Nuclear Fusion: Why is energy created from mass?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of energy creation from mass in the context of nuclear fusion, exploring the relationship between mass and energy as described by the equation E=mc². Participants examine the implications of energy conservation, the nature of mass, and the processes involved in fusion, including the challenges of overcoming repulsive forces between nuclei.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that during nuclear fusion, mass is reduced when protons collide at high speeds, leading to energy being created from this mass loss.
  • Another participant proposes that energy conservation can be better understood by recognizing that mass itself is a form of energy, and thus mass is not converted into energy but rather transformed into other energy forms.
  • A different viewpoint emphasizes that no energy is created from nothing, and the mass of the resulting fused nucleus is less than the sum of the original masses, with the difference released as energy.
  • Some participants note that the potential energy between particles plays a role in fusion, requiring energy input to overcome repulsive forces, which complicates the understanding of energy release during fusion.
  • One participant clarifies that mass is not converted into energy but that rest mass is a form of energy, and energy transformations occur during processes like fusion and annihilation.
  • Concerns are raised about the simplification of concepts, with one participant arguing that understanding the Coulomb barrier is crucial to grasping why energy is required for fusion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether energy is created from mass or if mass is simply a form of energy being transformed. There is no consensus on the interpretation of energy conservation in the context of fusion, and multiple competing perspectives remain.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the importance of understanding the Coulomb barrier in fusion, indicating that energy must be supplied to overcome repulsive forces. Additionally, the discussion touches on the historical context of mass conservation, which may not apply in modern interpretations of mass-energy equivalence.

Raiden60
Messages
8
Reaction score
2
Ok, so nuclear fusion is given by the formula E=MC2, where E = Energy, M = Rest mass and C = 299792458. To my understanding, this means that if two protons collide under the incredibly high speeds/temperatures(like they do in the sun), they will fuse, having reduced mass and that mass is converted to energy.
But, I thought that energy could not be created or lost, it is always converted. In a nuclear reactor, nuclear energy is converted to thermal energy. In beta decay, if an electron is slowed by an atom, that lost kinetic energy is converted to bremsstrahlung X-rays(Electromagnetic radiation). So, why is energy created from mass? I can understand why antimatter can create energy from annihilation, basically 1 + -1 = 0 + γ + γ. Is it similar? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You will have an easier time with energy conservation if you consider that there is also an energy associated to a mass and that the total energy of an object can be written ##E = mc^2 + T##, where ##m## is the object mass and ##T## its kinetic energy. In special relativity, you will have the relation ##E^2 = m^2c^4 + p^2 c^2##, where ##p## is the momentum of the object. The thing to note is that even an object at rest has an energy, given by its mass. Thus, it is not really that mass is converted into energy as much as mass being converted into other forms of energy, as mass is a form of energy in itself.

Also see our FAQ on the subject: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/what-is-the-massenergy-equivalence.763067/
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: TEFLing and Raiden60
what do you mean energy created?
There is no energy created out of nothing. You have that your initial objects have some mass together: m_1 + m_2 and then the product has a mass m < m_1 + m_2.
The difference m_1 + m_2 - m is released as photons or kinetic energy for the products (if you have more ).
 
Orodruin said:
You will have an easier time with energy conservation if you consider that there is also an energy associated to a mass and that the total energy of an object can be written ##E = mc^2 + T##, where ##m## is the object mass and ##T## its kinetic energy. In special relativity, you will have the relation ##E^2 = m^2c^4 + p^2 c^2##, where ##p## is the momentum of the object. The thing to note is that even an object at rest has an energy, given by its mass. Thus, it is not really that mass is converted into energy as much as mass being converted into other forms of energy, as mass is a form of energy in itself.

Also see our FAQ on the subject: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/what-is-the-massenergy-equivalence.763067/
That seems to make sense. Thanks for explaining, it's given me a bit more understanding.
 
Basically the two particles lose potential energy between one another, therefore energy would be required to pull them apart. Hence a release of energy when two particles are smacked together to become one. (By dumbing stuff down I have always found it easier to understand.
 
Zacpearson said:
Basically the two particles lose potential energy between one another, therefore energy would be required to pull them apart. Hence a release of energy when two particles are smacked together to become one. (By dumbing stuff down I have always found it easier to understand.

Except that it is wrong and not contributing to the understanding. When you want fusion to happen you are essentially trying to merge two positively charged nuclei. This means you have to overcome the repulsive Coulomb barrier to make them meet. This iss why you need to put energy into the system to create fusion, but if the Coulomb potential energy was all you got out of the fusion, there would be no point in trying to create it as you could at most get out the same amount of energy that you put into the system. This would also mean stars could not shine.

Net energy release in fusion is based on the resulting nucleus having less mass than the sum of the original ones.
 
It seems like your first post is mostly right and your confusion stems from a simple point. Mass isn't converted into energy. Rest mass is a form of energy, and you only convert from one form of energy to another. So when you convert some matter into thermal energy using fusion or annihilation, you aren't creating energy, but converting rest mass energy to thermal energy. Nuclear fission and nuclear fusion both do this.

(A sidenote: there is no conservation of rest mass. The idea of conservation of mass arose back before we understood the equivalence of mass and energy, and is basically now supplanted by the conservation of energy.)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: TEFLing

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
8K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K