Can Gamma Rays Completely Disrupt Electrons in Solid Objects?

  • Thread starter Thread starter lucas_
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Electrons
AI Thread Summary
Gamma rays can theoretically disrupt intermolecular bonds in solid objects, but they primarily heat materials rather than completely remove all electrons. The photoelectric effect mainly affects surface electrons, while bulk materials absorb energy from freed electrons, leading to heating rather than disintegration. Removing all electrons from a bulk object is impractical, as the increasing positive charge makes further electron ejection increasingly difficult. Energy input can create plasma, but the object would likely vaporize before reaching that state. Ultimately, the discussion highlights the complexities of electron dynamics and energy transfer in solid materials.
lucas_
Messages
413
Reaction score
23
What kind of beam can remove all the electrons of the target solid object and disrupt the intermolecular bonds disintegrating the object? Can gamma rays do it (enough energy to knock all electrons)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
now i understand...you want to build a new weapon of destruction and rule the world...sorry we are not going to answer to terrorists!
 
funny.. I read particle beam weapon uses atoms or particles as projectiles to heat up or shread the target.. but why can't they be composed of photons to knock out all the electrons.. is this not possible.. is there no em frequency that can knock electrons out especially if it is inside the material? I think photoelectric effect can only disrupt the surface electrons...
 
The problem is that bulk materials quickly absorb energy from these free electrons as they travel through the material. Youd mostly just heat up the material. You could continue to heat it up until it ionizes completely of course, in which case youd have a plasma.
 
Drakkith said:
The problem is that bulk materials quickly absorb energy from these free electrons as they travel through the material. Youd mostly just heat up the material. You could continue to heat it up until it ionizes completely of course, in which case youd have a plasma.

The Bohr-Oppenheimer approximation says you can separate analysis of the wavefunctions of the electrons and nucleus because the electronic transition is much faster. But if you can expose an object to gamma rays enough to make electronic transitions.. how much would the energy transfer to molecular vibrations (or how much heat would this produce in Fahrenheit compared to just heating the object)?
 
lucas_ said:
The Bohr-Oppenheimer approximation says you can separate analysis of the wavefunctions of the electrons and nucleus because the electronic transition is much faster.

The bohr approximation is about analyzing interactions, so I don't see how it's relevant here. You're blasting electrons out of their orbitals and sending them careening through a sea of charged particles. They're going to be bouncing around and ionizing other atoms as they travel, regardless of how you analyze it. Practically all of the energy eventually ends up deposited in atomic and molecular vibrations. The effect this has on the material is to heat it up.

lucas_ said:
But if you can expose an object to gamma rays enough to make electronic transitions..

You don't even need gamma rays for this. Visible light, UV light, and X-Rays all excite electrons too. Besides, you're missing the bigger issue here. You can't remove all the electrons from a bulk object anyways. With each electron taken the more positively charged the object becomes. Eventually the energy required to eject an electron would be so high that you couldn't eject anymore. You'd also reach a point where the electric field strength becomes so high that the object would rip electrons off of other nearby objects in the form of a static discharge.
 
Drakkith said:
Eventually the energy required to eject an electron would be so high that you couldn't eject anymore. You'd also reach a point where the electric field strength becomes so high that the object would rip electrons off of other nearby objects in the form of a static discharge.

Add enough energy quickly enough and the target in principle could be heated to the point of forming a plasma. Of course it would have vaporized long before that, which is the principle behind laser cutting and machining. Google for "laser machining" and "laser weaponry" to get a sense of the state of the art here.

There's not much more to say in this thread (except that if you want to actually build something, you should review our policy on dangerous activities!) so this thread is closed. As always, send me or any of the other mentors a private message if you disagree and want to add more to it.
 
Nugatory said:
Add enough energy quickly enough and the target in principle could be heated to the point of forming a plasma. Of course it would have vaporized long before that, which is the principle behind laser cutting and machining.

Sure. I said that in my previous post. Just to clarify for the OP, there is a difference between disintigrating an object by turning it into a plasma and disintigrating an object by removing all electrons from it.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top