"Someday, they said, if they're right, a machine just 20 times bigger could run the city of Santa Fe." - The Santa Fe News Imagine if you could spend 200,000 dollars on a machine, which satisfied all your energy needs. Imagine there was a machine which produced bountiful electricity with no carbon footprint and no radiation. Imagine if that machine held the capacity to make space exploration a real possibility. If that were true, then such a machine would be the greatest invention of our time. That is a big IF. That is the claim that Dr. Robert Bussard is making with his Polywell device. He is claiming that he has designed a machine which will create bountiful energy, with no radiation and no carbon footprint. Such a claim is hard to stomach. It is hard to believe. This video attempts to take a hard look at this claim. Where does it make sense? Where does it falter? How valid is it, from a rough engineering analysis. This is by no means comprehensive. I do not claim to be an expert. Hopefully, this will spark a conversation, and further investigation by honest experts, into this validity of this device. ----------- Magnetic Containment Field: The Whiffle ball Effect This is the big question mark of the experiment. Can Dr. Bussards device create a spherical magnetic containment field? Bussard claims he can. Moreover, he claims what he created is a Whiffle ball containment field; electrons are mainly trapped, except for leak holes on the sides of the field. The leaking allows electrons to re-circulate. Bussard does give us a hint as to how it works in his Google talk: As you push the magnetic field out, the scaling ceases to be mirror scaling and becomes cusp confinement scaling that scales at 1/magnetic field strength^2.. In essence, what happens is the electron cloud in the center presses against the magnetic field. In the push and pull of forces, a Whiffle ball field is formed. It is: very much like blowing up a balloon. The Whiffle ball is also determined by the placement of the magnetic rings on the side. Their placement is critical; as Bussard explains in his letter: so that no B field uniquely penetrated the cans, and then placed the coils in a special array so that no corners touched (this latter is a long topic having to do with local B fields, and loss of Wiffle Ball trapping due to line cusp effects at the corners, etc, etc, and is the basis of our final patents on this thing). It IS the details that make or break the device. And this particular set of details absolutely dominates the performance. An analogy can be made to focusing light using lens. In the same manner, it seems the precise placement of these magnetic rings is critical to the device performance. At Google, Dr. Bussard mentions the distance between the edges as some multiple of the gyro radii.