Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: alexander_busek; AZLiberty
Fissioning atoms lighter than Lead consumes energy.
Fusioning atoms heavier than Lead consumes energy.

Not quite true, as the graph below shows. While Lead is the "stable" endpoint of a large number of decay chains involving heavy isotopes, the atomic number of lead (Z=82) is WAY too high for the claim your making; the nuclear force is not stabilizing enough to overcome the repulsion of that many protons.

Fission of Lead produces energy, IF you can find a favorable nuclear reaction kinetics to produce it. The chart below shows the break-even point, which is all the way down at the where the derivative of the binding energy per nucleon goes to zero, at Iron (Z=26.)

The corrected statement is:

Fissioning atoms lighter than Iron consumes energy.
Fusioning atoms heavier than Iron consumes energy.


83 posted on 08/26/2014 10:09:32 AM PDT by FredZarguna (His first name is 'Unarmed,' and his given middle name is 'Teenager.')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]


To: FredZarguna
Fissioning atoms lighter than Iron consumes energy.

If this statement is correct, it debunks the oxygen to hydrogen mechanism proposed -- lock, stock, and barrel.

86 posted on 08/26/2014 11:13:32 AM PDT by AZLiberty (No tag today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies ]

To: FredZarguna
The corrected statement is: Fissioning atoms lighter than Iron consumes energy. Fusioning atoms heavier than Iron consumes energy.

Yes... Iron!

Seemed to recall that all matter will eventually (in on the order of 10^14 years) decay to Iron.

Regards,

92 posted on 08/27/2014 12:04:51 AM PDT by alexander_busek (Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson