In fusion, there will always be at least three particles involved because momentum has to be conserved also. The neutron always has the same mass when free. My book mentions that when alpha decay happens ,a decrease in mass turns into kinetic energy gained by the products.įor any decay, since energy is a conserved quantity, adding the new masses and finding a deficit, means that kinetic energy must be taken by the decay products. But if there are too many neutrons, they are not in a stable energy, but there is a probability that the weak decay will generate a beta decayī)The solution of the collective potential after adding a neutron may push the nucleus into an unstable energy level, as happens with Uranium. When bound in the nucleus in a stable energy level it will not decay, and it helps overcome the electrostatic repulsion of protons between them.
#FISSION FUSION FREE#
Why does adding a new neutron or more to any nucleus without changing the number of protons, make the nucleus unstable?Ī)The neutron when free decays within 13 minutes. In general adding a proton or a neutron may change a nucleus to a less bound one that has a high probability of decay, or may immediately break up as with uranium nuclei ( see the other answer). There might be spontaneous decay to lighter nuclei, the sum of which will release energy. How stable a nucleus is, is a solution of the quantum mechanical problem of having so many nucleons bound in a "box", there are stable and unstable levels, as the other answer states, that depend on the number of protons and neutrons and how the levels are filled. How much energy would be needed to set a nucleon free.įission happens to nuclei after Fe to the right in the plot, fusion to light nuclei on the left of F It shows against n+m how bound is each nucleon(proton or neutron) within the nucleus. The difference is what generates this plot: If you have n free protons and m free neutrons, the sum of the masses of the free nucleons is always larger than the same n+m bound in a nucleus.
Aking to how the van der Waals interaction is a remnant of the EM force. The nucler force is a remnant of the strong force and is what holds the nucleons together. $\dagger$: the strong force hold the quarks together inside the nucleons. The process of losing mass for energy and vice versa in fission and fusions, shouldn't the mass for the neutrons shot out of the mass increase back and that's it? where would energy come from? does it mean the decrease of mass because of the lost neutrons and protons or what? My book mentions that when alpha decay happens ,a decrease in mass turns into kinetic energy gained by the products. why does adding a new neutron or more to any nucleus without changing the number of protons, make the nucleus unstable? This question is related to the above one neutrons are supposed to be the main factor of nucleus stability because it contributes in the strong force. In fission, does the nucleus divide because of the collision between the neutron and the heavy nucleus, or because the nucleus would become unstable after the mass number has increased.
My high school physics book doesn't elaborate the idea of binding energy and how it's related to fission and fusion adequately in a way that made me have wrong thoughts about these ideas.
0 kommentar(er)
