Recent content by mosad655

So coulomb is not the unit for charge, but the unit for the magnitude of charge?

In the textbook that I have, it comes with this example: A 5 amp current flows for an hour. The total charge that passes by in such case, is Q = I • t = 5 A • 3600 s = 18000 C or 18000 Coulombs. Now how many electrons is that?

so let's say.. 18 C would be then be 18 / (- 1,602 176 565(35) • 10^(-19)) electrons? That's a negative number, how is it possible to have a negative number of electons?

but is it correct that the charge of an electron in Coulombs is - 1,602 176 565(35) • 10^-19 ?

Is it correct that the charge of an electron in Coulombs is - 1,602 176 565(35) • 10-19 C ? By inserting this in the formula for current I = Q / t, that would make the current a negative number. I don't reckon having read about negative currents though. So what's the explanation for how...

Bravo! I think I got it lol. This is how I explain it to myself on basis of having read all your posts.. The binding energy is the energy recuired to split a nucleus into its components. That is the same as saying that the binding energy is the energy that the components (nucleons) radiated...

but I thought we defined the binding energy as the energy that the nucleus did NOT have? On the link posted by Astronuc it says in the very top that "the mass of a nucleus is always less than the sum of the individual masses of the protons and neutrons which constitute it. The difference is a...

Okay I'll keep that definition in mind then. I understood your fusion example ealier, and find it very intuitive that the decrease in mass must mean an increase in energy, thus prooving that the fusion proces was exothermic. My textbook explains it in some other way though.. In my textbook...

Well that would explain alot. But what about the increase in the product-nuclides binding energi? According to the "binding energy pr. nucleon curve", the binding energy pr. nucleon is greater in the product nuclides of fission and fusion processes. Thus some of the transformed mass must have...

I am aware of that. But how is binding energy used to boil water at power plants? Dont we need kinetic energy for that?

How is the binding energy released as kinetic energy? Or are you saying that the transformed mass in fusion and fission, is converted into both binding energy AND kinetic energy?

When a nucleus fissions into two smaller ones, the total binding energy pr. nucleus is increased. Somewhat similarily when two nucleus fusion into one larger nucleus the binding energy is increased. Thus both fusion and fission are exothermic processes. This is the explanation I get in my school...