The weak force, first step of nuclear fusion in the Sun

AI Thread Summary
The discussion clarifies a common misconception about nuclear fusion in the Sun, specifically regarding the transformation of protons into neutrons during proton-proton fusion. It confirms that a helium-2 nucleus, or diproton, is unstable, necessitating the conversion of one proton into a neutron for fusion to occur. The participants also address a labeling error in a textbook illustration, where the quark composition of protons and neutrons was incorrectly depicted. The correct configuration for a proton is two up quarks and one down quark, while a neutron consists of one up quark and two down quarks. Overall, the conversation enhances understanding of the weak force's role in fusion and corrects a visual misrepresentation in educational materials.
bluejello
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi. I need help please with a textbook illustration that has confused me.

Is the caption a typo? Should be "neutrons into protons" instead?

Thanks.
 

Attachments

  • 1386275750809.jpg
    1386275750809.jpg
    50.3 KB · Views: 958
Astronomy news on Phys.org
The illustration is correct. A helium-2 nucleus, aka a diproton, is not stable, so when two protons collide in the core of the Sun, one of them MUST be turned into a neutron in order for proton-proton fusion to work. Most collisions between protons do not result in fusion. It is only on the very rare occasions that the weak force is able to turn one of the protons into a neutron that fusion occurs.

See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton-proton_chain_reaction
 
Hello,

Thank you for your help. I understand now that it's protons to neutrons.

My confusion stemmed from the placement of the quarks. Is the proton on the left incorrectly labeled with two down quarks and one up quark--should have two up and one down? Vice versa for the neutron on the right?

Thanks.
 
bluejello said:
My confusion stemmed from the placement of the quarks. Is the proton on the left incorrectly labeled with two down quarks and one up quark--should have two up and one down? Vice versa for the neutron on the right?.
Yep, you're right. The picture has it backwards!
 
Bill_K said:
Yep, you're right. The picture has it backwards!

Oh wow, I didn't even notice, lol.
 
Oh good, I felt stumped. Nice relief.

Thank you, both!
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top