Using muon-catalyzation toward Island of Stability?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bbbl67
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Stability
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the production of superheavy elements in particle accelerators, specifically exploring the potential use of muon-catalyzed fusion as a method to create larger atomic nuclei and the implications for reaching the so-called Island of Stability.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire about the methods used to create heavy elements, questioning whether neutrons or alpha particles are employed in the bombardment process.
  • There is a suggestion that muon-catalyzed fusion could facilitate the fusion of larger nuclei, such as Lead and Uranium, potentially aiding in the creation of superheavy elements.
  • Several participants note that current methods involve colliding large nuclei, but question whether muon-catalyzed fusion could simplify these processes.
  • Some argue that muon-catalyzed fusion is limited to hydrogen and that the practical application for heavier nuclei is unclear.
  • Concerns are raised about the feasibility of using muons due to their short lifespan and the low probability of them interacting with specific nuclei.
  • There are discussions about the stripping of electrons from heavy nuclei in accelerators and the implications for muon bombardment.
  • One participant mentions the energy requirements for generating muons and the challenges associated with using them in fusion processes.
  • Another participant suggests that while millions of muons could be produced, the likelihood of them effectively interacting with nuclei remains low.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the advantages of using muons compared to direct collisions facilitated by accelerators.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the feasibility and effectiveness of muon-catalyzed fusion for creating superheavy elements. There is no consensus on whether this method would be advantageous compared to existing techniques.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations related to the short lifespan of muons, the low probability of effective interactions, and the energy requirements for both muon generation and nuclear collisions. These factors contribute to the uncertainty surrounding the proposed applications of muon-catalyzed fusion.

bbbl67
Messages
216
Reaction score
21
Hi, I'm an amateur observer of nuclear physics, so I'm curious about how larger and larger elements are produced in particle accelerators. Like for example, they've created elements all of the way upto element 118 now, I guess? Like when they get Plutonium from Uranium, do they bombard with neutrons, or bombard with alpha particles? Using neutrons, some of the neutrons would decay into protons, I suppose. Using alpha particles, you would automatically have two extra protons and neutrons inside the nucleus. And is this also how they keep building towards larger elements than Plutonium?

Now my second question would be, have they considered using Muon-catalyzation as a method of making larger and larger elements, heading towards the so called Island of Stability? For example, could they use Muon catalyzation to bring some truly large atomic nuclei (bigger than an alpha particle) together to fuse? Like for example, fusing a Lead nucleus to Uranium? Or even fusing two Uranium together?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mathman said:
These elements are created by collision of two fairly large nuclei. Attached is an example.
https://www.osti.gov/biblio/936490-synthesis-isotopes-elements-fusion-reactions
Okay, so they are already using pretty big nuclei to produce these things, they mentioned Calcium + Californium I think, but they aren't using a muon catalyzer, so wouldn't a muon catalyzer make these fusions much easier?
 
I have no idea how it would be used in the creation of heavy nuclei, since the theory is for use in fusion reactors.
 
Muon-catalyzed fusion works for hydrogen only. A muon shields a charge of 1 only, and getting multiple muons in an atom within their short lifetime is unrealistic. Once you have an accelerator you can directly deliver the necessary energy for a collision.

Neutrons are a great method to create elements just a bit beyond uranium, especially plutonium and americium. They don't help for the superheavy nuclei - you need months for the process in a nuclear reactor but the nuclei just live for seconds or less.
 
mfb said:
Muon-catalyzed fusion works for hydrogen only. A muon shields a charge of 1 only, and getting multiple muons in an atom within their short lifetime is unrealistic. Once you have an accelerator you can directly deliver the necessary energy for a collision.

Neutrons are a great method to create elements just a bit beyond uranium, especially plutonium and americium. They don't help for the superheavy nuclei - you need months for the process in a nuclear reactor but the nuclei just live for seconds or less.
When they send heavy nuclei through an accelerator (e.g. gold), aren't they completely stripped of all of their electrons? If so, then after stripping away the electrons, what if they shotgun a barrage of muons towards them, and their entire orbital cloud would be filled by muons. Since the muons would be going at relativistic speeds, their lifetimes would be extended.
 
bbbl67 said:
When they send heavy nuclei through an accelerator (e.g. gold), aren't they completely stripped of all of their electrons?
Typically, but it depends on the application.
bbbl67 said:
If so, then after stripping away the electrons, what if they shotgun a barrage of muons towards them, and their entire orbital cloud would be filled by muons.
Where would you get such a muon source from?
And where is the point? We can make the nuclei collide directly - the energy is provided by the accelerator.
 
mfb said:
Where would you get such a muon source from?
And where is the point? We can make the nuclei collide directly - the energy is provided by the accelerator.
Well, I don't know how they make the muons, but I've always assumed that they make millions of them at a time.

As for what the point is, wouldn't this make it easier to create the superheavy nuclei to jump to the Island of Stability rather than slowly approach it?
 
bbbl67 said:
Well, I don't know how they make the muons, but I've always assumed that they make millions of them at a time.
Millions don't help you, the probability that a muon is caught by one particular nucleus is tiny.
bbbl67 said:
As for what the point is, wouldn't this make it easier to create the superheavy nuclei to jump to the Island of Stability rather than slowly approach it?
No. See above: Accelerators can easily deliver enough energy. Lowering the required energy doesn't help.
 
  • #10
I studied to use muons as catalyzer of fusion reactors and as long it is needed 150MeV to generate them and the enhancement of fusion was 25% I decided not to go on that.
Another way I tried is to generate a small magnetic black hole to generate fusion inside but giant kilotesla fields wastes a lot of energy due radiation and eroded all electrodes, wolframium toriated included due hundred amps were released

probability that a muon is caught by one particular nucleus is tiny
Yes, the cross section is small you should have to compress the matter more than 10 times
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
11K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K