Can we harness the power of atoms for energy through fission or fusion?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bassplayer142
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Atom
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the potential for harnessing energy from atomic processes, specifically through fission and fusion. Participants explore the mechanisms of energy release in nuclear power and consider alternative methods of energy generation involving atomic interactions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether it is possible to break down any atom to release a significant amount of energy, suggesting the use of concentrated laser beams, and inquires if the energy output could exceed the input.
  • Another participant acknowledges that nuclear power plants utilize fission, which involves breaking down atoms to release energy, and raises concerns about the relationship between power input and output in these processes.
  • A different viewpoint emphasizes the preference for fusion over fission, arguing that fission primarily generates heat to produce electricity rather than being an efficient energy source in itself.
  • One participant discusses the mass-energy relationship, explaining that fission of heavy atoms like Uranium and Plutonium can yield energy due to the mass difference, while lighter atoms require energy input for fission, suggesting that fusion may be a more viable energy source.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the efficiency and desirability of fission versus fusion, with no consensus reached on the best method for harnessing atomic energy.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions regarding the energy input and output relationships in nuclear processes remain unresolved, and the discussion does not clarify the specific conditions under which fission or fusion may be more advantageous.

bassplayer142
Messages
431
Reaction score
0
Is there a way that we could break down any atom into a considerable amount of energy? I know Nuclear power works but what about other particles. A concentrated laser beam or source. And if it would work, would the power output of the particle exceed the power input?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Maybe I'm just wrong, but don't nuclear power plants use fission already, which is the break down of atoms, giving off a considerable amount of energy?

Also, again, I could be thinking of this incorrectly, but either:

1) the power they input to pull off these reactions isn't in a form readily usable by use (in contrast to the power output)

or 2) the power input had better be less than the power output or else they just wasted power for no reason whatsoever.
 
It is far more desirable to gain energy from bringing atoms together then through fissile methods.

Essentially all nuclear power does, is heat a large amount of water creating pressurized steam to turn turbines (containing many loops of wiring) in a giant magnet which through inductance creates electricity which is more or less used directly.
 
It is a question of the relative weights of the orginal atom and the "parts" that it breaks down into. Roughly speaking, any atom larger than lead has more weight than the parts you get by fissioning it. When you fission such an atom the excess weight goes into energy according to e= mc2. It is only when you get up to the really heavy things, like Uranium and Plutonium, that the difference is enough to overcome the difficulty of fission.

Below lead it works the other way- the "parts" weigh more than the original atom so breaking an atom up requires more energy than you get out. Of course, then you can "make energy" by putting them togeher: fusion.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K