Prev: Don't lose your head trying to predict the future
Next: volume example Re: deriving speed of light out of just pure mathematics; 3rd attempt #592 Correcting Math
From: Bill Bowden on 11 Apr 2010 23:17
On Apr 11, 6:31 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_x> wrote:
> "Bill Bowden" <wrongaddr...(a)att.net> wrote in message
>
> news:2149aac2-5ed6-4f61-add9-13df873c2bb8(a)w17g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
> > If fusion is a process of putting atoms together, and fission is a
> > process of breaking them apart, and both cases produce energy, then it
> > seems somewhat like a perpetual motion machine putting things together
> > and taking them apart while always producing energy. Where does the
> > extra energy come from?
>
> > What am I missing?
>
> > -Bill
>
> That's a very good question, Bill. The thing to notice is that fission
> and fusion take place at opposite ends of the periodic table, with
> uranium (atomic weight 238, atomic number 92) splitting into smaller
> atoms, and hydrogen (atomic weight 1.0079, atomic number 1)
> combining with itself to form the heavier atom of helium (atomic
> weight 4.0026, atomic number 2).
> 4 * 1.0079 (H) = 4.0316, so 4.0316(He) -4.0026 = 0.029 units of atomic
> mass have radiated, so the sun shines.
> Atomic weight is the mass, atomic number is the charge, so the charge
> of 4 protons (H) has lost 2 (He) and two electrons are missing, two
> neutrons have appeared.
> In the middle of the table is iron, cobalt, nickel and copper from which
> you will not get much energy by either fission or fusion, it has reached
> the bottom.
> What we do not know is the precise method by which hydrogen ( of
> which there is plenty) can combine all the way up to the heavier elements,
>  but it is theorised that this takes place in stars which implode/explode as
> supernovae and compress the lighter elements into the heavy in a final
> cataclysmic bang, so small chunks like the Earth (with a molten iron
> core) break off and the heavier elements that go with it have picked up
> some energy in the final cataclysm.
> We can never know for certain what goes on inside stars, we can only
> theorise.

Thanks, that clarifies a bit. I guess the idea is on the way up from
the bottom, energy is obtained from electrons changing into neutrons
and some mass disappearing. Not sure how electrons change into
neutrons, or why the difference of potential. I get the general idea
of the strong nuclear force acting like a locked spring, so energy is
released when the lock breaks, but that's about it.

So, on the way down, energy is obtained when the strong nuclear force
loses hold (like a compressed spring with a open lock) and the atom
breaks apart into smaller atoms of less mass?

And nobody knows how we get from ground zero past the iron/nickel
center barrier on the way up, other than it probably happens in
exploding stars?

Still sounds like witchcraft to me.

-Bill
From: J. Clarke on 11 Apr 2010 23:15
On 4/11/2010 9:31 PM, Androcles wrote:
>
> "Bill Bowden" <wrongaddress(a)att.net> wrote in message
> news:2149aac2-5ed6-4f61-add9-13df873c2bb8(a)w17g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>> If fusion is a process of putting atoms together, and fission is a
>> process of breaking them apart, and both cases produce energy, then it
>> seems somewhat like a perpetual motion machine putting things together
>> and taking them apart while always producing energy. Where does the
>> extra energy come from?
>>
>> What am I missing?
>>
>> -Bill
>
> That's a very good question, Bill. The thing to notice is that fission
> and fusion take place at opposite ends of the periodic table, with
> uranium (atomic weight 238, atomic number 92) splitting into smaller
> atoms, and hydrogen (atomic weight 1.0079, atomic number 1)
> combining with itself to form the heavier atom of helium (atomic
> weight 4.0026, atomic number 2).
> 4 * 1.0079 (H) = 4.0316, so 4.0316(He) -4.0026 = 0.029 units of atomic
> mass have radiated, so the sun shines.
> Atomic weight is the mass, atomic number is the charge, so the charge
> of 4 protons (H) has lost 2 (He) and two electrons are missing, two
> neutrons have appeared.
> In the middle of the table is iron, cobalt, nickel and copper from which
> you will not get much energy by either fission or fusion, it has reached
> the bottom.
> What we do not know is the precise method by which hydrogen ( of
> which there is plenty) can combine all the way up to the heavier elements,
> but it is theorised that this takes place in stars which implode/explode as
> supernovae and compress the lighter elements into the heavy in a final
> cataclysmic bang, so small chunks like the Earth (with a molten iron
> core) break off and the heavier elements that go with it have picked up
> some energy in the final cataclysm.
> We can never know for certain what goes on inside stars, we can only
> theorise.

It's more than "theory". Heavy elements of all kinds have been detected
in numerous supernova remnants, with little hydrogen or helium.

And no "small chunks break off"--when the stuff is formed it is in an
effing SUPERNOVA, it's not solid, it's plasma that condenses to hot gas
and eventually to dust as it cools.


From: Androcles on 12 Apr 2010 00:27

"Bill Bowden" <wrongaddress(a)att.net> wrote in message
news:00a2fe52-3695-4911-a087-7f3779851cb0(a)y36g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 11, 6:31 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_x> wrote:
> "Bill Bowden" <wrongaddr...(a)att.net> wrote in message
>
> news:2149aac2-5ed6-4f61-add9-13df873c2bb8(a)w17g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
> > If fusion is a process of putting atoms together, and fission is a
> > process of breaking them apart, and both cases produce energy, then it
> > seems somewhat like a perpetual motion machine putting things together
> > and taking them apart while always producing energy. Where does the
> > extra energy come from?
>
> > What am I missing?
>
> > -Bill
>
> That's a very good question, Bill. The thing to notice is that fission
> and fusion take place at opposite ends of the periodic table, with
> uranium (atomic weight 238, atomic number 92) splitting into smaller
> atoms, and hydrogen (atomic weight 1.0079, atomic number 1)
> combining with itself to form the heavier atom of helium (atomic
> weight 4.0026, atomic number 2).
> 4 * 1.0079 (H) = 4.0316, so 4.0316(He) -4.0026 = 0.029 units of atomic
> mass have radiated, so the sun shines.
> Atomic weight is the mass, atomic number is the charge, so the charge
> of 4 protons (H) has lost 2 (He) and two electrons are missing, two
> neutrons have appeared.
> In the middle of the table is iron, cobalt, nickel and copper from which
> you will not get much energy by either fission or fusion, it has reached
> the bottom.
> What we do not know is the precise method by which hydrogen ( of
> which there is plenty) can combine all the way up to the heavier elements,
> but it is theorised that this takes place in stars which implode/explode
> as
> supernovae and compress the lighter elements into the heavy in a final
> cataclysmic bang, so small chunks like the Earth (with a molten iron
> core) break off and the heavier elements that go with it have picked up
> some energy in the final cataclysm.
> We can never know for certain what goes on inside stars, we can only
> theorise.

Thanks, that clarifies a bit. I guess the idea is on the way up from
the bottom, energy is obtained from electrons changing into neutrons
and some mass disappearing. Not sure how electrons change into
neutrons, or why the difference of potential.
=======================================
Whoa, I hope I didn't imply that. Rather that a proton (+ve charge,
atomic number 1, mass 1), plus an electron (-ve charge -1, mass
negligible) result in a neutron and some charge loss or cancellation,
and some mass (whatever that is) converted to energy which is
carried away as photons.
So it seems as if charge and mass are intricately linked in some way
which the popular models do not represent. In order to detect mass
we use the force of gravity, we "weigh" ourselves by compressing
a spring that resides between us and the Earth, and call that a
"bathroom scale". I have no idea what matter IS, and nor does
anyone else, we rely on models to explain phenomena and the models
are imperfect.
=============================================
I get the general idea
of the strong nuclear force acting like a locked spring, so energy is
released when the lock breaks, but that's about it.
=============================================
That may not be such a bad model, especially if the locked spring
is gravity itself rather than a special different force. Consider that
a magnet doesn't have much of a field around it if you place an
iron bar across the poles. That's a very easy thing to experiment
with.
If proton repels proton electrically yet proton attracts proton
gravitationally we have something of a balance and an intermediate
neutron can add more gravity without adding any charge. Then
having "used up" the gravitational field there is little left over to
attract other atoms, and electrons balance the protons electrically.
I've never been a fan of the strong and weak nuclear forces as
separate from the Gravitational, Electric and Magnetic forces,
I like things simple.

RULES OF REASONING IN PHILOSOPHY.
RULE I.
We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true
and sufficient to explain their appearances.

To this purpose the philosophers say that Nature does nothing in vain, and
more is in vain when less will serve; for Nature is pleased with simplicity,
and affects not the pomp of superfluous causes. -- Sir Isaac Newton,
"Principia Mathematica".

===============================================

So, on the way down, energy is obtained when the strong nuclear force
loses hold (like a compressed spring with a open lock) and the atom
breaks apart into smaller atoms of less mass?

================================================

It takes a spontaneous breakdown with three loose neutrons flying off to
trigger a chain reaction.

================================================
And nobody knows how we get from ground zero past the iron/nickel
center barrier on the way up, other than it probably happens in
exploding stars?
================================================
Yeah, that's about it. Still plenty of room for research in that area.

================================================
Still sounds like witchcraft to me.
================================================
TV would be witchcraft to anyone living in medieval times, a Boeing 767 or
Airbus 380 is more comfortable than a broomstick or flying carpet, ice cream
in a refrigerator would be incredible. We live in an age of witchcraft, we
have electricity. If you don't understand how it works then it is magic.
"Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who is fairest of them all?" Closed circuit TV
showed the Wicked Queen how Snow White was shacked up with seven short
miners in the forest. "Hi Ho, Hi Ho, It's off to work we go..." Walter
Disney was a wizard, too.





From: Bill Bowden on 12 Apr 2010 00:32
On Apr 11, 7:44 pm, Sammy Sams <s...(a)nunya.biz> wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 17:40:31 -0700, Bill Bowden wrote:
>
> > What am I missing?
>
> You are missing an education in elementary science that
> should be available to any inhabitant of the developed
> world.
>
> Please answer the following questions so that we can
> elucidate the error:
>
> Where did you go to grade school?
>
> What high school did you attend, and what subjects
> formed the curriculum?
>
> Maybe a class action lawsuit can be initiated against
> the local school board.  The original posting can be
> used as evidence of severe malpractice.

No, that was too long ago before the stars exploded. Science wasn't
taught in elementary schools when I was there, and most of the schools
have disappeared, just like the electrons that turn into neutrons.

-Bill
From: Sam Wormley on 12 Apr 2010 09:09
On 4/11/10 10:17 PM, Bill Bowden wrote:
> Thanks, that clarifies a bit. I guess the idea is on the way up from
> the bottom, energy is obtained from electrons changing into neutrons
> and some mass disappearing. Not sure how electrons change into
> neutrons, or why the difference of potential.

Electrons are stable particles and don't change into anything.
However electrons can interact with other particles, such as
electron-positron annihilation. It is thought than sort of the
reverse of neutron decay takes place in the formation of neutron
stars. p + e ==> n

See: http://www.astro.wisc.edu/~heroux/images/Particle_chart.jpg

Also keep in mind, the Law of Conservation of Energy and the
laws of thermodynamics -- no free energy.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Don't lose your head trying to predict the future
Next: volume example Re: deriving speed of light out of just pure mathematics; 3rd attempt #592 Correcting Math