Nuclear Chemistry: Iron Nucleus & Energy Needs

In summary, the discussion revolves around the amount of energy required to hold together an iron nucleus and whether it is the most energetically stable nucleus. It is confirmed that per nucleon, an iron nucleus requires the most amount of energy to hold it together, despite the total binding energy increasing with nuclear mass. There is a possibility that a heavier nucleus, such as nickel, may have less overall binding energy than iron, but this does not disprove the equation E=mc^2. The binding energy is not the same as the rest energy of the nucleus and is related to the mass defect. Therefore, proving E=mc^2 wrong in this case would be incorrect reasoning.
  • #1
+Minkie+
24
0
Is it true an Iron nucleus requires the most amount of energy to hold it together?

I would have thought it would be the larger the nucleus the more energy is required to hold it toghether.
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
  • #2
+Minkie+ said:
Is it true an Iron nucleus requires the most amount of energy to hold it together?
Per nucleon, yes.

I would have thought it would be the larger the nucleus the more energy is required to hold it toghether.
The total binding energy increases with the nuclear mass, but the binding energy per nucleon hits a maximum at Fe.
 
  • #3
So a heavier nucleus, not too much heavier, may have less overall binding energy than Fe?

Say Nickel compared to Iron?
 
  • #4
+Minkie+ said:
So a heavier nucleus, not too much heavier, may have less overall binding energy than Fe?

Say Nickel compared to Iron?
It's possible, but I don't know the actual numbers.

PS: Fe-56 has the highest BE per nucleon among naturally occurring isotopes; I believe one of the artificial isotopes of Ni has a higher value.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
What I'm getting at is if that were true wouldn't it prove E=MC^2 wrong?
As the Fe nucleus would have more energy but less mass than the nickel nucleus.
 
  • #6
+Minkie+ said:
What I'm getting at is if that were true wouldn't it prove E=MC^2 wrong?
As the Fe nucleus would have more energy but less mass than the nickel nucleus.
No, it would not. The binding energy is not the same as the rest energy of the nucleus. The binding energy is related to the mass defect, not the total nuclear mass. The greater the mass defect, the greater the total binding energy.

If you think there's something that proves E=mc^2 wrong, then you've either got incorrect data, or you're applying an incorrect reasoning. In this case, it is the latter.
 
  • #7
I see how my thinking was wrong, it was worth a try though.
:biggrin: Imagine proving Einstein wrong:biggrin:
 

1. What is a nuclear reaction?

A nuclear reaction is a process in which the nucleus of an atom undergoes a change, resulting in the formation of a new element or isotope. This can involve the breaking apart of a nucleus (nuclear fission) or the combining of two nuclei (nuclear fusion).

2. What is the role of the iron nucleus in nuclear chemistry?

The iron nucleus, specifically the isotope iron-56, is considered the most stable and tightly bound nucleus. This is important in nuclear chemistry as it serves as a reference point for measuring the stability of other nuclei and their energy needs.

3. How does nuclear chemistry play a role in meeting energy needs?

Nuclear reactions, particularly fission reactions, are used to generate energy in nuclear power plants. The heat produced from the reactions is used to create steam, which then drives turbines to generate electricity. Nuclear energy is a reliable and relatively clean source of energy, but it also poses risks and challenges in terms of waste disposal and safety.

4. What are the potential risks and benefits of nuclear chemistry?

Nuclear chemistry has the potential to provide a significant amount of energy, but it also comes with risks. The main risk is the release of harmful radiation, which can have serious health effects. On the other hand, nuclear reactions do not produce greenhouse gases and can help reduce dependence on fossil fuels for energy production.

5. How is nuclear chemistry used in medicine?

Nuclear reactions are used in medicine for a variety of purposes, such as diagnostic imaging and cancer treatment. In diagnostic imaging, radioactive isotopes are injected into the body and their movement is tracked to identify potential health issues. In cancer treatment, targeted radiation is used to destroy cancer cells while minimizing damage to healthy cells.

Similar threads

Is my understanding of nuclear fusion and binding energy correct?
    • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
431
Do chemists use X-NMR where the spin of X is greater than a half?
    • Chemistry
Replies
8
Views
1K
Spin of a nucleus within an external magnetic field.
    • Chemistry
Replies
8
Views
2K
I Why the binding energy per nucleon has specific pattern?
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
673
B Iron, Nuclear Stability and Nuclear Energy
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
24
Views
2K
Complete thermal decomposition of specific compounds
    • Chemistry
Replies
4
Views
1K
Implementing “Ab initio” approach in molecular mechanics method
    • Chemistry
Replies
4
Views
1K
Mystery Stain Solved with Fertilizer Chemistry!
    • Chemistry
Replies
2
Views
914
B Why don't neutrons bind into large out of control masses?
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
28
Views
2K
Using a nuclear warhead to expose large amount of limestone
    • Chemistry
Replies
11
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top