Bogdan Maglich: Migma Fusion

![](0logo.gif)  
**[rexresearch.com](../index.htm)**

---

**Bogdan MAGLICH**

**Migma Fusion**

---

**[Bogdan Maglich: Aneutronic Energy](#aneutr)**
  
**[B. Maglich: *Harper's Weekly Magazine*
(October 6, 1975)](#harper)**   
**[S.R. Channon, et al.: *Phys. Rev.* A
17: 407-409 (January 1978)](#phys)**   
**[Note](#note)**   
**[References](#refs)**   
**[D.E. Thomsen: *Science News* (March
9, 1985); *ibid*., (September 16, 1987)](#scinews)**   
**[B.Maglich: British Patent # 1,422,545 ~
Nuclear Fusion Reactors](migma.htm)**   
**[B. Maglich: Migmacell -- A Low-Gain
"Driven" Fusion Power Amplifier as an Interim Energy Source](migma2.htm)**

---

 **ANEUTRONIC ENERGY: A Search for
Non-RadioacticeNon-Proliferating Nuclear Power**

**Dr. Bogdan Maglich**

The Tesla Foundation Inc. ~ P.O. Box 3037 ~ Princeton, New
Jersey 08543 USA

Can we design a nuclear power source that --- like Robbie in
Asimov's classic tale "I, Robot" --- is pre-programed never to
harm a human?

Can there be a nuclear process whose fuel will never be
converted into nuclear weapons?

The recent report (1) of a special committee of the U.S.
National Research Council implies that the world may be only one
step away from being able to say "yes" to both of these
questions. Conclusions of the First International Symposium on
Feasibility of Aneutronic Power, held at the Institute for
advanced Study in Princeton in the Fall of 1987, suggest that
this last step may well be imminent.

**What is Aneutronic?**

Energy-releasing nuclear reactions involving nonradioactive
nuclei (both as the reactants and reaction products) and
producing no neutrons have been known for half a century. We
define a nuclear reaction as "aneutronic" if not more than 1% of
the total energy released is carried by neutrons and if not more
than 1% of the reactants ("fuel") and reaction products
("waste") are radionuclides. The definition is somewhat
arbitrary and serves only as a guideline. Their product in all
cases is predominantly helium, a nonradioactive inert gas.

**Success of the Migma IV Experiment~**

In an experiment carried out in 1982, referred to as Migma IV,
AELabs demonstrated that a 1-Mev deuteron migma can be
neutralized by oscillating electrons and exceed the space charge
limit density without instability. Fuel density of migma was
1000 times lower than that of the best tokamak but migma's
temperature was 100 times higher than that of the best tokamak
and its confinement 15 times longer, so that their product is
1,500 times higher than that in tokamak. The migma program had
spent $23 million over 10 years. The Western world has spent $10
billion on the conventional plasma fusion program over the past
30 years.

Reflecting this development, the Senate's Appropriations
Committee stated in 1982:

"To date, basic research in the field of nuclear fission and
fusion has largely overlooked the potential for aneutronic
nuclear alternatives using light metals, such as lithium, that
produce no radioactive side effects. The Committee recommends
that the Department of Energy give higher priority to this
non-radioactive and non proliferative nuclear potential."

**Strategic and Commercial Ramifications of Aneutronic Power ~**

A: Aerospace --- low reactor weight because of no need for
shielding as well as very large power-to-weight ratio; low fuel
weight (100,000 X more concentrated fuel energy than non-nuclear
fuels); 10% lower fuel cost than uranium (for dirty
fission);reasonable fuel availability; lower plant capital cost;
no heat pollution; modular - units as small as 1 megawatt may be
economical.

B: Power supply for radar and telecommunications --- The
smallest aneutronic power plant (30 KWe), similar to the
proposed Migma V, would have a wide application: this is the
power needed to run a radar or CCC station.

C: Naval application --- The advantage of lightweight
aneutronic power production also applies to ship propulsion,
where specific power is less critical than in aerospace case.

D: Terrestrial applications for utilities --- First, an
aneutronic reactor can be small, producing megawatts of electric
(MWe), while the minimum economical size of a fission or
(projected) fusion power plant is about 1000 MWe. Hence, the
small nuclear power plant, impossible today, becomes feasible. A
small power unit implies mass production, which results in lower
capital cost per kilowatt of capacity than with large reactors
that are built one or two at a time. (Initial capital cost is
one of the major barriers to nuclear energy in developing
countries and smaller communities of developed countries).
Second, there are clear environmental advantages of
nonradioactive fuel, nonradioactive waste, and the absence of
waste heat (heat pollution).

E: Non-Proliferation --- Absence of neutrons means that the
aneutronic reactor cannot breed plutonium for nuclear weapons.
Since radioactive fuel, radioactive waste, heat pollution, and
proliferation are the main current environmental and political
issues for nuclear power, the implications of aneutronic nuclear
energy for the environment are obvious: not only an acceptable
but an attractive nuclear power technology.

Article Source: Nu Energy Horizons, Inc., P. O. Box 22, Rumney,
New Hampshire 03266-0022

---

***Harpers Weekly Magazine* (Vol. LXIV, No. 3143 ~
October 6, 1975) ~**

**"Will Migma Fusion End the Energy Crisis?"**

**by Bogdan Maglich**

**Fighting for the Idea ~**

In 1969, while I was working in high-energy physics with a
physicist by the name of Macek, we developed the principle of
self-colliding particle orbits. We published a paper then,
called "Fusion Reactions in Self-Colliding Orbits", but we said
it was a completely impractical device. The first time I
realized that the migma idea could have practical applications
was in 1972.

Then, unfortunately, I had an accident where my finger was
badly cut and I had to have four operations, so I was pretty
well tied up at home. I had a lot of time to make calculations,
and then the idea of high-energy nuclear fusion developed.

The patent application was submitted in April 1972, and its
still being kicked back and forth at the Patent Office. We have
been granted patents in some other countries, but not in the
United States. It is very unusual for something so utterly new
to be patented. The patent examiners very often return things
for further information. They just dont understand, because
there is no earlier invention.

As soon as we applied for a patent we felt we needed three
tests, which would cost $3 million, so we applied to the Atomic
Energy Commission. After almost a year, we were turned down.
They said nothing wrong was found, but the policy of the
government was to pursue other fusion schemes that were further
ahead.

As soon as we were turned down, Rutgers University --- where I
was then a professor --- took the attitude that if the
government turns you down there must be something wrong. Among
professors there was the same attitude, surprisingly, although
experts who analyzed our project found that there was nothing
wrong. Nevertheless, the chairman of the department, a new man
from the National Science Foundation, came and said, "Oh, at NSF
I talked to the experts who have been in the field 20 years, and
they say it will not work".

This opposition weve met is nothing new, and as a scientist I
find it very invigorating, particularly when we see that we are
winning. Three years ago we were considered total idiots. Two
years ago some people were saying, well, it looks rather crazy,
but there may be something to it. Now the skepticism is
disappearing so fast, what better recognition do you want to see
than something like that?

**Revolt of the Plasma People ~**

Clearly, there is nothing wrong with our scheme. I think our
opposition has come from the vested interests in plasma fusion.
These people have been in the field 25 years. Ever since the
hydrogen bomb exploded they have made their careers in plasma
fusion. They are developing devices for then year 2000, so they
dont have goals that can be made and immediately verified. They
will retire and be on their retirement funds by that time, so
they can actually keep developing this for the rest of their
lives.

And, I may add, its a very closed community. The people in the
CTR [Controlled Thermonuclear Research] division at the AEC are
all ex-researchers from various plasma labs who have been
working on this idea for the last 25 years, mainly those who
were not very successful in experimental research and were
kicked upstairs to become bureaucrats. Their loyalties lie with
these labs. With the huge amounts of money at stake, it is not a
scientific question anymore.

I dont get angry, but our opponents get very angry. They start
shouting, "Weve been in this field so many years", and so on.
At the AEC last year, two fusion experts, the military and
Congresspeople were there. We asked them, Okay, so just tell us
why this will not work. One man who is a very famous plasma
theorist said, "Well, there are certain rules of thumb that we
have learned over the last 20 years in plasma, certain rules of
thumb". I said, "Please write down the equation for the rule of
thumb. What kind of scientific approach is that?"

These "rules of thumb" really mean ingrained thinking. For
instance, one of their ideas is that the more ordered a system
is, the less likely it is to produce energy. Thats because
theyre working on a random system. Plasma fusion is random.
Their second belief is that we will not succeed in getting high
densities, which we are already working on now.

Because of this opposition, we had to form our own corporation
with one objective: to raise funds for Rutgers to build a lab.
The reaction at Rutgers back then was incredible, very
emotional. For a professor to bring $3 million to Rutgers was
unrealistic, and, formally, we were turned down. In the
meantime, the Navy came to Rutgers and favorably reviewed our
project. Then the president of Switzerland, their ex-minister of
energy, ordered a review of migma --- I have lived in
Switzerland and I go there quite often.

At that time something unusual happened. A big Swiss aluminum
corporation called Alusuisse came in and said they would give us
$3 million for one third of the stock, which we agreed to. To
avoid speculation, we have not sold stock to any individuals. We
had people here from Merrill Lynch and many other houses asking
for stock, and many individuals, but we feel that selling stock
would be wrong because we do not guarantee that we will make a
source that will be the answer to humanitys prayers for energy.

Now we do plan to bring in a new group of high-technology
American investors, not just any corporations, but corporations
that know the ups and downs of research. We know we are going to
have ups and downs and delays, so we want to get companies that
are sophisticated in their corporate structure and that know
that things are not always rosy.

We have private investors now, but we will also be willing to
take money from the government, We are not turning down money;
its just that it takes a tremendous effort to raise money. You
almost have to stop doing research just to keep coming to
Washington to negotiate a $10 million deal. We would have to
triple our staff. Without government aid, we can operate with
simplicity. We have practically no administration, and all our
management is technology management.

**The Future of Migma Power ~**

This country has shown that once a principle has been
demonstrated --- like in the case of the atomic bomb --- we can
put so many resources and so much technological manpower into a
project that it will take very little time to produce an
economical device. Once we demonstrate that we can produce even
the smallest amount of electricity from the Migma Principle,
there will be all kinds of migmacells.

First there will be single units used for military
applications, because the military does not care about economy.
The Air Force is very interested in having a compact power
source to power a laser, because the whole future of warfare is
laser warfare. The Navy is interested in having remote
underwater power stations to detect Soviet submarines. These
military applications could be developed in 5 years from the
moment the principle is shown.

The next step is to develop a migmacell of one megawatt, which
can then be stacked into any configuration. A big nuclear power
plant is a thousand megawatts, and a cube of migmacells ten
units on a side will give you as much power as a large nuclear
power plant. Our calculations show that a migmacell power plant
can produce as much as six megawatts, enough for some small
local power stations, but in a space about 4 feet in diameter.

We had envisioned individual household power units, but we were
told by the Westinghouse people that it takes them about 8 to 10
years just to develop a new concept for something like a
toaster, because household people just always push the wrong
buttons at the wrong times. With the household units about a
decade away, its better to have professional manpower to use
for a block or a section of a town, or even a single building,
but attended by somebody who really knows what he is doing.

**Migma at the Moment ~**

Where does our project stand now? The first test was to make
migma. A first, migma was a very beautiful computer drawing of
an ordered system, and our first experiment was to demonstrate
that it could be made. We have done this. Weve shaped a beam of
nuclei so that it comes back and collides with itself. The
products are mostly charged particles carrying the nuclear
energy.

So we do have fusion, but the only way we can prove that the
fusion is coming from the migma is to demonstrate that the
fusion rate obeys the basic law of colliding beams, the
quadratic law, which states that the collision rate is
proportional to the square of the beam intensity. We are taking
the very strict attitude that the only way to prove fusion is to
prove the quadratic law experimentally. This is what we are
doing now, in a test that may last from 6 to 8 months.

This is our second test, but that is still not enough. We
really want to break even. We want to have the energy out to be
equal to the energy in. Our third test is to compact more
nuclei. Since the nuclei all have the same positive charge,
were going to put negative charges in the migma to overcome
their natural repulsion. In this way, we hope to build the
density of the migma and reach the break-even point.

Our current plan is to get an experimental confirmation of the
last two tests within the next 18 months. Our next objective is
to build an operational prototype fusion power plant which will
be the first to produce more than break-even energy. At the rate
we are working now, this will take from 4 to 6 more years.

I spent 6 months approaching the leading scientists in the
country in every field, including Nobel Prize winners, to set up
one meeting here which lasted two days. At the end of June, we
presented our theories and our work at a meeting of independent
scientific and engineering consultants whom we hired to evaluate
our project and report their findings to our board of directors.
They unanimously endorsed the project. Not only did they say
they found nothing wrong with the principle, but they said they
saw nothing that will prevent it from working.

When I formed this committee of consultants and informed some
of our business people, they said they had never heard of
anything such as this, where the president of a company invites
such an independent board that can essentially demolish you. But
we received their unanimous endorsement.

The general belief that fusion will not be conquered before the
next millennium is bases on misguided research in plasma fusion.
In my opinion, effecting controlled fusion is a relatively easy
task, provided that one gets rid of all old concepts and accepts
the high-energy fusion concept.

The US Energy Research and Development Administration is not
supporting one clean fusion project. Their projects are all
based on tritium, an artificial isotope which is highly
radioactive.

We are being criticized for keeping our work too quiet, but I
believe that it is better to make big advances in the lab than
to talk in advance about what you are going to accomplish. To
our knowledge, we are the only group throughout the world that
is working on a totally non-polluting, clean fusion power
source. It is just shocking that, in spite of all the pressure
on the part of environmentalists, the government is not
supporting one nuclear fusion power source that is clean.

![](0maglich.jpg)  
 

![](0harper.jpg)

**Dr Maglich Explains the Nuts and Bolts of Migma Fusion ~**

The first artificial fusion energy reaction which released
significant amount of nuclear energy was the explosion of the
hydrogen bomb in 1952. Since then, physicists have tried without
an explosion to use it as a source of cheap power in the form of
electrical energy.

Until now there have been two approaches to controlled fusion.
As a basic fuel, our method uses the natural isotope of
hydrogen, deuterium, which is not radioactive and which can be
extracted from ordinary water. The oceans contain enough
deuterium fuel to meet our energy needs for millions of years.

In the deuterium fusion process, almost all energy released
goes into charged particles. The kinetic energy of charged
particles can be converted directly into electricity, thus
eliminating cumbersome boilers and turbines, and the heat and
radiation pollution associated with neutrons.

Instead of heating, we use the concept of colliding beams. We
accelerate the nuclei of deuterium to higher speeds than can be
accomplished by heating, and we fire them head-on against each
other at these high speeds.

In our method, we use one single accelerated deuteron beam and
make it collide head-on with itself. This configuration we call
the "figure-of-eight". The deuterons in both the lower and upper
loop move clockwise and collide nearly head-on. As time
progresses, the figure-of-eight configurations superimpose one
on another, until a mixture --- and the Greek word for mixture
is migma --- of orbits has been established. In this mixture the
deuterons being to interact and fuse.

In plasma fusion you heat the ions to high temperatures often
by magnetic means. In laser fusion, you heat the nuclei by
concentrating the power of light. We threw away the concept of
heating. We know better. With heating, the motions are random.
Today, we can direct particles head-on against each other. An
analogue to this process is two machine-gun bullets colliding in
midair. As you realize, its quite difficult to aim bullet
against bullet. Well, weve already mastered that. We can
already aim nuclei to collide head-on.

Now we go even one step further. We have invented a process in
which one beam collides with itself. We shoot a beam and bend it
so that it comes back against itself. The principle doesnt
change; we still have an ordered system.

Migma is an ordered system in which fusion is ignited by
head-on collisions instead of heat. Once you have that, then you
can have much higher collision energies, because in fusion what
counts is the relative velocity with which one nucleus hits
another, not the temperatures involved.

Inside the stars, fusion is accomplished by heating, but we
dont seriously intend to build a star on Earth. We make no
bones that we are building a machine. It has to be done
differently, completely artificially. There is nothing natural
about our process, the same as there is nothing natural about a
rocket or a car engine.

Once we have these higher energies of collision, we can ignite
clean fuel, for example helium-3. Nothing becomes radioactive.
The energy released is carried off by charged bodies --- protons
and nuclei --- which can be collected by a series of
positively-charged plates surrounding the cell. As the
positively-charged bodies approach the plates, they slow down,
giving up their energy to the plates. Connecting an external
circuit to the plates would draw off an electric current.

Our products are clean, and everything is converted directly
into electricity.

---

***Phys. Rev.* A 17: 407-409 (January 1978) ~**

**Estimation of Diamagnetic Limitations to
the Fusion Rate in a Migmacell**

**S. R. Channon, J. E. Golden, and R. A.
Miller**   
**Migma Institute of Clean Fusion, Fusion
Energy Corporation, Princeton, New Jersey 08540**

We describe a two-dimensional analytic calculation of the
equilibrium diamagnetic field strength and shape, applicable in
the regime of high magnetization to the high-energy
low-angular-momentum ion orbits which characterize the
distribution in a Migma fusion device.

---

**www-staff.socs.uts.edu.au/~iwoolf/
txt/discovery/lightfission.txt**

In 1982 Dr Bogdan Maglich carried out experiments with his
"Migma" light fission reactor --- the size of a car tire,
designed to be used as a clean   
source of power in third world countries. It was funded mainly
by an Arabian prince. However in 1991 the funding ran out. No
government was   
interested, because no weapons can be produced from the
technology.

In 1992, in sheer desperation, Dr Maglich sold the US Air Force
on the idea that aircraft, fueled by Migma light fission
reactors could stay in   
the air for years without refuelling. Since the military took it
over, nothing further has been heard of the development of this
technology.

---



**References**

*Chemical Abstracts* 83: 67244q ~ ibid., 83: 105035g ~
ibid., 85: P11484 ~ ibid., 86: 178999q   
*J. Applied Physics* 46(7): 2915-2923 (1975)   
*IEEE Trans. Nuclear Science* NS 22(3): 1736-1742 (1975)   
*Proc. Intersoc. Energy Conversion Conference* 11(2):
1123-1129 (1976)   
*Nuclear Instr. & Methods* 11: 213 (1973)   
*Bull. Amer. Phys. Soc.* 21: 1 (1976)   
*Science News* (March 9, 1985); *ibid*., September
16, 1987   
*Harper'sWeekly* vol. 64 #3143 (October 6, 1975)   
*Planetary Association for CLean Energy Newsletter* (May,
1979); *ibid*., (July/August 1980)

---

***Science News* (March 9, 1985) ~**

**"Migma: An Approach to Neutron-Free
Fusion"**

**By D.E. Thomsen**

Nuclear fusion, according to its proponents, will be the
ultimate cheap-fuel energy source, an answer to the worlds
energy problems --- if they can make it work. Although
significant progress has been made in recent years, development
has been much slower than the first proponents of fusion hoped
when they began 40 years ago.

About 12 years ago, at a meeting of the American Physical
Society, physicist Bogdan Maglich presented an unorthodox method
of approaching fusion. At the time, other physicists were quite
skeptical. Now, in the Feb. 25 *Physical Review Letters*,
Maglich and co-workers report a significant achievement in what
they call "aneutronic fusion" --- "a word so new it is not yet
in any dictionary". Other physicists are still somewhat
reserved.

In principle, "conventional" magnetic fusion experiments
involve the formation of a plasma (consisting of atomic nuclei
and electrons) by ionizing a gas. This plasma is then confined
by a suitably shaped magnetic field and heated to a temperature
at which significant numbers of fusions occur. In practice,
magnetic fields do not confine very well. Instabilities in the
plasmas behavior tend to build up until they enable the plasma
to break out of confinement. So the race is to hold the plasma
at least long enough for a useful number of fusions to occur.

In conventional experiments the plasma is heated so that the
nuclei gain enough energy to overcome the electrical repulsion
between them and so are able to fuse. In Maglichs scheme, which
he calls a migma (from the Greek word for mixture), the nuclei
gain energy not by heating by being accelerated in a linear
accelerator. In the current experiment, deuterons --- the nuclei
of deuterium, an isotope of hydrogen --- come out of the
accelerator with 0.7 Million electron-volts energy, the
equivalent to heating to 7 billion kelvins. They also have a
directed motion rather than the random motions of a thermally
energized plasma. Therefore, a magnetic field can be set up in
the migma cell, as they call the vessel they use, that forces
the nuclei into self-intersecting orbits that form a kind of
rosette around the center of the field. Orbits of this kind
provide many opportunities for nuclei to encounter each other
and fuse.

The containment time in this experiment, 20 seconds, was less
than the 60 seconds of the DCX-1 device, a conventional
experiment chosen for comparison. But the triple product of
energy confinement time and density --- three critical
parameters --- is 10 to 20 times that of DCX-1, and none of the
instabilities formed.

The word "aneutronic" comes from the reaction they ultimately
hope to use, in which hydrogen and lithium fuse to helium with
two protons left over. The easiest reaction (and the goal of
most conventional experiments) is deuterium and tritium yield
helium plus a leftover neutron. The neutron is a penetrating and
potentially dangerous particle. The protons from the lithium
reaction, being electrically charged, are easy to capture and
not damaging. Energy is harvested from these leftover particles
and that, too, is easier with charged particles.

According to James Nering of United Sciences, Inc., in
Princeton NJ, the organization Maglich and co-workers formed to
do these migma experiments, the present experiment used
deuterons because they make measuring and following the
reactioneasier.

In 1973,when Maglich first presented the idea, the physics
community reacted so skeptically that he could not get funds
from the DOE, which funds most of the US fusion program. He did,
however, obtain $20 million in private funds from sources in
Japan, Switzerland, Saudi Arabia, and the USA. Now, according to
an announcement by United Sciences, money is included in the
Defense Appropriations Bill for fiscal year 1985 for a study of
migmas space applications.

---

***Science News* (September 16, 1987) ~**

**"Seeking Aneutronic Nuclear Fusion"**

**By D.E. Thomsen**

"Aneutronic" is a word that has not yet made its way into the
dictionaries.It refers to processes of thermonuclear fusion that
produce few or no neutrons. In energy-producing fusion reactors,
aneutronic processes would have advantages in both safety and in
ease of gathering the energy released. However, this breed of
has had low priorityin the fusion research program funded for
the last 40 years by the DOE and its predecessors. Now something
of a push toward them seems to be developing.

Last week, the Committee on Advanced Fusion Power of the
National Research Councils Air Force Studies Board issue a
report advising the Air Force that research on aneutronic fusion
processes is worth supporting as a possible answer to Air Force
requirements both for electric current and for propulsion. As
the report was issued, many of the interested scientists were
gathered at the Symposium on Feasibility of Aneutronic Power,
meeting at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton NJ.

The study was generally well received, although some people,
particularly Bogdan Maglich of AELabs in Princeton, thought it
too pessimistic in predicting how many years it would take to
bring about practical aneutronic reactors.

Conventional fusion requires confining atomic nuclei at high
density and high temperature. The easiest conditions of
confinement and temperature, and therefore the ones sought first
by the mainstream fusion program, are those for fusion of
deuterium and tritium. However, the energy released in such a
fusion is carried away by neutrons --- dangerous, penetrating
particles, which will yield their energy only by the inefficient
means of heating something.

But in an aneutronic reaction (for example, deuterium and
helium-3), the energy comes off with protons. Protons can be
converted directly into electrical power in the form of radio
waves. Protons are not very damaging or dangerous and so minimal
shielding is necessary. However, in the jargon of the DOE, these
substances are "advanced" fuels because the confinement and
temperature conditions necessary for them go beyond those for
deuterium-tritium.

Proponents of aneutronic fusion say that to the DOE "advanced"
means far in the future or even in the hereafter. But Bruno
Coppi of the Massachusetts Institute of technology argues that
experimentation with deuterium and helium-3 could be done in
some current mainstream experiments --- MITs Alcator, for
example. "You could make with todays technology an experiment
that burns deuterium and helium-3", he says. However, it lacks
funding. Quoting the Swedish physicist Hannes Alfven, one of the
grand old men of this kind of physics, Coppi says that there
seems to be "a conspiracy not to do fusion".

Instead of depending on more or less random encounters of
nuclei that have been heated to overcome their repulsion for one
another, as the mainstream experiments do, aneutronic systems
like Maglichs "migma" use the principle of colliding beams,
directing the nuclei into intersecting orbits, where they are
more likely to encounter each other. "Our position is that the
whole concept of heating to achieve collisions is obsolete", he
says.

The most recent migma experiment, Migma III, achieved
confinement conditions that rival those of conventional
experiments, and did it without the disruptive instabilities
that plague conventional experiments. Migma IV, to be built in
Palatka, FL, in collaboration with the University of Florida at
Gainesville, will attempt to increase the density of nuclei in
the center of the experiment to 300 billion, ten times that of
Migma III, reaching the "space-charge limit", the point where
electric repulsions will prevent further crowding. It will test
whether neutralizing some of the charge by introducing electrons
will permit higher densities, and it will also test predictions
that the resulting plasma should be stable under these
conditions.

If deuterium-helium-3 fusion works out as a source of power, it
will require a continuing supply of helium-3 (Deuterium can be
obtained from sea water). Although helium-3 is rare on earth,
George Miley of the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign
notes that is "one of the most plentiful fuels we can find in
the universe". But we will have to get off the earth to get it.

On earth, the immediate source is radioactive decay of tritium,
a by-product of nuclear fission reactors. According to Miley and
the National Research Council, by the year 2000 we can obtain
about 600 kilograms of helium-3 from tritium decay. This would
run a 200-megawatt power plant for 20 years, "not enough for an
economy", says Miley.

Scientists would have to go to the moon and mine helium-3,
which the solar wind generates in the lunar surface. Ultimately,
when space travel is sophisticated enough, says Miley, we could
get it from Jupiter.

---