Fissionable elements for Fission

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter fog37
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Elements Fission
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the fission process in nuclear reactions, specifically addressing whether large elements like uranium-235 or plutonium-239 must be naturally radioactive to undergo fission. It concludes that while naturally radioactive materials are commonly used, large non-radioactive elements can theoretically undergo fission when bombarded with fast particles, although this is highly unlikely. The conversation also clarifies that artificially created elements can be either radioactive or stable, depending on their isotopes, and emphasizes the inaccuracy of visualizing fission as a simple "breaking" of the nucleus.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of nuclear fission and its mechanisms
  • Knowledge of isotopes and their stability
  • Familiarity with neutron bombardment and particle physics
  • Concept of artificial radioactivity and its implications
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the liquid drop model in nuclear physics
  • Explore the properties of uranium-235 and plutonium-239 in fission reactions
  • Study the differences between naturally occurring and artificially created isotopes
  • Investigate the conditions required for a chain reaction in nuclear fission
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in nuclear physics, researchers in radioactivity, and anyone interested in the principles of nuclear reactions and fission processes.

fog37
Messages
1,566
Reaction score
108
TL;DR
materials suitable for fission
Hello,

Quick question: in fission, which is a nuclear reaction, a large element is hit with neutrons and broken/split into two smaller elements while lots of energy is released. Does the starting element, which must be large in size (like uranium-235 or plutonium-239) need to be an element that is naturally radioactive? Or is it enough for it to just be a large atomic number Z element? What if we hit a large non-radioactive element with fast particles? Can we still split it and have the release of energy? Or is it too hard to do so we rely on naturally radioactive materials to start the fission process?

I understand natural radioactivity: some elements spontaneously decay and transform into new elements (until the final element is a stable one).
In the case of artificial radioactivity, we create new elements by forcing an element (does it have to be naturally radioactive to start with) to change into a new one by hitting it with fast particles (neutrons, alpha particles, etc.).

Are the new, artificial elements that we create through this process automatically radioactive? I don't think so. They are simply called artificially radioactive because when they were created some radioactive particles were also released, correct?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
All suitable nuclides happen to be radioactive, but this is not a requirement, and not every large Z nucleus will work.

In principle energy can be released if you shoot a fast particle onto e.g. lead and it splits, but that is a very unlikely reaction. You are more likely to get something else, like kicking out a few neutrons and protons. And you can't get a chain reaction with lead.
fog37 said:
Are the new, artificial elements that we create through this process automatically radioactive?
All elements with stable isotopes occur in nature. If we create an element that doesn't occur in nature then it has to be radioactive... but of course we can also create stable elements. It is just less interesting, because we can simply mine them.
 
fog37 said:
a large element is hit with neutrons and broken/split into two smaller elements
Just as an aside, this mental image of the nucleus being "broken or split" by the incoming neutron is not accurate. It is not a kinetic effect, like a target being shattered by a bullet. Google "liquid drop model"
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K