0
Nuclear Physics
Most commonly known for its applications in nuclear energy and nuclear weapons, Nuclear Physics also has applications in medicine and archaeology. This category is for questions about the branch of physics that deals with the study of the forces, reactions, and internal structures of atomic nuclei, Nuclear Physics.
500 Questions
How dangerous is the threat of Water contamination from Nuclear waste?
Asked by Wiki User
If you put nuclear waste in a situation where groundwater can flow over it on the way to a water course, you will obviously get contamination. Nuclear waste stores have to be very carefully considered to find locations that are safe from water access.
Has the Higgs boson been found yet?
Asked by Wiki User
We are not sure if the theorized Higgs boson is real or not. If it is, it would be provide some support to ideas about what mass (and, therefore, gravity, which is associated mass) really is. We're still looking for experimental support that the Higgs boson is real, and now that the Large Hadron Collider is up and running, all (interested) eyes are on CERN and awaiting results.
How is nuclear power dangerous?
Asked by Wiki User
Nuclear energy as it is used to generate power can be dangerous. The nuclear reactors used to heat water to generate steam to spin turbines to generate electricity must be operated by individuals who know what they are doing. If something goes wrong, the duty crew must make all the right decisions and make them first time, every time. Failure to do so can cause structural elements of the core to fail and release both nuclear fuel and waste into the coolant passages in the core. (The fuel rods are designed to hold everything inside throughout the life of the fuel bundle.) This is what happened at Three Mile Island. Both mechanical failure and the failure of the duty crew to react correctly caused a meltdown. Spent fuel presents its own special problems. Fuel bundles must be recovered from the reactor and taken away and stored for an extremely long period of time before radiation levels are low enough to try to do anything with them. Fission byproducts are highly radioactive, and remain so for tens of thousands of years. Links are provided for further reading.
Is there a positron in the nucleus of an atom?
Asked by Wiki User
Positrons can be produced in atomic nuclei by some kinds of radioactive decay, and they can be observed to be leaving a nuclear reaction called beta plus decay. But the positron leaves the nucleus of an atom as soon as it is created. It does not (cannot) exist in the nucleus of an atom.
Do electrons have the mass as protons?
Asked by Wiki User
Protons are part of the nucleus, so they have less mass than the nucleus (except in the specific case of hydrogen, where the nucleus is a single proton so they have the same mass).
Electrons are much less massive than protons. It would take 1836 electrons to equal the mass of one proton.
Neutrons are very slightly more massive than protons, by just about the mass of an electron. They're close enough that they're generally treated as having essentially the same mass.
What are the major branches of physical science?
Asked by Wiki User
In general, the Physical sciences study non-living matter, energy, and their interactions. Earth science, Chemistry, Mathematics, and Physics are, traditionally, the main branches of the physical sciences.
There are many sub-branches. To name only a few:
Aerodynamics: Motion of air and its interaction with moving objects;
Astronomy: Motion and character of the universe and the bodies within it;
Astrophysics: Properties, origin, and evolution of celestial bodies;
Biochemistry: Chemistry of living organisms;
Classical mechanics: Behavior of objects in a system of forces;
Computer sciences: Fundamentals of Information Management and computation;
Earth sciences: Encompassing term for the study of the planet, Earth;
Electricity: Fundamentals of electrical energy, its transport, and uses;
Electronics: Emission, behavior, and effects of electrons;
Engineering (most): Development of technology from new discoveries;
Geography: Earth's features and the distribution of life over it;
Geology: Earth's Origin, History, and structure
Mechanics: Motion and behavior of objects under force;
Fluid Dynamics: Motion and behavior of fluids and gases under force;
Optics: Behavior and properties of light;
Physical Chemistry: Application of any of several physical sciences to chemical systems;
Quantum mechanics: Structure and behavior of atoms and sub-atomic systems;
Statistical mechanics: Predicts behavior of materials from atomic & molecular observations;
Thermodynamics: Transformational relationships between heat and other energy forms.
etc.
Which causes primarily by the gravitational force between earth and moon?
Asked by Wiki User
There is insufficient information in the question to answer it. You did not provide the list of "these". However, it seems obvious that the answer is the tides of the oceans are caused by the gravitational force between the Earth and the Moon, with the Sun also a significant part. Also, it is known that the Moon tends to keep the alignment of the Earth's axis with respect to the plane of the ecliptic relatively constant, stabilizing our seasons.
What are examples of fission?
Asked by Wiki User
Example 1If a 235U atom splits up into two nuclides with mass number 117 and 118, estimate the energy released in the process.
SolutionA search of stable nuclides with mass numbers 117 and 118 are 117Sn50, and 118Sn50, their masses being 116.902956 and 117.901609 amu respectively. The mass of 235U is 235.043924 amu. The difference in mass 235.043924 - (116.902956 + 117.901609)
= 0.2394 amu (931.5 MeV) / (1 amu)
= 223 MeV.
Discussion
Actually, the fission is induced by neutrons, and usually the split is uneven. In reality, two neutrons are also released, but they were ignored in this example to make the estimate simple. Furthermore, the fission products are beta emitters as illustrated by example 2.
Example 2Assume the neutron induced fission reaction to be, 235U + n ® 142Cs55 + 90Rb35 + 4 n.
explain the results and estimate the energy released.
Solution
The neutron-rich fission products are beta emitters:142Cs55 ( , b) 142Ba56 ( , b) 142La57 ( , b) 142Ce58 ( , b) 142Pr59 ( , b) 142Nd60 (stable)
90Rb37 ( , b) 90Sr38 ( , b) 90Y39 ( , b) 90Zr40 (stable)
The masses of n, 142Nd60 and 90Zr40 are 1.008665, 141.907719 and 89.904703 amu respectively. The energy per fission and the decay energy are estimated as follows. Energy = 235.04924 - (89.904703 + 141.907719 + 3 x 1.008665)
= 0.210823 amu (931.5 MeV / amu)
= 196 MeV (1.6022e-13 J / MeV)
= 3.15e-11 J
Can an optical fiber transmit microwaves?
Asked by Wiki User
To be perfectly technical, the answer to this question would have to be 'yes', but
only because light and radio are the same physical phenomenon.
The optical fiber only conducts the electromagnetic waves that we usually describe as "light".
The waves that we normally describe as "radio" cannot pass through optical fiber.
How do neutrinos differ from photon?
Asked by Wiki User
A photon is a unit of light and has a mass of 0 where is a Neutrino has a small but nonzero mass. Neutrino's are similar to electrons in most regards, except neutrino's have no charge. Where photon's travel at the speed of light neutrino's come close but do not.
What are quarks and electrons made up of?
Asked by Wiki User
There is no evidence of a smaller particle than the quarks and electrons and other fundamental particles, but there is a theory of smaller particles called "rishons". The theory states that there are T, V, t, and v rishons. The T and t rishons are antoparticles, the T's having an electric charge of +1/3, and the t's having -1/3. The v and V are antiparticles, but they are both neutral. (Again, this is only theory.)
What happens when an unstable nucleus decays via alpha radiation?
Asked by Wiki User
- mass number decreases by 4
- atomic number decreases by 2
- the nuclei recoil quite strongly (compared to other modes of decay) due to the large mass of the alpha particle
Does nuclear fusion produce more radioactive waste than nuclear fision?
Asked by Wiki User
The waste from coal power stations has virtually no radioactive waste where as a
nuclear plants waste is nearly all toxic.
Completely Wrong. All coal waste is toxic. Coal fired power plants chuck out all the radioactive elements that were in the coal that was burned. This is fairly old news from the 70's. Excellent source: http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html .
More facts that are totally ignored by the media as governors and industrial groups lobby to continue to launch toxic, hazardous and poisonous elements and compounds into the air from the stacks, and onto the land downwind.
The following is quoted. There is no copyright on this article at this website. Thanks to ORNL.
Web site provided by Oak Ridge National Laboratory's Communications and External Relations
ORNL is a multi-program research and development facility managed by UT-Battelle for the US Department of Energy
"Because existing coal-fired power plants vary in size and electrical output, to calculate the annual coal consumption of these facilities, assume that the typical plant has an electrical output of 1000 megawatts. Existing coal-fired plants of this capacity annually burn about 4 million tons of coal each year. Further, considering that in 1982 about 616 million short tons (2000 pounds per ton) of coal was burned in the United States (from 833 million short tons mined, or 74%), the number of typical coal-fired plants necessary to consume this quantity of coal is 154.
Using these data, the releases of radioactive materials per typical plant can be calculated for any year. For the year 1982, assuming coal contains uranium and thorium concentrations of 1.3 ppm and 3.2 ppm, respectively, each typical plant released 5.2 tons of uranium (containing 74 pounds of uranium-235) and 12.8 tons of thorium that year. Total U.S. releases in 1982 (from 154 typical plants) amounted to 801 tons of uranium (containing 11,371 pounds of uranium-235) and 1971 tons of thorium. These figures account for only 74% of releases from combustion of coal from all sources.
Releases in 1982 from worldwide combustion of 2800 million tons of coal totaled 3640 tons of uranium (containing 51,700 pounds of uranium-235) and 8960 tons of thorium.
Based on the predicted combustion of 2516 million tons of coal in the United States and 12,580 million tons worldwide during the year 2040, cumulative releases for the 100 years of coal combustion following 1937 are predicted to be:
U.S. release (from combustion of 111,716 million tons):
Uranium: 145,230 tons (containing 1031 tons of uranium-235)
Thorium: 357,491 tons
Worldwide release (from combustion of 637,409 million tons):
Uranium: 828,632 tons (containing 5883 tons of uranium-235)
Thorium: 2,039,709 tons
Radioactivity from Coal Combustion
The main sources of radiation released from coal combustion include not only uranium and thorium but also daughter products produced by the decay of these isotopes, such as radium, radon, polonium, bismuth, and lead. Although not a decay product, naturally occurring radioactive potassium-40 is also a significant contributor.
According to the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), the average radioactivity per short ton of coal is 17,100 millicuries/4,000,000 tons, or 0.00427 millicuries/ton. This figure can be used to calculate the average expected radioactivity release from coal combustion. For 1982 the total release of radioactivity from 154 typical coal plants in the United States was, therefore, 2,630,230 millicuries.
Thus, by combining U.S. coal combustion from 1937 (440 million tons) through 1987 (661 million tons) with an estimated total in the year 2040 (2516 million tons), the total expected U.S. radioactivity release to the environment by 2040 can be determined. That total comes from the expected combustion of 111,716 million tons of coal with the release of 477,027,320 millicuries in the United States. Global releases of radioactivity from the predicted combustion of 637,409 million tons of coal would be 2,721,736,430 millicuries.
For comparison, according to NCRP Reports No. 92 and No. 95, population exposure from operation of 1000-MWe nuclear and coal-fired power plants amounts to 490 person-rem/year for coal plants and 4.8 person-rem/year for nuclear plants. Thus, the population effective dose equivalent from coal plants is 100 times that from nuclear plants. For the complete nuclear fuel cycle, from mining to reactor operation to waste disposal, the radiation dose is cited as 136 person-rem/year; the equivalent dose for coal use, from mining to power plant operation to waste disposal, is not listed in this report and is probably unknown.
...
Although trace quantities of radioactive heavy metals are not nearly as likely to produce adverse health effects as the vast array of chemical by-products from coal combustion, the accumulated quantities of these isotopes over 150 or 250 years could pose a significant future ecological burden and potentially produce adverse health effects, especially if they are locally accumulated. Because coal is predicted to be the primary energy source for electric power production in the foreseeable future, the potential impact of long-term accumulation of by-products in the biosphere should be considered. "
Personally, more concerned about the complete waste slate, but the radioactive portion always deserves mention.
Simple search by high school chemistry students found the West Virginia coal trace elements shown in an average ppm for nearly 800 samples.
Antimony (Sb)
1.02
Arsenic (As)
17.13
Barium (Ba)
109.86
Beryllium (Be)
2.57
Bismuth (Bi)
0.32
Boron (B)
20.01
Bromine (Br)
23.88
Cadmium (Cd)
0.096
Cerium (Ce)
16.88
Cesium (Cs)
1.15
Chlorine (Cl)
959
Chromium (Cr)
17.85
Cobalt (Co)
7.41
Copper (Cu)
20.4
Dysprosium (Dy)
2.03
Erbium (Er)
1.09
Europium (Eu)
0.33
Fluorine (F)
62.68
Gadolinium (Gd)
1.46
Gallium (Ga)
6.45
Germanium (Ge)
3.09
Gold (Au)
6.062
Hafnium (Hf)
0.72
Holmium (Ho)
0.52
Indium (In)
0.91
Iridium (Ir)
0.95
Lanthanum (La)
9.23
Lead (Pb)
8.19
Lithium (Li)
19.09
Lutetium (Lu)
0.133
Manganese (Mn)
21.29
Mercury (Hg)
0.19
Molybdenum (Mo)
2.37
Neodymium (Nd)
8.65
Nickel (Ni)
13.99
Niobium (Nb)
3.21
Praseodymium (Pr)
3.11
Rhenium (Re)
0.57
Rubidium (Rb)
23.62
Samarium (Sm)
1.52
Scandium (Sc)
3.71
Selenium (Se)
4.2
Silver (Ag)
0.058
Strontium (Sr)
91.68
Tantalum (Ta)
0.195
Tellurium (Te)
0.083
Terbium (Tb)
0.261
Thallium (Tl)
1.194
Thorium (Th)
3.02
Thulium (Tm)
0.283
Tin (Sn)
2.2
Tungsten (W)
0.79
Uranium (U)
1.59
Vanadium (V)
24.36
Ytterbium (Yb)
0.8
Yttrium (Y)
7.53
Zinc (Zn)
14.97
Zirconium (Zr)
24.32
To determine emissions of these elements just follow the example above with the Thorium and Uranium and factor from those tons.
Can anyone name the 11 dimensions of M theory of the superstring theory and how is it possible to have 11 dimensions?
Asked by GBAWisdom
The first three are already know to you:
#1 Width
#2 Length
#3 Depth
#4 is Space/Time it is a combination of space and time, but at high energy states they can be separated.
The remaining 7 dimensions are not yet named or discovered, but string theory predict them using math. They are so small they cannot be seen, but gravity seems to work through them. They could be quantum dimensions and the reason why quantum theory has different laws than general relativity theory and larger scales.
What does an alpha decay look like?
Asked by Wiki User
It can be difficult to visualize something so small that it cannot be seen directly with any light-based instrument. But we can make a stab at it, so let's do that.
An atomic nucleus is tiny beyond anything we've ever seen. It's really, really small. But picture a fuzzy sphere hanging in space. (The electrons will not be part of the picture because they are far, far away on the scale in which an atomic nucleus would be visible.) There's a little vibrating fuzzy sphere, and something is happening to it. Is it changing shape in subtle ways?
A very short distance from the nucleus, we'll see a tiny fuzzy sphere appear almost out of nowhere. That's the alpha particle, and its much smaller than the nucleus. It is composed of a pair of protons and a pair of neutrons bound together. It's a helium-4 nucleus, but you may have figured that out. The reason it seems to "magically appear" near the nucleus is because the alpha particle is believed to escape the nucleus via the mechanism of quantum mechanical tunneling. In one moment, the nucleus is whole, though it is unstable, and the next instant it has lost some of its mass and the alpha particle appears. That little alpha particle has tunneled out of the nucleus and was not seen actually exiting the mass of that nucleus. We might add that the nucleus has just undergone a nuclear transformation, and we call it nuclear transmutation. Where one chemical element existed before, another one that is two atomic numbers down on the periodic table will be left.
That alpha particle, the one that slipped unseen from the nucleus, will appear, but it won't be still. It will materialize and be off in a flash. It comes away with a tremendous amount of kinetic energy. It's really moving! It will rocket out away from the nucleus and blow through the electron cloud like it wasn't even there. It's a helium-4 nucleus as we mentioned, and its a nucleus without electrons, but it is moving far too quickly to have a high probability of "capturing" any electrons from the atom from which it arose. It isn't taking any "baggage" with it. There will be some "shape changes" in the nucleus of the atom that the alpha particle left, but it ends up a bit smaller and as indistinct in our view as it was in the beginning.
Following the alpha particle farther out, we'll see that little guy slamming into air or whatever else is in its way. These "collisions" will be scattering events, and atoms will be ionized in the process. If any solid material is present, the alpha particle will pretty much be hammered into a stop. Alpha particles don't have a lot of penetrating power. A piece of paper will block them. The alpha particle will then snatch a couple of electrons from just about anywhere around it, and the "transformation" of that alpha particle into a helium-4 atom will be complete.
Does Nuclear fission as used in nuclear power plants produces radioactive waste with long half lives?
Asked by Wiki User
yes, Nuclear fission as used in nuclear power plants produces radioactive waste with long half lives. However, this creates no problems. This wastes are either confined in the spent nuclear fuel (that is stored either in wet storage or in dry storage facilities) or stored as vitrified nuclear waste.
What are the instruments used to detect radioactive materials?
Asked by Wiki User
RADIAC stands for Radiation Detection, Indication And Computation.
A description is given of the main types of radiation monitoring instruments, usually called "radiac" instruments, which would be required by the civil defence authorities in the event of atomic warfare. The instruments discussed include the flash dosemeter, individual dosemeter, dose-rate meter and contamination meter. In each case, an account is given of the purpose of the instrument and the performance characteristics required, and some typical designs are mentioned. The paper concludes with an appendix giving the approved specifications for each instrument discussed.
Who postulated the existence of the neutrino?
Asked by Wiki User
Walter Baade and Fritz Zwicky proposed the existence of the neutron star in 1934.
Antony Hewish and Samuel Okoye discovered "an unusual source of high radio brightness temperature in the Crab Nebula" in 1965, which turned out to be the Crab Nebula neutron star.
What can the higgs boson do?
Asked by Wiki User
If it is found it is expected to explain the various masses of the known particles, if it is not found it might be too massive for the LHC to make. If it is proven not to exist we may have to wait for the Supersymmetry theory to explain particle masses.
What is the fundamental force which holds particles together to form protons and neutrons?
Asked by Wiki User
It is called the Strong Force, specifically the ResidualStrong Force. The Fundamental Strong Force is what holds quarks (which make up Protons and Neutrons) together. The Residual Strong Force is mediated by virtual mesons and has an effective range of 10^(-15) Meters and gets significatly weaker beyond this point. This is the diameter of a Lead atom's nucleus- any bigger and it will become unstable, which is why all elements greater than this are radioactive.
What was the original purpose of the atomic bomb?
Asked by Wiki User
The atomic bomb creates a tremendous explosion that is more powerful than regular TNT bombs and one of the by products of the atomic reaction is radiation.
Atomic and hydrogen bombs create different types of damage and effects depending on where it is exploded. If it is exploded underground it has one type of effect. If the bomb is exploded in outer space, then there is no air so the explosion is dispelled in almost pure radiation and light energy.
Answer
They were also a major scare tactic. Let's face it. If your opponent has something that can wipe out most of an entire city, aren't you going to do as they say?
How powerful is the atomic bomb?
Asked by Wiki User
Atomic bombs come in a wide variety of sizes. Their explosive power is usually measured in terms of an equivalent number of tons of dynamite. Smaller bombs range in the kilotons (thousands of tons) while larger bombs are in the range of megatons (millions of tons). Even a small atomic bomb is extremely powerful, much more powerful than any conventional bomb. A large atomic bomb can destroy an entire city.
Could an atomic bomb destroy the earth?
Asked by Wiki User
Absolutely not 100,000 cant even destroy a continent like europe. to have a bomb destroy the world it would have to weigh at least 500 petatons of tnt which is about 200 million billion tons of tnt, a lot.
An atomic war world wide with thousands of unleashed bombs would do little more to the planet earth than an ant hive does in our world.
A nuciance, but that is probably all it will be.
Life on earth as we know it would probably be at stake though.
Atomic bombs are those with the most dangerous after-effects. Radioactive fallout that will be active for 50-100 years afterwards at least. Long term effects not fully known yet.
How did Max Planck contribute to the atomic theory?
Asked by Wiki User
Quantum theory, the idea that energy is emitted in discrete quanta, contrary to classical physical theory.
Why do cochroaches survive a nuclear war?
Asked by Wiki User
Actually, it is possible. Radiologists have found that humans can safely withstand exposure to 5 rems of Radiation. A rem is the measurement of radiation dosages that will cause a measured amount of injury to human tissue. Insect researchers have found that the lethal dose for the American cockroach is 67,500 rems and for the German cockroach it is between 90,000 and 105,000 rems. The amount of radiation that cockroaches can withstand is equivalent to that of a thermonuclear explosion. However, without the waste that humans provide cockroaches would not thrive as well after the nuclear war wiped out the human species.
Your statement about cockroaches not surviving without humans is untrue. They were perfectly capable of surviving millions of years before we came along. They do not depend on us for anything. Cockroaches can and will eat anything organic. Once they are done eating the glue from the bindings of all of the books we leave behind(glue is made from animal protein), they'll move onto eating dead animals and plants. They'll be here millions of years after our species is gone. Also, it would theoretically be possible for cockroaches to survive a nuclear war if the exposure to radiation is not constant. They are about 6 to 15 times more radiation resistant than humans, since their cells are not constantly dividing like ours. So its safe to say that any roaches that are not directly exposed to the heat of a nuclear blast and are not molting (their cells divide when they molt) would be safe. That's one of those scenarios that could go either way depending on the factors.
Another answer
Cockroaches are not actually impervious to nuclear radiation. It may have a certain resistance to it due to its simple and skeletal body structure. The reason why creatures die with radiation is because of their muscles, bones, veins and marrow. So generally almost all types of insects may survive a nuclear war.
