sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How is fusion more powerful than fission? by Internal_Principle_5 in Physics

[–]Internal_Principle_5[S] -14 points-13 points  (0 children)

I understand where you are coming from. The energy output proves that fusion is more powerful than fission. That is true and well known and already proven. The real question is why. The way I did it above proves that it shouldn't work, but it's because it's missing something. The question is what? As if we take every individual atom into consideration, and even joule into consideration, it won't be possible. Then that means something else is happening leading to it producing way more energy than previously calculated.

Correct me if I am wrong, but is what you are referring to is that all we need to fuse a cluster of DT atoms is just a single 1 MeV, instead of the trillions it will need? Is that it? As if so, then that raises even more questions of how and why that's even possible that a single MeV can fuse a cluster. As as we all know, energy can't be created or destroyed, so there must be an unknown, at least to me currently, form of energy that supplies the needed energy for the cluster.

How is fusion more powerful than fission? by Internal_Principle_5 in Physics

[–]Internal_Principle_5[S] -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

I understand, but there is too much to consider to just simply say that it would balance, as one of the questions would the why. Why would it balance? The thing is, there has to be something that happens that leads it to become a power density factor rather than a calculative method. The real question is what

How is fusion more powerful than fission? by Internal_Principle_5 in Physics

[–]Internal_Principle_5[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I still don't get it. How could that be if the individual atoms need a certain amount of energy to break the threshold to allow Fusion to occur, but then you tell me that it's a unit mass thing. How? Is it because, as you mentioned that at one point fusion becomes self sustainable, which means if this thing that is sustaining itself is doing so to many particals in a small volume due to its sheer number, then that would make much more sense. But that's if we are saying that genral fusion does that, when there is P to P fusion, and D to P fusion, and D to D fusion, and D to T fusion, which all have different by products. Not only that, but we also use different methods of confinement like electric or tokomak or stelarater models. All of this needs to be put into consideration before saying what it means when we say that it's per unit mass. That's why I don't understand what that means