Hi. a simple question on endothermic fusion

duration
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Would it be feasible theoretically to use a continuous endothermic fusion reaction as a high-energy heat sink?
Would such a process be capable of producing unstable isotopes for use in nuclear fission?

I ask this as a science fiction writer and I would dearly love input and even direction or further information on the subject. Thank you!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think it will be possible to do that at normal temperature, you know, nucleus need enough energy to get over Columb potential to get close enough to become another kind of nucleus. Typically the temperature is millions of degrees.
 
So if a device could successfully enter an area where such temperatures occur naturally, such as the core of a star, (which I know seems entirely unreasonable as such a device would be crushed, dispersed, and fused itself) then at least the heat sink portion of that question is a positive?

Do the temperature requirements for nuclear fusion increase as the nuclei become heavier, or just the total energy? I have done a bit of research and most texts are unclear (I'm an author not a physicist!) and I can't really find any pertinent information on the subject.

I have also heard of electromagnetic fields containing and compressing plasma composed of hydrogen for the purpose of exothermic fusion, would this same process theoretically work for an endothermic reaction?
 
Last edited:
Your idea is 65 years old. Plutonium 239 is produced by the fusion of a neutron and Uranium 238.
 
I'm aware of the process used to produce 239 for weaponry, however, I was more interested in using the process as an extremely fast mechanism for simultaneously reducing heat as well as producing fuel.

If this isn't speculatively impossible, I'd like to use it as a plot device, somewhat of a (fictional) bridge between solid fuel propulsion and something like the fabled Alcubierre drive, essentially storing the heat of a star

I know that the current method for synthesizing 239 involves particle accelerators as opposed to using electromagnetic implosion on plasma. I was asking if it's theoretically possible or impossible to use thermal energy in the order of a solar core as opposed to long distance collisions.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Why is there such a difference between the total cross-section data? (simulation vs. experiment)'
Well, I'm simulating a neutron-proton scattering phase shift. The equation that I solve numerically is the Phase function method and is $$ \frac{d}{dr}[\delta_{i+1}] = \frac{2\mu}{\hbar^2}\frac{V(r)}{k^2}\sin(kr + \delta_i)$$ ##\delta_i## is the phase shift for triplet and singlet state, ##\mu## is the reduced mass for neutron-proton, ##k=\sqrt{2\mu E_{cm}/\hbar^2}## is the wave number and ##V(r)## is the potential of interaction like Yukawa, Wood-Saxon, Square well potential, etc. I first...
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
58
Views
15K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
5K
Replies
9
Views
25K
Back
Top