there is no end-scale "highest" temperature, to put this in easy terms : the bigger the bang the higher the temperature, to answer the Question: the highest temperature would probably be the temperature created when the big-bang occurred.
No, an increase in temperature will speed up the reaction. This is because the heat energy is transferred into kinetic energy (movement energy) in the reactors and this increases their speed and so increases the rate at which they collide with each other, increasing the rate of the chemical reaction.
Nuclear reactions at very high temperatures are known as thermonuclear reactions. These reactions involve the fusion of atomic nuclei, typically hydrogen isotopes, and release large amounts of energy. Thermonuclear reactions are responsible for the energy production in stars like our sun.
An increase in temperature speeds up the reaction rate.
Increasing the temperature usually increases the rate of a chemical reaction by providing more energy to the reacting molecules. This allows the molecules to collide more frequently and with greater energy, leading to more successful reactions occurring per unit time. However, very high temperatures can also denature proteins or break chemical bonds, inhibiting the reaction.
The most exothermic reaction is nuclear fusion, which is the power of a hydrogen bomb. Nuclear fission is also extremely exothermic.An extremely exothermic chemical (as opposed to nuclear) reaction, although maybe not the most ever, is the so-called thermite reaction. Fe2O3 + 2Al ---> Al2O3 + 2Fe ΔH = -851.5 kJ/mol See the Related Questions and Web Links to the left of this answer for more information.
No, its not simple. It requires a sophisticated balance of temperature, pressure, and moderation in order to sustain a critical nuclear fission reaction.
Yes. Very much. That is how we get useful heat to make steam, to turn turbines, to make electricity.
Problem on nuclear fusion is upon confinement of reaction in earth atmosphere. Nuclear fusion required very high temperature to initiate the reaction. Sustaining reaction is not easy. It is likely the earliest nuclear fusion will be available commercially by 2050. It is a little far future for the current energy crisis would reach it peak around 2040.
They are...reactions and can lead to new elements; but the big difference is that a nuclear fusion involve particles from the atomic nucleus and a very great energy is needed.
No, a bomb is not necessarily a nuclear reaction. A bomb can be any device that is designed to explode and cause destruction, whereas a nuclear reaction involves the splitting or combining of atomic nuclei to release energy. Nuclear bombs, also known as atomic bombs, utilize nuclear reactions to produce a very powerful explosion.
Beacause they are very alike & Then They Get Wild
In a tokamak device, which is the most promising for developing fusion power on Earth, the ionised plasma of the fuel material must be contained in a ring doughnut shaped compartment at very high temperature, a magnetic field is used to control the plasma to keep in the ring shape wihout ever touching the sides. The magnetic field does not actually control the nuclear reaction which is brought about by the high temperature, but it keeps the reaction steady once it starts (in theory, only very short pulses have been achieved so far).
Because of the nuclear fusion that it does.
In a pressurised nuclear reactor the temperature is very high, which cn be accepted as a point for this.
The products are very different.
the importance of nuclear reactions are very important.for energy purpose these reactions are very important because many energetic outgoing particles produce fission and fusion.
The energy released in a nuclear reaction can vary widely depending on the reaction. However, typically nuclear reactions involve very high energy levels, on the order of millions to billions of joules. This is due to the large amounts of energy stored in atomic nuclei.