Science General Discussion

Started by Legend, Sep 02, 2014, 07:17 PM

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

DD_Bwest

Quote from: Legend on Mar 14, 2016, 11:33 PMNah didn't mean fission, although that'd be even more of an exact opposite.

I expected that to lead into a joke!
your moms age is no laughing matter..

Legend

@Xevross

What are your thoughts on larger elements being potentially stable? Is that something they think still might be possible?

Xevross

#617
Quote from: Legend on Mar 14, 2016, 11:33 PMNah didn't mean fission, although that'd be even more of an exact opposite.

I expected that to lead into a joke!
Yeah I guess. I wouldn't really consider alpha/beta decay opposite to fusion though because they're very different processes but they sort of do the opposite things. Fusion increases proton/ nucleon number while alpha reduces it. Beta can reduce or increase proton number while nucleon number always remains the same, so that definitely isn't opposite to fusion!

Same! Were you referring to carbon dating there, DD?

Quote from: Legend on Mar 14, 2016, 11:35 PM@Xevross

What are your thoughts on larger elements being potentially stable? Is that something they think still might be possible?
As far as I understand it, due to the standard model and the nuclear forces, the larger elements can never be stable.

They're unstable because the electrostatic force pushing the protons away from each other is too large for the strong nuclear force. At Uranium and below the SNF is just strong enough to hold the nucleus together against the EF. However at 93 protons and above the EF is always too strong and the SNF can't hold it together. Due to the way the universe is and how science works, I don't think we'll ever be able to overcome this.

That is, unless something radical and crazy gets invented which allows us to artificially change nuclear forces. That would be awesome. Very unlikely though.

the-pi-guy

Quote from: Xevross on Mar 14, 2016, 11:37 PMSame! Were you referring to carbon dating there, DD?
Potassium and Uranium are also used (fairly regularly) for dating.  

the-pi-guy

Quote from: Xevross on Mar 14, 2016, 11:37 PMThat is, unless something radical and crazy gets invented which allows us to artificially change nuclear forces. That would be awesome. Very unlikely though.

SuperGravity.

Xevross

Quote from: the-Pi-guy on Mar 14, 2016, 11:41 PMPotassium and Uranium are also used (fairly regularly) for dating.  
True true. I've only ever learned about carbon dating though. ::)

Quote from: the-Pi-guy on Mar 14, 2016, 11:42 PMSuperGravity.
Its interstellar all over again!

DD_Bwest

Quote from: Xevross on Mar 14, 2016, 11:37 PMYeah I guess. I wouldn't really consider alpha/beta decay opposite to fusion though because they're very different processes but they sort of do the opposite things. Fusion increases proton/ nucleon number while alpha reduces it. Beta can reduce or increase proton number while nucleon number always remains the same, so that definitely isn't opposite to fusion!

Same! Were you referring to carbon dating there, DD?
As far as I understand it, due to the standard model and the nuclear forces, the larger elements can never be stable.

They're unstable because the electrostatic force pushing the protons away from each other is too large for the strong nuclear force. At Uranium and below the SNF is just strong enough to hold the nucleus together against the EF. However at 93 protons and above the EF is always too strong and the SNF can't hold it together. Due to the way the universe is and how science works, I don't think we'll ever be able to overcome this.

That is, unless something radical and crazy gets invented which allows us to artificially change nuclear forces. That would be awesome. Very unlikely though.
the first post was about radiometric dating, whenever i hear about the decay chain it makes me think of that.  especially since i have literally had arguments with people about if it is accurate.   sometimes with face palms when they say we cant know that the half lives werent alot shorter in the past.

uranium to lead is used one certain types of rocks to measure ages over a billion years and up to the 4.5billion for current estimates of earths age.

Legend

#622


Really like the contrast in this video, showing the advanced rocket in an empty field.


DD_Bwest

Quote from: Legend on Mar 15, 2016, 04:29 AMReally like the contrast in this video, showing the advanced rocket in an empty field.

i saw that yesterday and noticed that to lol

DD_Bwest

CRS-8  Is officially scheduled for friday the 8th,  4:43pm edt.   looks like itll be a drone ship landing.   (info from nasaspaceflight.com)

Legend

Woah this IS magic.


the-pi-guy


Cute Pikachu

So I am doing a research paper on CTE and the NFL it's pretty interesting stuff.
The Vizioneck Nintendo Fanboy!

Switch Software Sales Guide:
http://vizioneck.com/forum/index.php?topic=5895.msg218699#new

Mmm_fish_tacos

Does anyone know what kind of or how powerful a telescope has to be to focus the light of a star on to a prism?

Xevross

Quote from: Mmm_fish_tacos on Mar 21, 2016, 06:08 PMDoes anyone know what kind of or how powerful a telescope has to be to focus the light of a star on to a prism?
Can you specify? You'd need to work out a load of things like distance between the lenses of the telescope and the prism