User talk:WikiHelper2134

Barnstar for your edits to Fusion power

 * Yes It was me. I spent a couple of days re-working the topic.  I really hope that it is unbiased.  The main thing was reorganizing the history section by year - not by topic or theme.  That way, it become accessible for other editors to add material.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.0.90.170 (talk) 03:44, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Fusion Power
Why did you remove the word thermonuclear from the tokamak section of Fusion Power? Tokamaks contain a plasma at thermal equilibrium so it has a meaningful temperature and it relies on this temperature to achieve fusion so the word thermonuclear seems entirely appropriate. Devices like the Farnsworth_fusor achieve fusion by giving nuclei high velocities by non thermal mechanisms so cannot be described as thermonuclear. I might be rusty - it has been a while but I am curious about why you think thermonuclear is incorrect. Mtpaley (talk) 23:27, 24 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I am sure it was to make it more readable. It was clearly important to you.  Change it back.

Nomination of Phoenix Nuclear Labs for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Phoenix Nuclear Labs is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Phoenix Nuclear Labs until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ukexpat (talk) 18:36, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Polywell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Work. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:LLE Founding Photo 1976.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:LLE Founding Photo 1976.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text   below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:36, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:StephenODeanPicture.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:StephenODeanPicture.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Animalparty-- (talk) 05:52, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Lets hash this out
This seems like as good a place as any. You said on your fusion page:

"Lawson Criterion and the triple product. The two issues should be separated, John Lawson wrote about the energy balance not a triple product."

The original paper contains a basic discussion of what we would now call the triple product in equation 4 and the following paragraph. His statement about the difficulty of fusion specifically references it. Although he uses a different R, the totality of the statement "a useful reactor T myst exceed 10^8 degrees and nt must exceed 10^16" is, IMHO, a description of the triple product.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that there are two concepts here, the energy balance and the triple product. My concern is the statement that they can be separated, and that Lawson didn't write about it.

So to abuse experimenter effect a bit, let's see what the greater world says about all this:


 * this page at EUROfusion says "The genesis of Lawson’s Criteria is simple enough – he calculated the requirements for more energy to be created than is put in, and came up with a dependence on three quantities: temperature (T), density (n) and confinement time (τ). With only small evolution thanks to some subtle changes of definition, this is basically the same figure of merit used by today’s fusion scientists – the triple product, nτT."
 * this definition from the same site states "Lawson’s Criteria specified a minimum value for the product of three parameters, plasma density (n), confinement time (τ) and temperature (T)."
 * HyperPhysics defines the criterion in terms of triple product.
 * this presentation from Lehigh does the same.
 * as does Rochester.
 * the CEA combines the two concepts,
 * although this one doesn't,
 * but then this one does.

While hardly rigourous, overall it would seem that "the field" considers the two concepts to be flip sides of the same coin. While I would agree that the current article on the criterion is not all that it can be, I would argue against separating these two concepts too firmly.

Maury Markowitz (talk) 15:03, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

I apologize it took me several months to see your message. I agree with your statement that most fusion researchers see the Lawson Criteria as setting a minimum density, temperature and time. The tokamak and ICF crowd uses this as a way to excuse lots of fusion approaches - and justify their funding, so this is a really important concept.

The original paper did start with an energy balance - which many people are unaware of - and yes it moved to a triple product. This has become a "minimum" triple product in the past 60 years. But, I think the balance is a more important concept, because it connects lots of problems seen in modern fusion research: plasma loss by conduction, energy lost by radiation, device efficiency and fusion rates. But - admittedly - that is just a opinion. In my opinion, using the energy balance is a much more comprehensive way to measure fusion approaches, then the triple product.

I cannot argue this position fully because I do not have enough information. For example, I do not fully understand the steps to take this energy balance to a minimum triple product. I suspect that there are assumptions built into those steps (for example assuming that you can only capture a maximum % of the energy from a fusion reactor). I also would love to see the measurements connecting radiation loss to confinement, plasma composition and temperature - which would be critical for finding a minimum set of conditions. I have some documents I want to read which I hope can explain this better:

1. Wessons' tokamak textbook walks the reader through the steps

2. Irvin Lindemuths' 2009 paper: "The fundamental parameter space of controlled thermonuclear fusion" American Journal of Physics 77, 407 (2009); doi: 10.1119/1.3096646 By Irvin R. Lindemuth and Richard E. Siemon

3. Re-checking Lawson's original paper

I called up Dr. Lindemuth, who spent a long time thinking about this and in his opinion the triple product had been oversold. He told me: "it is not clear that: reaching minimum triple is a guarantee that a concept will work and that not reaching a minimum triple will guarantee that a concept will fail".

But, I need some time to research this idea some more. I would also add that if you surveyed a group of fusion graduate students, or physics students they would tell you that lawson means a minimum triple, without knowing why. WikiHelper2134 (talk) 22:52, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:The Gas Dynamic Trap Photo.png
Thanks for uploading File:The Gas Dynamic Trap Photo.png, which you've attributed to Dr. Thomas Simonen. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 15:40, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

RESPONSE
Hi, I have the permission from Dr. Peter Bagryansky who works on the Gas Dynamic Trap:

we agree to provide written consent for the use of drawings and photographs. Please tell me how to do it. Attached please find a couple of pictures more. You can use them if you see fit. With kind regards Peter Bagryansky

I will adjust the reference and forward on the info. WikiHelper2134 (talk) 14:21, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Magnetic mirror, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Plasma. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:26, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:StephenODeanPicture.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:StephenODeanPicture.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION : This is an automated, BOT-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate your file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Mirror Fusion Test Facility During Construction.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:The Mirror Fusion Test Facility During Construction.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 20:21, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Fusion Power Associates


The article Fusion Power Associates has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Non-notable with zero sources"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  — Keithbob • Talk  • 23:17, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Deletion pending for File:The Large-S FRC Machine.png
Hello, WikiHelper2134. Some time ago, a file you uploaded &mdash; File:The Large-S FRC Machine.png &mdash; was tagged with OTRS pending, indicating that you (or perhaps the copyright holder if you did not create this image) submitted a statement of permission to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Though there is often a backlog processing messages received at this address, we should have received your message by now.


 * If you have not submitted (or forwarded) a statement of permission, please send it immediately to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and let us know at the OTRS noticeboard that you have done so.


 * If you have already sent this message, it is possible that there was a problem receiving it. Please re-send it to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and let us know at the OTRS noticeboard that you have done so.

If we don't hear from you within one week, the file will be deleted. If we can help you, please feel free to ask at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 15:47, 27 February 2018 (UTC)