Nuclear Fusion: Why is energy created from mass?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Nuclear fusion generates energy through the conversion of rest mass into other forms of energy, as described by the equation E=mc². When two protons collide at high speeds and temperatures, they fuse, resulting in a mass deficit that is released as energy. This process does not create energy from nothing; rather, it transforms mass into thermal energy, adhering to the principles of energy conservation. The net energy release in fusion occurs because the mass of the resulting nucleus is less than the sum of the original masses, illustrating that mass is a form of energy rather than a separate entity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of E=mc² and mass-energy equivalence
  • Basic knowledge of nuclear fusion and fission processes
  • Familiarity with special relativity concepts, including energy-momentum relations
  • Knowledge of Coulomb barrier and its role in nuclear reactions
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the principles of nuclear fusion and its applications in energy generation
  • Study the implications of mass-energy equivalence in modern physics
  • Explore the mechanisms of overcoming the Coulomb barrier in fusion reactions
  • Investigate the differences between nuclear fission and fusion, including energy outputs
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, energy researchers, students of nuclear physics, and anyone interested in understanding the principles of nuclear fusion and energy conversion.

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