- #1
- 136
- 1
How to convert C-12 / C-13 to C-1, does anyone know how this can be done, how much energy will I need to bang out a neutron?
what is C-1?C-12 / C-13 to C-1
There's no such thing as C-1. C has 6 protons.How to convert C-12 / C-13 to C-1, does anyone know how this can be done, how much energy will I need to bang out a neutron?
C12 (6p, 6n) and C13 (6p, 7n) are the stable isotopes of carbon. The other isotopes are unstable or radioactive.Carbon-12 contains 6 protons, 6 neutrons and 6 electrons.
If I must take a shot, C-6 will be the highest ?
Firstly, you won't get the equipment needed to do such nuclear reactions. It's expensive, complicated
Carbon won't decay to hydrogen. Rather, one could knock out a proton, by a sufficiently energetic (n,p) reaction, but that leaves a boron nucleus. One could knock out another proton and obtain Be, and so on throught Li, He and finally H. However, when all is said and done, that's a lot of energy expended for little gain.Ok the big idea is to make Carbon decay to Hydrogen,
Well He-6 apparently decays by beta emission to Li-6. H-6, H-5 and H-4 decay by neutron emission, at least according the Chart of Nuclides on BNL's website. I would be interested in how someone made H-4, H-5 or H-6, as these would tend to be highly unstable with very short half-lives.What happens to H-6 then it’s on decay mode?
He-6 becomes H-6, but H-6 can becomes nothing?
NopeDo you understand how to calculate the Q value for a decay or reaction?
NopeDo you know that you need a positive Q value for a decay to be possible?
Lol, I not so sure manIts very simple.
My idea is to take the CO2 and make the C turn into H via neutron capture and then you just use that O2 + H = Energy
If you turn C to H there will be some energy release I’m not yet 100% sure where, but somewhere there will be a gain, because it took energy to make H-1 turn to C
So I want to take C-12 / C-13 and convert the isotopes to C-1, but now that won't be the case, I can't make it C-1, I can only make it C-8, so that sucks
Lol, I not so sure man
What does Q symbol stand for, I know it’s energy now, but, Joule, eV, Coulomb or Watts ?
In my electronic book, my have a formula of Q = C x V
that C is for Capacitance and the V like you know, Volt
In the book it describes as says something like, Q = Charge
Q=[M(12C)-6M(H)-6M(n)]*C^2
Q = Charge
M = Mass
(n) = neutrons
12C = C-12, carbon / (12XC), what must C value be
And that H what value must you put in there?
My idea is to take the CO2 and make the C turn into H via neutron capture and then you just use that O2 + H = Energy
If you turn C to H there will be some energy release I’m not yet 100% sure where, but somewhere there will be a gain, because it took energy to make H-1 turn to C
So I want to take C-12 / C-13 and convert the isotopes to C-1, but now that won't be the case, I can't make it C-1, I can only make it C-8, so that sucks
He-6 apparently decays by beta emission to Li-6.
Turning carbon to hydrogen TAKES energy, many many thousands (if not millions) of times more energy you'd get from then burning tha hydrogen with oxygen.My idea is to take the CO2 and make the C turn into H via neutron capture and then you just use that O2 + H = Energy
If you turn C to H there will be some energy release I’m not yet 100% sure where, but somewhere there will be a gain, because it took energy to make H-1 turn to C
When looking for the phone number of a local taxi company, do you look in a cook book? No, because you know you find recipies in a cook book, not phone numbers. So why are you looking in an electronics textbook for nuclear physics models?LIn my electronic book, my have a formula of Q = C x V
that C is for Capacitance and the V like you know, Volt
In the book it describes as says something like, Q = Charge
That is exactly what makes converting C to H impractical.Turning carbon to hydrogen TAKES energy, many many thousands (if not millions) of times more energy you'd get from then burning tha hydrogen with oxygen.
I don’t have any nuclear physics textbooks or resources. And I’m working on the lowest tech internet you can imagine dial-upSo why are you looking in an electronics textbook for nuclear physics models?
Yes.To come back again to that He-6 decays to Li-6.
Yes, but He-4 has a very low cross-section - probability of absorbing neutrons, so it would not be a practical thing to the. I don't know the process which others have used to produce He-6, but I might venture that they used an (n,p) reaction to change Li-6 to He-6, which then promptly (or relatively quickly) decays back to Li-6.If you make He-6 from He-4 by adding energy, neutrons or something it will decays to Li-6.
It is possible to obtain O-15 from O-16, but perhaps not very practical. Certainly O-15 transforms to N-15 via electron capture.And if you take O-16 and take some energy, neutrons or something you’ll get O-15, and that O-15 will decays to N-15.
Radionuclides eventually decay to a nuclide that is stable, i.e. non-radioactive. That's the way nature works.To my understanding the down part on isotopes decays back to a stable element, forwards and the top part also decays from a unstable element back to a stable one two
I don’t have any nuclear physics textbooks or resources. And I’m working on the lowest tech internet you can imagine dial-up
To come back again to that He-6 decays to Li-6.
So to understand this thing better?
If you make He-6 from He-4 by adding energy, neutrons or something it will decays to Li-6.
And if you take O-16 and take some energy, neutrons or something you’ll get O-15, and that O-15 will decays to N-15.
To my understanding the down part on isotopes decays back to a stable element, forwards and the top part also decays from a unstable element back to a stable one two
The unstable isotopes decay until they become one of the stable.
You will never se 12B decay into 12Be for instance.
The third way something can decay is through alpha decay. Then a nucleus emits a 4He and moves 2 steps down and 2 steps to the left on the table. Example of that is 8B decays into 4He.
I'd just like to note that it would be in jacques' best interests if he did not come out of this (and a dozen similar threads) with the notion that somehow, you can internet-hop your way through a science education. To that end, I urge others to not encourage jacques' attitude of "I can build impossible devices because there is no such thing as impossible", which is based on no comprehension of the most fundamental concepts of science.
Jacques does not need a book on nuclear physics. He needs a simple high school physics text, and he needs to learn it completely.
I’m starting to convert from just practical do-do :yuck: , to theory first before build, I’m seems to works better and saved a lot of time man.
If it’s my Eng what makes me sounds stupid, that's because I’m actually Afrikaans and not Eng