thank you for the explanation Paul. Just one thing to maybe watch out for - when you were summing up the particles on the left and right side of the reaction, you wanted to write 4 H, but instead there was 4H with the 4 being upper index. That might confuse someone into thinking it is a nucleus with Z=4.
Thank you so much for the work you guys do to teach science. And I realize this is high school science, but I don't think that justifies the overstatement at the beginning. Nuclear fusion "is the production of energy by combining two smaller atoms into a larger atom." Nuclear fusion, as you know, also consumes energy for nuclei heavier than 60 AMU. This seems minor but Google does it too. Googling: nuclear fusion, returns in their info box, "noun -- a nuclear reaction in which atomic nuclei of low atomic number fuse to form a heavier nucleus with the release [OR ABSORBTION] of energy." The Google screenshot is at rsr.org/fusion-erroneous-simplification.
I think he mentioned that. From how I think of it is that for heavy atoms, fusing them essentially puts them in a more unstable state, one in which the electromagnetic force is greater than the strong nuclear force, so the input of energy would be required for a process that is more unstable, more likely to completely split apart due to positive to positive charge repulsion.
Trying to understand this because I’m curious from this Lego book I got called “particle physics: brick by brick” and it definitely doesn’t explain it this well
your final result seems to conflict with the final result here: th-cam.com/video/vCD3ca_W8z8/w-d-xo.html is the gamma in the penultimate step produced or not?
Page is called high school physics, but I’m using it for my uni Astronomy class😂😂 great explanation, many thanks
Thanks
Mr williamson (my physics teacher) if your seeing this i wathced the video
HSC discussion page ftw, Cheers lad
+Connor Foy 👍
Maybe you could share on that page. It seems to be more for student comment 😉
Thank you for doing this.
thank you for the explanation Paul. Just one thing to maybe watch out for - when you were summing up the particles on the left and right side of the reaction, you wanted to write 4 H, but instead there was 4H with the 4 being upper index. That might confuse someone into thinking it is a nucleus with Z=4.
Thanks for the tip!
Hi Paul. They are figuring it out. I like your math.
4 years and only 9 comments......
Great explanation of today's society
Thank you so much for the work you guys do to teach science. And I realize this is high school science, but I don't think that justifies the overstatement at the beginning. Nuclear fusion "is the production of energy by combining two smaller atoms into a larger atom." Nuclear fusion, as you know, also consumes energy for nuclei heavier than 60 AMU. This seems minor but Google does it too. Googling: nuclear fusion, returns in their info box, "noun -- a nuclear reaction in which atomic nuclei of low atomic number fuse to form a heavier nucleus with the release [OR ABSORBTION] of energy." The Google screenshot is at rsr.org/fusion-erroneous-simplification.
I think he mentioned that. From how I think of it is that for heavy atoms, fusing them essentially puts them in a more unstable state, one in which the electromagnetic force is greater than the strong nuclear force, so the input of energy would be required for a process that is more unstable, more likely to completely split apart due to positive to positive charge repulsion.
Im happy for the correction. Correct teminology is important
Trying to understand this because I’m curious from this Lego book I got called “particle physics: brick by brick” and it definitely doesn’t explain it this well
your final result seems to conflict with the final result here: th-cam.com/video/vCD3ca_W8z8/w-d-xo.html
is the gamma in the penultimate step produced or not?
Atoms? Why don't you say nucleus? There is enough confusion