Posted on 08/25/2005 4:11:34 AM PDT by CarrotAndStick
For light reading:
Nuclear Energy by Raymond L Murray, Pergamon Press, 4th Ed 1993
ISBN 0-08-042125-3
This book does oversimplify some things, but if you have no background in
physics or things nuclear, it's not bad at all.
For heavy reading:
Basic Nuclear Engineering by Foster and Wright, Allyn and Bacon, 4th Ed
1983, ISBN 0-205-07886-9
Introduction to Nuclear Engineering by Lamarsh, Addison Wesley, 2nd Ed
1983, ISBN 0-201-14200-7
A pair of my undergrad texts, both clear and concise.
For really heavy reading:
Nuclear Reactor Engineering by Glasstone and Sesonske, VNR Co., 1967,
ISBN not given. Difficult to find anyway.
That doesn't sound right. Let's say the protons and mass are split in two equally so that the calculation is easy. Each nuclei would have a charge of about 73.6E-19 C. Let's also say that the two nuclei are separated initially by 10E-15 m. The energy in that electric field would be about 5E-11 J which is about 3E8 eV or 300 MeV. According to this, "a typical energy released by a fission event is approximately 200 MeV" so the electric repulsion of the two main products could easily explain the bulk of it.
However it is clear that not all of the energy released by fission can be explained that way since some of the products (neutrons and photons) are uncharged also carry away a lot of the energy. In fact, IIRC, the neutrons need to be slowed down by a moderator to captured and induce further fission reactions.
I-131 forms a diatomic molecule via a covalent bond. It is not "negatively" charged.
Themes > Science > Chemistry > Inorganic Chemistry > More Information about Chemical Bonding > The Covalent Bond
is based upon electron-pair sharing and is the attraction between two atoms that share electrons. A single covalent bond is a bond in which two atoms are held together by sharing two electrons.
Each positive nucleus is attracted toward the region of high electron density between them:
1s2 2s2 2p6 3s2 3p2 3p2 3p1 3p1 3p2 3p2 3s2 2p6 2s2 1s2
The bonded atoms come close enough together for their electron clouds to overlap.
Covalent bonds form between atoms when ionic or metallic bonding is unlikely because the gain or loss of electrons requires large amounts of energy.
http://au.biz.yahoo.com/050822/17/7qz2.html
Another example of fanatic safety standards of american companies
Eventually, yes. But it's native preference is to have an extra electron. Until it slows down enough to actually FORM that covalent bond, the probability is high that it will be negatively charged.
If I gave the impression that I thought electrical forces "were not involved", then I apologize. CERTAINLY they provide some small fraction of the energy, but by far the largest part is provided by the disappearance of mass, which energy appears as velocity of the fission fragments.
"Moonman"'s assertion was that all the energy release was provided ONLY by that electrostatic repulsion.
SURE they do---but ALL the energy imparted to the fission fragments is NOT the sole result of electrostatic forces, which is what "Moonman" was asserting.
Well, my copy is "only" the 2nd edition, but I doubt that the basics of nuclear fission have changed in the interim.
I too have this book, however, mine is the third edition.
From one of my shelves (some other nuclear specific books I have enjoyed and kept) since we are talking books:
Fast Breeder Reactors Alan E. Waltar and Albert B. Reynolds
Introduction to Atomic and Nuclear Physics - Henry Semat
Fast Reactor Safety - John Graham
Atomic Energy - Glasstone
Minerals for Atomic Energy - Nininger
Cerenkov Radiation - J. V. Jelley
Nuclear Reactor Materials and Applications - Benjamin M. Ma
Pile Neutron Research - Hughes
Nuclear Radiation Physics - Lapp and Andrews
Introduction to Synchrotron Radiation - Giorgio Margaritondo
Nuclear Statistical Spectroscopy - S.S.M. Wong
Fusion Research - Dolan (Vol 1)
Fusion - Weston M Stacey, Jr (Magnetic Confinement Fusion)
Fusion Plasma Analysis - Weston M Stacey, Jr
Theory of Hydromagnetic Stability - Bhimsen K. Shivamoggi
MHD Instabilities - Glen Bateman
Yukawa Couplings and the Origins of Mass (Conference Proceedings and Lecture notes) Edited by Pierre Ramond
Principals of Stellar Evolution and Nucleosynthesis - Donald D. Clayton
Statistical Plasma Physics (Vols I and II) - Setsuo Ichimaru
Hope this did not come across wrong. These are books I liked and thought if you saw one of them in a book store, you too may want to take a gander thru it.
(You all probably have most of these anyway)
Well, let me steate what is KNOWN.
1. A company gets complete plans to build a nuclear reactor power plant.
2. The Atomic Energy Commission approves THOSE plans.
3. The AEC changes it's mind and forces the company to re-engineer and rebuild large parts of the project, often AFTER that portion has already been built even though no defect or problem has been shown to exist.
4. Repeat step #3 monthly for the next 20 years and MAYBE you will get your plant online.
NO ONE is even in the planning stages for a nuclear power plant because there is literally no way to budget for one. A project that ought to cost $900 million might end up costing $7 BILLION. It HAS happened time after time in the US.
Look at the ISS as an example.
Dude! You are a thread killer. Sigh.
I don't think so but I would be happy to entertain a link ...
I don't think a PhD in physics would make such a statement.
Just so we are clear ...
Here's a quote from a REAL nuclear science text (Nuclear Reactor Engineering, Glaasstone and Sesonske).
"- the fission fragments - which are propelled in opposite directions as a result of the electrostatic repulsion between them."
1. A company gets complete plans to build a nuclear reactor power plant. They don't get complete plans to build a nuclear power plant.
2. The Atomic Energy Commission approves THOSE plans. There is no AEC.
3. The AEC changes it's mind and forces the company to re-engineer and rebuild large parts of the project, often AFTER that portion has already been built even though no defect or problem has been shown to exist. FALSE.
4. Repeat step #3 monthly for the next 20 years and MAYBE you will get your plant online. Whatever. Not proven by experience.
Look in your freshman chemistry text.
I say again--I am contending that "Moonman"'s assertion that ONLY electrostatic repulsion is the source of the energy is incorrect. OF COURSE the fission fragments are propelled in opposite directions as a result of electrostatic repulsion---but I don't believe that ALL THE ENERGY of the "mass difference loss" shows up ONLY as a result of electrostatic repulsion.
I did. It says you are wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.