The forces do I have this right?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter maximiliano
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Forces
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of energy release in chemical and nuclear reactions, specifically focusing on combustion and fission. Participants explore the underlying forces involved, such as electromagnetic and strong forces, and question the roles of weak forces in these processes.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes combustion as a chemical reaction where hydrocarbons break down into hydrogen and carbon, questioning the nature of energy release and the role of hydrogen in the flame.
  • Another participant agrees that energy released in combustion and fission is stored in chemical and nuclear bonds, respectively, and explains the concept of mass deficit in nuclear fission.
  • A participant clarifies that the heat felt during combustion is due to infrared and visible light released, attributing the energy in bonds to the electromagnetic force rather than the weak force.
  • One participant seeks confirmation on their understanding that they are experiencing the electromagnetic force during combustion and the strong force during fission and fusion.
  • A later reply provides an example of the weak force, mentioning beta decay as a relevant phenomenon.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the basic descriptions of energy release in combustion and fission, but there are nuances in the understanding of forces involved. Some participants express discomfort with the accuracy of certain descriptions, indicating a lack of consensus on the precision of terminology used.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the nature of the weak force and its examples, as well as the accuracy of descriptions related to the forces involved in combustion and nuclear reactions.

maximiliano
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
The forces...do I have this right?

So, I'm not in any way trained in any type of physics...so I'm sorry for the very basic way of explaining my question.

Energy released from burning firewood (for example). The way I think of this (and would explain it to someone) is that a chemical reaction is occurring, where hydrocarbons are being broken into their individual parts...that being hydrogen and carbon. The smoke I see is the carbon (and other stuff like water vapor). The heat I feel are the molecular bonds (energy) which were previously holding carbon and hydrogen together in a molecular fashion. Question/s- Is this incorrect...or essentially how it is working? Also...where is the hydrogen going? Is that the fuel for the flame I see, combusting with the oxidizer in the air? Is the energy released from the weak force??

Energy released from an "atomic" (let's use fission for the example) explosion- Is the energy that is released a manifestation of the energy (strong force?) contained within the bonds which previously (pre-fission) held the atomic structure/parts (neutron, proton, electron) together?

Basically, I've always had it reasoned out in my head that fire/combustion is the release of the molecular bonds (previously holding the molecules together), while fission and fusion are releasing atomic bonds (previously holding the sub-atomic particles together). Am I out in left field?? I started thinking and reading about the weak and strong forces...which made me question the basic assumptions I have long kept...??
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Saying that the energy released was previously stored in chemical and nuclear bonds (respectively) in your two examples seems reasonable.

For nuclear fission, the nucleus of a heavy atom is broken up into two lighter nuclei. However, if you take the combined mass of the two lighter nuclei, you will get a number that is smaller than the mass of the original heavy nucleus. The shortfall, which is typically referred to as a "mass deficit" has been converted into energy, in accordance with the relation E = mc2.

Why was the heavier nucleus more massive in the first place than the two lighter elements that it split into? The extra energy was the nuclear binding energy i.e. it is the extra energy that (conceptually, at least) went into putting the heavy nucleus together. You might want to look up "binding energy" on Wikipedia or something, for some more insight.

The strong nuclear force is indeed the thing that holds protons and neutrons together in the nuclei of atoms. Therefore, it is the force that is doing the binding in this case.
 


maximiliano said:
Energy released from burning firewood (for example). The way I think of this (and would explain it to someone) is that a chemical reaction is occurring, where hydrocarbons are being broken into their individual parts...that being hydrogen and carbon. The smoke I see is the carbon (and other stuff like water vapor). The heat I feel are the molecular bonds (energy) which were previously holding carbon and hydrogen together in a molecular fashion. Question/s- Is this incorrect...or essentially how it is working? Also...where is the hydrogen going? Is that the fuel for the flame I see, combusting with the oxidizer in the air? Is the energy released from the weak force??

Generally the fuel is bonded with the oxidizer. In the case of hydrocarbons, such as Methane, CH4, both the carbon and hydrogen are bonded with oxygen to form carbon dioxide and 2 water molecules, H2O. However real combustion is never perfectly complete and various other oxides and wastes are produced along with carbon smoke and ash. The heat you feel is either infrared and visible light released or hot gasses from the process. The energy in the bonds is from the electromagnetic force, not the weak force.


Basically, I've always had it reasoned out in my head that fire/combustion is the release of the molecular bonds (previously holding the molecules together), while fission and fusion are releasing atomic bonds (previously holding the sub-atomic particles together). Am I out in left field?? I started thinking and reading about the weak and strong forces...which made me question the basic assumptions I have long kept...??

You are pretty much correct.
 


thanks folks! Okay...so
With fire...essentially I'm FEELING the electromagnet force (or what was the electromagnetic force);
while with fission (and fusion) I'm essentially feeling the strong force...or what was the strong force.

Am I, in very layman's terms, basically correct so far...yes??

NOW, since we don't really understand gravitational force...can you give me an example of the WEAK FORCE/INTERACTION??
 


I'd say that's an alright non technical description, though its a little too inaccurate for my tastes.

An example of the weak force is beta decay. Look it up on wikipedia for more info.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K