This was truly groundbreaking for my understanding of nuclear physics. Three letters W O W. Thankfully i can finally pursue further endeavours in the field of nuclear physics. PS it’s all over the screen, in your next video please can you give me an honourable mention, as tonight I am going to do a come tribute to this video.
Do we know the reason that small elements realease energy when fused, but large elements release when the break apart. You explained clearly that they do , but not the reason they do.
Well, there's no binding energy of the simplest Hydrogen nucleus because it is just one proton, so not bound to anything else. There would be a binding energy associated with a deuterium nucleus (one proton and one neutron) which you could look up.
If He-2 exists it would be clear that the binding force (aka residual strong force) is stronger than the em repuslive force. How much stronger or weaker is it? The strong force inside the nucleons is approx. 137 times stronger than the em force.
Wouldn't the work required to split the nucleons apart be equal to the energy holding them together by the strong force? Where does the extra mass of the nucleons on their own come in?
I know this is an old comment but yes the nuclear binding energy is indeed negative as it represents the amount of mass-energy the system lost as it collapsed into a single nucleus. In this regard, it is comparable to the gravitational binding energy which is also negative as in that case, it is the potential energy lost in the process of gravitational collapse. In both cases, the process brought the system into a lower energy state and the binding energy represents this negative change in energy, it is measuring an energy deficit. This is also why you need to put energy in to reverse the process energy was liberated when the system became bound so you need to put that energy back to unbind the system.
I believe 2 protons and 2 neutrons has an especially high binding energy, and makes up a very stable chunk of nuclear matter. This might explain why an alpha particle is emitted from the nucleus for very large nuclei. Note that the strong force is actually *repulsive* at very close distances.
@@benaryder H-3 (tritium) should also have a strong binding energy as there are 3 nucleons contributing binding force, but only one proton so no em repulsive force. Yet it is unstable and decays. Perhaps there is more going with nuclear binding on than simple offsetting forces( binding and em).
I understand the strong force(inside the nucleons) gets stronger with distance like spring or rubber band, and is responsible for confinement of the quarks. But here we are talking about distances less than 1 fm. Outside the nucleons( distances = or greater than 1 fm) the nuclear binding force holds the nucleons bound together offsetting the em repulsive force of positive charged protons. So, if you have two protons and no netrons in a nucleus (ie, He-2) then you can measure the offset of em and binding force to determine their ratios. If He-2 exists at all. If it doesn't, could that be because the em reulsion is greater than the binding force attraction? And just how close are the two.?
You said , a system bounded with energy has less mass....than when it is weighed in its individual components ...Which is contradictory to Einsteins statement ...That...Bounded system has energy...Which will appear as mass when we weigh it ....
The bound system does NOT have more energy than the unbound system - it has LESS. You can think of binding energy as being negative. You must SUPPLY the energy to break the nucleons apart.
@@benaryder I sometimes find it helpful to relate it to gravitational binding energy to explain that. I find people tend to grasp the concept that the binding energy is the net change in energy when the system enters a bound state if you relate it to a form of energy that is easier to directly observe and experiment with and gravitational potential energy fits the bill nicely there. Nuclear binding energy is probably the least intuitive form of binding energy as it is not easy to demonstrate without equipment most of us can only dream of having access to. Gravitational binding energy is fairly easy to understand as the main thing you need is the big rock below you and any random small object with mass to experiment with how gravitationally bound systems behave.
This was truly groundbreaking for my understanding of nuclear physics. Three letters W O W. Thankfully i can finally pursue further endeavours in the field of nuclear physics. PS it’s all over the screen, in your next video please can you give me an honourable mention, as tonight I am going to do a come tribute to this video.
The most clear, concise and well-illustrated explanation I've seen since being intrigued by John McPhee's book. Thank you.
The graph at the end was a lifesaver. Never understood why fission and fusion both released energy
What can I say... simply and brilliant explained. You have a teacher’s DNA.
Great video. The quality of your video is much higher than what I’m getting in my masters degree. Well done my friend! 👍
Your voice makes me remember this..... Thank you....
A very good and crystall clear Idea of binding energy illustrated in this Video
thank you so much for the effort and especially for taking the time to walk through all the units!!!
Very Good Video.Thanks.Greatly Explained.
u made that so simple to understand.....thanks
Very nice video now I understood the concept
Thank you for the explanation. You did an awesome job.
sufficient explanation to understand binding energy.
the graph is very helpful to understand this material.
Well explained sir ...😄
Do we know the reason that small elements realease energy when fused, but large elements release when the break apart. You explained clearly that they do , but not the reason they do.
Well-explained! Thanks
Very nicely explained! Thanks a lot!!!
Very good video Sir
Awesome video lecture
Thank you very much please l ask howmuch is the binding energy of hydrogen nucluse ?
Well, there's no binding energy of the simplest Hydrogen nucleus because it is just one proton, so not bound to anything else. There would be a binding energy associated with a deuterium nucleus (one proton and one neutron) which you could look up.
If He-2 exists it would be clear that the binding force (aka residual strong force) is stronger than the em repuslive force. How much stronger or weaker is it? The strong force inside the nucleons is approx. 137 times stronger than the em force.
Wouldn't the work required to split the nucleons apart be equal to the energy holding them together by the strong force? Where does the extra mass of the nucleons on their own come in?
I know this is an old comment but yes the nuclear binding energy is indeed negative as it represents the amount of mass-energy the system lost as it collapsed into a single nucleus. In this regard, it is comparable to the gravitational binding energy which is also negative as in that case, it is the potential energy lost in the process of gravitational collapse. In both cases, the process brought the system into a lower energy state and the binding energy represents this negative change in energy, it is measuring an energy deficit. This is also why you need to put energy in to reverse the process energy was liberated when the system became bound so you need to put that energy back to unbind the system.
This was very helpful, thanks man
why is it that a higher binding energy per nucleon mean that energy is released?
He-4 is unusually stable compared to its neighbors. Is this due to the ratio of neutrons to protons 2:1 and the small size of the nucleus itself.?
I meant the ratio of nucleons contributing binding force to nucleos contributing em force which is actually 3:1.
I believe 2 protons and 2 neutrons has an especially high binding energy, and makes up a very stable chunk of nuclear matter. This might explain why an alpha particle is emitted from the nucleus for very large nuclei. Note that the strong force is actually *repulsive* at very close distances.
@@benaryder H-3 (tritium) should also have a strong binding energy as there are 3 nucleons contributing binding force, but only one proton so no em repulsive force. Yet it is unstable and decays. Perhaps there is more going with nuclear binding on than simple offsetting forces( binding and em).
I understand the strong force(inside the nucleons) gets stronger with distance like spring or rubber band, and is responsible for confinement of the quarks. But here we are talking about distances less than 1 fm. Outside the nucleons( distances = or greater than 1 fm) the nuclear binding force holds the nucleons bound together offsetting the em repulsive force of positive charged protons. So, if you have two protons and no netrons in a nucleus (ie, He-2) then you can measure the offset of em and binding force to determine their ratios. If He-2 exists at all. If it doesn't, could that be because the em reulsion is greater than the binding force attraction? And just how close are the two.?
very good explanation
very very good video. thanks!!
Thanku soo much ....this is really helpful ❤️
Thank you for a great explanation and images. (physics teacher)
very very good video. thanks to you. lot helpful.
So clear thank you
If we add two neutron and two proton it releases about 24 eV energy. Then what causes the nuclear force? Is it negative?
Thankyou very much mate
nice
Thank you :)
thank you sir.
You said , a system bounded with energy has less mass....than when it is weighed in its individual components ...Which is contradictory to Einsteins statement ...That...Bounded system has energy...Which will appear as mass when we weigh it ....
The bound system does NOT have more energy than the unbound system - it has LESS. You can think of binding energy as being negative. You must SUPPLY the energy to break the nucleons apart.
@@benaryderI had the same doubt .. but u explained it very well.. thank you so much ❤️
@@benaryder I sometimes find it helpful to relate it to gravitational binding energy to explain that. I find people tend to grasp the concept that the binding energy is the net change in energy when the system enters a bound state if you relate it to a form of energy that is easier to directly observe and experiment with and gravitational potential energy fits the bill nicely there. Nuclear binding energy is probably the least intuitive form of binding energy as it is not easy to demonstrate without equipment most of us can only dream of having access to. Gravitational binding energy is fairly easy to understand as the main thing you need is the big rock below you and any random small object with mass to experiment with how gravitationally bound systems behave.
crystal clear.....
Brilliant
thanks for the great help:)
The first half of the video still helps with chemistry. :derp
Who is here from Qr code
Hit like if u r👍🏻
Where's the QR code printed? I'm intrigued!
Am saved
Thanks
Thank youuuuu
Wow
MEDICALLL PHYSICSSS
Hardly a quantum mechanical calculation !!!
As stated in the video title, it's designed for post-16 physics students, i.e. 16 to 18 year olds.
I also want the derivation of fission and fission reaction
Lol...
E= 1/2 mv² proves that energy and mass are interchangeable.