Nuclear Engineering and Chemistry Concern

Click For Summary
Nuclear engineering does not heavily focus on chemistry, especially in certain programs, as evidenced by experiences from past students. Key subjects in the field include mathematics, electrical engineering, and nuclear physics, with minimal chemistry required. Practical chemistry knowledge can often be acquired on the job rather than through formal education. A specific example mentioned is that 1 weight percent boric acid equates to 1750 ppm boron, which is a useful fact to remember. Overall, a solid foundation in other engineering disciplines is more critical for success in nuclear engineering.
questionmenow
Messages
8
Reaction score
1
Does nuclear engineering require a lot of chemistry? Chemistry is not my strongest subject simply because I chose to skip it in high school. So I just wanted to know if it was heavily ridden with chemistry. And if so what topics do I have to look forward to. ugh...
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
I got half way through a nuclear engineering degree course 40 years ago , at that time there was only one university doing this in the UK ... QMC London ... they have their own reactor near mile end... Absolutely no chemistry in the course ...plenty maths ..., elect eng... nucl. physics , and for some strange reason aeronautical eng.
 
Thanks for the reply! This is at least half good to hear (since you only got half way through)! lol
 
If you can remember 1 weight percent boric acid is 1750 ppm boron, you'll probably be OK. Unless you want to work in the chemistry dept, you can probably pick up the chemistry you need "on the job."
 
gmax137 said:
If you can remember 1 weight percent boric acid is 1750 ppm boron, you'll probably be OK. Unless you want to work in the chemistry dept, you can probably pick up the chemistry you need "on the job."

Okay committing that to memory!
 
What type of energy is actually stored inside an atom? When an atom is split—such as in a nuclear explosion—it releases enormous energy, much of it in the form of gamma-ray electromagnetic radiation. Given this, is it correct to say that the energy stored in the atom is fundamentally electromagnetic (EM) energy? If not, how should we properly understand the nature of the energy that binds the nucleus and is released during fission?

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
8K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K