Can Radioactive Materials Generate Electricity Through Electromagnetic Fields?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Carbonator
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Course Ideas Physics
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores the potential for generating electricity using radioactive materials and their interaction with electromagnetic fields. Participants consider theoretical scenarios involving the placement of radioactive materials and the effects of electromagnetic fields, as well as existing technologies like radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether particles from two pieces of radioactive material would move towards each other when placed beside one another.
  • Another participant explains that radioactivity involves nuclear decay and emits particles and energy, but emphasizes that a magnetic material does not emit energy in the same way.
  • It is proposed that radiation can affect an electric field (E-field), but the interaction is more about the E-field reacting to charged particles rather than the other way around.
  • Some participants suggest that a specific arrangement of radioactive materials and E-fields could theoretically work to generate electricity, but the output would likely be minimal compared to conventional methods.
  • One participant describes a conceptual setup where an E-field is run between two pieces of radioactive material, suggesting that this could create alternating charges that might be harnessed.
  • Another participant mentions existing technology, specifically radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs), which already utilize radioactive materials to generate electricity from heat, noting that past research indicated no more efficient methods than RTGs were found.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of ideas and hypotheses regarding the interaction of radioactive materials and electromagnetic fields, with no consensus on the feasibility or efficiency of the proposed methods for generating electricity. Some acknowledge existing technologies like RTGs while others explore theoretical possibilities.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various assumptions about the behavior of radioactive materials and electromagnetic fields, and the efficiency of proposed methods remains unresolved. Limitations in current understanding and technology are acknowledged, particularly regarding the practicality of new designs compared to established systems.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in the intersection of nuclear physics, electromagnetism, and energy generation, as well as those exploring innovative applications of radioactive materials in technology.

Carbonator
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Ok, I am not in any physics courses, programs, associations, nothing.
I have never taken a physics course
But I was just wondering a few things.

1) If you take two pieces of radioactive material, one of which is more radioactive than the other and put them beside each other, would anything happen. Specifically, would particles from one move towards the other?

2) An electromagnetic field. How would it interact in the presence of radioactive particles. IE, would it move, shift, or become altered in any way. And could you measure how much it moved?

3)When a magnet moves about a coil of wire, electricity is generated down the wire, yes? And the effect is produced by the electromagnetic fields affecting the electrons in the wire, or in the field itself?

OK, so if by moving an E-Field around wires, you make electricity, and If(IF!) radiation could move an E-Field enough, could you not place radioactive materials between an E-Field, causing it to move, and making Electricity? And if one were to say that on a large scale this would be too inefficient, could it be done at a smaller scale, with arrays of these devices working together (lets forget timing for now.)


If anyone would like to comment, please do. BTW, I am the poster child for laymen-ness in the world of physics. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Generally speaking, radioactivity is a process of nuclear decay. That is, the nucleus of the atoms are unstable and seek a more stable arangement of the nucleus. To do this, a radioactive atom emits particles and photons of energy from the nucleus until it becomes "stable"
The type of particles and photons emitted, their energy, the rate of emission and the length of time needed for "stability" varies from one type of radioactive atom to another, but is well established.
Radioactivity is a TRUE energy source, as the material literally emitts energy and mass which can be convertefd to useful work, and the material during this process undergoes changes that eventually stops the process; meaning that physics laws are not violated and a perpetual motion machine is impossible.
A magnetic material is not "emmisive" in the sense of particles or photonic energy, and does not "decay" on a nuclear level. Because of this, a magnetic material can never be considered an energy source in itself, but must be manipulated(requiring energy) to produce energy(always LESS is produced than required for manipulation, resulting in loss)
Can radiation move an E-field? Yes, but more correctly, it reacts with it. What I mean is that, generally, an E-field moves(or deflects) a charged particle much more so than a charged particle moves an E-field because an E-field is generally much stronger(even in a magnet) than a single or series of charged particles coming from a radioactive source.
Could a specific arangement of a device based on your theory work? Probably so. However, the useful output would be extremely small compared with conventional methods to extract work from radioactive decay.
Keep thinking, though; the only bad idea is no idea, and who knows what could be "tweaked" with yor theory.
 
Cool. So radiation can affect an E-Field

I was thinking that two pieces(?) of radiotctive material could be placed side by side. Then you run an e-field between the two pieces.

like this
e
{r}e{r}
{r}e{r}
{r}e{r}
e

(e's should be in the middle. Dang text formatting...)

the e-field extends beyond the r-material. As the field fluxes left and right(relative to where you want to look) it would come near a wire, or wires, or coil of wires. Anyhoo, The e-field goes Left, makes a +ive charge, Right, a -ive charge. And so on.

And yes, I did think that the total output would be minimal. But(!) if you were to have an array, maybe even at a very small scale, the T-Out would be the sum of all the parts(cliche? perhaps.) Even if this couldn't be used to power a car or a Rockem-Sockem Robot, it could apply to aux. power sources for satellites. Hey! I was thinking that some sort of catalyst could be used that is not inherently radioactive, but could be given its reaction to another material. Hmmmmm...Tangent!
 
radioisotope thermoelectric generators

Radioactive materials are already being used to power spacecraft , especially far from the Sun where solar power becomes increasingly inefficient. Probes such as Galileo, Pioneer 10, and Voyager 2 drew most of their power from radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs).

The radioactive materials generate heat, which is used to produce electricity via thermocouples.

Quite a lot of research was done before RTGs were designed and chosen for space probes; IIRC, ideas similar to the one you posted were looked at, but there seemed to be no way to make such a generator that could make electricity more efficiently than an RTG ('efficiently' here means electrical power per kilogram of generator; weight (actually mass) is the most precious commodity for a spacecraft ).

Here's a link which explains RTGs in more detail:
http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/RITEG-beacon
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K