Why Does Iron Take More Energy to Create Fusion Than Other Elements?

In summary: The strong force is always stronger than the EM force. It's just that in certain situations, the EM force can be stronger than the strong force. The EM force is what causes protons to repel each other. However, because the nucleus is so stable, the EM force can't cause the nucleus to break apart.
  • #1
stardust
55
0
Hello, this is my first post(so, hopefully I'm not breaking any decorum).

Something that I've always been puzzled about. I understand that a star will keep fusing elements until it hits iron. What I'm curious of, is why? Why does iron take so much more energy to create fusion than other elements? What property of iron causes this effect? Also, does iron experience fusion during supernovae when temperatures are very high?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
Once the stellar core is composed of silicon and sulfur, further fusion results in nickel-56. All of the silicon and sulfur in the stellar core fuses in about 24 hours. The nickel-56 is unable to fuse into heavier elements because it takes additional energy to make the fusion occur, which can only cause the core to collapse, since there is no energy being given off by fusing elements anymore. The core collapse occurs in less than a second, and the shock wave given off by the collapsing core causes additional fusion reactions to occur in the stellar envelope, which produce elements heavier than iron.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_burning_process
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #3
So, basically the fusion of iron would not produce enough energy to oppose the forces of gravity, causing inevitable collapse? Why does nickel/iron take more energy than say, carbon, to fuse?
 
  • #4
Okay, so I've looked at the article on nuclear binding on wikipedia. But, I'm still lost, what causes nuclear binding? It would seem that protons should fly away from each other, because of electromagnetism. I get that the strong nuclear force, or binding, keeps them together. But, what causes this force?
 
  • #5
stardust said:
So, basically the fusion of iron would not produce enough energy to oppose the forces of gravity, causing inevitable collapse? Why does nickel/iron take more energy than say, carbon, to fuse?

Fusion of iron, or in this case nickel-56, produces NO energy. It is an endothermic reaction. This reaction takes so much energy to occur because there are a larger number of protons in iron/nickel than there are in lighter nuclei. Due to the way the strong force drops off with distance, iron and nickel happen to have enough nuclei so that the attraction due to the strong force and the repulsion due to the EM force are balanced extremely well. Adding more nuclei to get heavier elements would increase the repulsion from the EM force more than it would increase the attraction from the strong force.

stardust said:
Okay, so I've looked at the article on nuclear binding on wikipedia. But, I'm still lost, what causes nuclear binding? It would seem that protons should fly away from each other, because of electromagnetism. I get that the strong nuclear force, or binding, keeps them together. But, what causes this force?

Electromagnetism and the strong force (also known as the color force) are two of the four fundamental forces of nature. They are fundamental because they cannot be explained in terms of being caused by something else. They simply exist.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #6
stardust said:
Okay, so I've looked at the article on nuclear binding on wikipedia. But, I'm still lost, what causes nuclear binding? It would seem that protons should fly away from each other, because of electromagnetism. I get that the strong nuclear force, or binding, keeps them together. But, what causes this force?
Right back at ya: What causes electromagnetism?

The strong interaction is one of the four fundamental interactions. It is, as the name suggests, much stronger than electromagnetism. It is what makes it possible for atomic nuclei to form. If it weren't for the strong interaction, electrical repulsion would indeed make protons fly away from another. There would be no helium, no lithium, no iron, no uranium, etc. Just hydrogen.

What causes this force? One answer is that just as photons are the carriers of the electromagnetism, gluons are the carriers of the strong interaction. One minor problem: That explanation is begs the question, what causes photons and gluons to exist? We don't know (yet). Even if we do eventually have a deeper explanation, there's still going to be some even deeper "what causes that" kind of question that future physics won't be able to explain.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #7
Drakkith said:
Adding more nuclei to get heavier elements would increase the repulsion from the EM force more than it would increase the attraction from the strong force.

Wouldn't it follow then that heavier elements than iron/nickel would rip themselves apart? If the EM force is stronger at the point, why does the nucleus stay intact?

D H said:
Even if we do eventually have a deeper explanation, there's still going to be some even deeper "what causes that" kind of question that future physics won't be able to explain.

I'm glad too, this is what makes physics so interesting.
 
  • #8
stardust said:
Wouldn't it follow then that heavier elements than iron/nickel would rip themselves apart? If the EM force is stronger at the point, why does the nucleus stay intact?

The EM force isn't stronger than the strong force at that point. It's that adding more nuclei causes the repulsion from the EM force to increase more than the strong force increases. The strong force still overcomes the EM force.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person

1. Why is iron considered a "dead-end" element in fusion reactions?

Iron is considered a "dead-end" element in fusion reactions because it takes more energy to create fusion with iron than it produces. This means that the energy output from fusing iron atoms together is less than the energy input required to initiate the fusion process, making it inefficient for energy production.

2. How does the atomic structure of iron affect its fusion properties?

The atomic structure of iron plays a significant role in its fusion properties. Iron has a highly stable atomic nucleus, with a large number of protons and neutrons. This stability makes it difficult for iron atoms to fuse together, requiring a higher amount of energy to overcome the strong nuclear forces holding the atoms together.

3. Can iron be used for fusion reactions at all?

While iron is not an ideal element for fusion reactions due to its high energy input requirements, it can still be used in some specialized fusion reactions. For example, iron can be used as a "blanket" material in nuclear fusion reactors to absorb the high-energy neutrons produced during the fusion process.

4. Are there any potential benefits to using iron in fusion reactions?

One potential benefit of using iron in fusion reactions is its abundance and low cost. Iron is one of the most abundant elements on Earth, making it a readily available and cost-effective option for fusion research and development. Additionally, using iron in fusion reactions could help reduce the amount of radioactive waste produced, as iron is a relatively stable element.

5. Are there any ongoing efforts to improve iron's fusion properties?

Yes, there are ongoing research and development efforts to improve iron's fusion properties. Scientists are exploring ways to increase the efficiency of fusing iron atoms together, such as using different isotopes of iron or incorporating other elements into the fusion process. Additionally, advancements in fusion technology and understanding of atomic structure could potentially lead to breakthroughs in iron fusion in the future.

Similar threads

  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
11
Views
384
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
997
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
775
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
5
Views
12K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
5
Views
2K
Back
Top