human breathes out around 59,000 pounds of
CO2, which is 608,000 moles of CO2 or 3.7 * 10^29 atoms of CO2 [2].

By your gigaton number then there will be on average less than one atom of his
CO2 production in 50,000 years [3].

What happens if we consider total carbon footprint instead? Various sources
cite around 20 metric tons per year as the average carbon footprint for
someone living in the US. That's about 120 times higher than the amount
exhaled, and since log(a*b) = log(a) + log(b) we can just add 3540 years [4]
to our above calculation ~= 54,000 years.

So above a millennium, but much less than a billion years.

[0] [https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2009/08/are-you-
heating-...](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2009/08/are-you-heating-the-
planet-when-you-breathe.html)

[1]
[https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=59000+pounds+%2F+mass+...](https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=59000+pounds+%2F+mass+of+carbon+dioxide)

[2]
[https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=608,000+moles+to+atoms](https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=608,000+moles+to+atoms)

[3]
[https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=-log_(739%2F740)(3.661...](https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=-log_\(739%2F740\)\(3.6614616%C3%9710%5E29\))

[4]
[https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=-log_(739%2F740)(120)](https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=-log_\(739%2F740\)\(120\))

------
mLuby
How much of this is the kid and how much is the parent? Still impressive no
matter what, but I do wonder…

~~~
faissaloo
You will continue to be amazed, kids nowadays have grown up with instant
access to an incomprehensible wealth of knowledge via the internet.

~~~
colmvp
Yup. I was at a ML meetup and one of the kids who was only 12 or so knew
advanced level coding and Tensorflow. Another one was a 16 year old who had
been coding C++ for more than half a decade. They both credit a lot of it to
the internet and the ease of learning which books to acquire.

~~~
yesenadam
In chess, there have now been four 12 year old grandmasters. ('Grandmaster'
isn't an easy title to achieve, needing besides incredibly strong play, a high
rating and doing very well in 3 tournaments with strong international
opposition.) It's because of computers and the internet making every facet of
chess learning/study incomparably faster than a few decades ago. And you can
get a game in seconds anytime online..

There's no-one from before the chess + computer age on the list of the 36
players who've become Grandmasters before their 15th birthday :
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_prodigy#List_of_youngest...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_prodigy#List_of_youngest_grandmasters)

------
eindiran
This reminds me of Taylor Wilson:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_Wilson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_Wilson)

In fact, if the claims are true, he will have beaten Wilson's record as
youngest person to have produced nuclear fusion using a fusor.

~~~
arkades
In his write-up, he explicitly calls out Wilson as his inspiration.

------
maehwasu
Narrator: He hadn’t. And back at the model home, Michael was dealing with a
physics problem of his own.

------
agumonkey
Meanwhile I just made a NiCr wire glow white with an ATX PSU. The race . is .
on.

------
Jun8
By coincidence I'm currently reading _The Boy Who Played with Fusion_
[https://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Played-
Fusion/dp/0544705025](https://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Played-
Fusion/dp/0544705025), which tells the amazing story of Taylor Wilson
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_Wilson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_Wilson))
who performed this feat when he was 14.

It's mind boggling what dedicated kids can achieve with parental backing and
scientist mentors. In Wilson's case places like The Black Hole surplus store
([https://www.roadsideamerica.com/story/18130](https://www.roadsideamerica.com/story/18130))
also greatly helped. Sadly such places are getting rarer.

------
Ancalagon
This is pretty inspirational. Im curious how much a setup like this must cost
though? Cursory investigations into vaccuum costs seem pretty prohibitively
high for a 12 year old, even most middle class parents. Very cool though.

~~~
feedbeef
Looks to be around $1.5-3k USD in his setup photos, likely less if he's using
some used/surplus equipment, which is quite possible. Stainless fittings and
tubing are surprisingly affordable. About $250 for the Deuterium.

Edit: sibling points out it may be $10k. I wonder if that price includes other
equipment not shown. If not, apologies for the gross underestimation ($1.5-3k
seemed reasonable - most of the equipment pricing can be looked up).

------
cubano
"A demo fusor can and has been made in a bell jar with crude vacuum gear and
kluded-up power supply. Most such systems are assembled by younger school age
children (mostly boys save for one pair of girls). The demo fusor often serves
as a science fair project in the 10th to 12th grades of high school. The
better examples have won regional science fairs and a couple of national
events! "[0]

[0]
[http://www.fusor.net/board/viewtopic.php?t=2674](http://www.fusor.net/board/viewtopic.php?t=2674)

~~~
reubenmorais
I don't know why you're quoting that. His device is not a demo fusor, it's
actually producing real nuclear fusion.

~~~
ggm
Where's the neutrons. As in
[https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/964833.Yes_We_Have_No_Ne...](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/964833.Yes_We_Have_No_Neutrons)

------
GuiA
Forum post detailing how he got there:

[http://www.fusor.net/board/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=12120](http://www.fusor.net/board/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=12120)

------
mordant
The fact that he's still alive and kicking undercuts his thesis.

------
asdfologist
(2018)

------
peter_d_sherman
You go, kid! (Applauding)

------
djsumdog
Fusors are totally different from the concept of Low Energy Nuclear Reactions
(LENR) right?

------
vietvu
For how long, on what scale, and how much energy it can create? A lot of
problems

------
rajacombinator
Maybe now he can get into his target high school.

------
LASR
This is certainly a pretty big deal for a 12 year old. But also, it’s a hobby
project that’s been around for decades.

Fusion is something we hear about in the media as being something very hard to
achieve. It’s not. Achieving fusion beyond breakeven - so we can generate
power from it - now that’s a very hard problem. It takes the combined effort
of seven countries and billions of dollars.

~~~
mikeash
Achieving fusion beyond breakeven isn’t super hard either. It’s far from
trivial, but it was figured out almost seventy years ago and produced on an
industrial scale. The hard part is doing it both breakeven and in a way that
lets you send the power to a city without destroying that city.

~~~
iceninenines
???

~~~
GuiA
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermonuclear_weapon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermonuclear_weapon)

------
jacques_chester
This is a prime example of a "too good to check" story.

