Question about nuclear fission/fusion and binding energy

In summary, during nuclear fission and fusion, a heavy particle is split into smaller ones with a higher specific binding energy. A certain amount of mass is transformed into energy for the binding. However, for some elements lighter than iron, the total energy of the created element can be smaller than that of the starting elements, resulting in a net release of energy. This is possible due to the difference in binding energy per nucleon, where lighter elements have a higher B.N.
  • #1
LennoxLewis
129
1
So, i know that during nuclear fission, a heavy particle is split into two smaller ones that have a higher specific binding energy. And i know that a certain amount of mass is transformed to energy for the binding. The same thing happens during nuclear fusion.

However, from my intuitive (and probably wrong) point of view, one has to put energy INTO the atom in order to make one with a higher binding energy.

My reasoning is this: binding energy = the amount of energy to build the atom from scratch (i.e. moving the nucleons piece by piece from infinity to the fm-sized shell). So, if the binding energy is higher, more energy is required to put the atom together or rip it apart. So, wouldn't it make sense to go from a high binding energy state to a lower one, so as to RELEASE this binding energy?

It just doesn't make sense to me that energy is RELEASED to go to a high bound state. For instance, in atomic physics, an electron releases energy (an x-ray) when going to a lower binding energy-state.

I'm a bit confused despite having understood this for years in the past... can anyone help?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
All your statements are correct except the first one. If the final energy for the created nucleus is higher than the total energy of the initial nuclei you do indeed need to add energy; and this is precisely what happens if you try to create an element with more protons than iron.
However, for some elements lighter than iron the total energy (mass+binding energy) of the created element (e.g. helium) can be SMALLER than that of the starting elements (e.g. deuterium); the energy coming out of a fusion process is just the "spare" energy.

I suspect you are implicitly assuming that heavier elements "contain" more binding energy than lighter elements but this is only true for heavy elements (beyond iron); the total energy of helium is smaller than that of two deuterium.
 
  • #3
f95toli said:
I suspect you are implicitly assuming that heavier elements "contain" more binding energy than lighter elements but this is only true for heavy elements (beyond iron); the total energy of helium is smaller than that of two deuterium.

Well, from my memory, the element Helium is actually lighter than the sum of two deuterons, and the difference in mass is the binding energy. However, my question remains: intuition tells me that going from two deuterons to one helium is an endothermic reaction because it requires some form of energy to convert that amount of mass into (binding) energy.

I know this is not the way things work, but what mechanism causes some mass to be converted into released energy? I know it's not gravity and not the weak interaction. Electromagnetic force seems to be to weak for these large amounts of energy on that scale, so left is the strong force?
 
  • #4
LennoxLewis said:
intuition tells me that going from two deuterons to one helium is an endothermic reaction because it requires some form of energy to convert that amount of mass into (binding) energy.
No, you DO need some initial energy to overcome the potential barrier that is due to the Coulomb force between the nuclei, but the net reaction is exothermic (otherwise fusion wouldn't work).



But what mechanism causes some mass to be converted into released energy?

As far as I understand there is no need for a mechanisms ; the difference in mass is DUE to the difference in binding energy; it is quite literally the energy itself that has a "weight".
Remember that SR not only tells that we can convert mass to energy; it also tells us that they are equivalent. Now, I can't claim to know much about on general relativity (I work in condensed matter/device physics); but as far as I understand the equivalence is quite clear there as well; mass and energy both have the same effect on space-time with a "conversion factor" equal to c^2.

Hence, all nuclei have a total mass given by the mass of the protons&neutrons + the binding energy divided by c^2
 
  • #5
LennoxLewis said:
So, i know that during nuclear fission, a heavy particle is split into two smaller ones that have a higher specific binding energy. And i know that a certain amount of mass is transformed to energy for the binding. The same thing happens during nuclear fusion.

However, from my intuitive (and probably wrong) point of view, one has to put energy INTO the atom in order to make one with a higher binding energy.

My reasoning is this: binding energy = the amount of energy to build the atom from scratch (i.e. moving the nucleons piece by piece from infinity to the fm-sized shell). So, if the binding energy is higher, more energy is required to put the atom together or rip it apart. So, wouldn't it make sense to go from a high binding energy state to a lower one, so as to RELEASE this binding energy?

It just doesn't make sense to me that energy is RELEASED to go to a high bound state. For instance, in atomic physics, an electron releases energy (an x-ray) when going to a lower binding energy-state.

I'm a bit confused despite having understood this for years in the past... can anyone help?
Hey I think you need to be introduced with the concept of “binding energy per nucleon” (B.N).You know this (B.N)=(B.E)/A where B.E represents binding energy of whole nucleus and A represents total number of nucleons .
Here when the Uranium atom is bombarded with the high speed neutrons it break into Barium and Krypton .I have looked the Binding energy per curve which tells that these Barium and Krypton have more (B,N) that the of the Uranium nucleus .This is not that the total binding energy of nucleus of the Barium or Krypton is greater than the uranium .It happens due to the less number of the nucleons of the Barium and Krypton nucleus.
Please notice the formulae I have given to figure out I have told.
There is less number of nucleons such that the total binding energy of the nucleus of the Barium or Krypton when Divided to the total number of nucleons ,each nucleons receive more binding energy than the each nucleons in the Uranium.Thats the way , despite the energy released in the uranium fission, the Barium or krypton nucleus have high bound state
Beside you mentioned the X ray production phenomenon. Please note that when speedy electrons strike the atom the metal ,the atom rises to the excitation potential and then releases the energy when returning the ground state . So they are different phenomenon.So you cannot link this to nuclear fission.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
Amrit N said:
Hey I think you need to be introduced with the concept of “binding energy per nucleon” (B.N).You know this (B.N)=(B.E)/A where B.E represents binding energy of whole nucleus and A represents total number of nucleons .
Here when the Uranium atom is bombarded with the high speed neutrons it break into Barium and Krypton .I have looked the Binding energy per curve which tells that these Barium and Krypton have more (B,N) that the of the Uranium nucleus .This is not that the total binding energy of nucleus of the Barium or Krypton is greater than the uranium .It happens due to the less number of the nucleons of the Barium and Krypton nucleus.
Please notice the formulae I have given to figure out I have told.
There is less number of nucleons such that the total binding energy of the nucleus of the Barium or Krypton when Divided to the total number of nucleons ,each nucleons receive more binding energy than the each nucleons in the Uranium.Thats the way , despite the energy released in the uranium fission, the Barium or krypton nucleus have high bound state
Beside you mentioned the X ray production phenomenon. Please note that when speedy electrons strike the atom the metal ,the atom rises to the excitation potential and then releases the energy when returning the ground state . So they are different phenomenon.So you cannot link this to nuclear fission.


Thanks for the reply. I still don't quite understand, however.

Let me put it simple, in terms of nuclear fusion.

The net equation is: deuteron + deuteron -> helium + garbageload of energy.

The deuteron has fewer B.E. PER NUCLEON, which i will call BE/A.
Helium has more BE/A.

So, before the reaction, you have:

deuteron (2 nucleons) low BE/A
deuteron (2 nucleons) low BE/A
So, in total:

4 nucleons with low BE/A.

Then after the reaction, you have:

Helium (4 nucleons), high BE/A.

In other words, you go from 4 nucleons with low total binding energy to 4 nucleons with high binding energy. (Since the total number of nucleons is same before as after, we can drop the binding energy "per nucleon").

So how can energy be RELEASED when the binding energy is released? My thought is that it requires energy to increase binding energy, in any system.
 
  • #7
LennoxLewis said:
Thanks for the reply. I still don't quite understand, however.

Let me put it simple, in terms of nuclear fusion.

The net equation is: deuteron + deuteron -> helium + garbageload of energy.

The deuteron has fewer B.E. PER NUCLEON, which i will call BE/A.
Helium has more BE/A.

So, before the reaction, you have:

deuteron (2 nucleons) low BE/A
deuteron (2 nucleons) low BE/A
So, in total:

4 nucleons with low BE/A.

Then after the reaction, you have:

Helium (4 nucleons), high BE/A.

In other words, you go from 4 nucleons with low total binding energy to 4 nucleons with high binding energy. (Since the total number of nucleons is same before as after, we can drop the binding energy "per nucleon").

So how can energy be RELEASED when the binding energy is released? My thought is that it requires energy to increase binding energy, in any system.

you Know that when two protons is made to come closer then by our knowledge we can say that these protons face electrostatic repulsion.To overcome this electrostatic repulsion external energy that usually comes as force have to applied to overcome the electrostatic repulsion barrier,surely this can cancel the electrostatic repulsion(opposing force effect.But it is useful to know that the energy is conserved whether force is cancelled.And note that these energy appears as the nuclear force which binds the nucleons and surely which can sense that the total binding energy has increased and therefore the binding energy per nucleon supporting the stable nuclei (as u meant as high bound state)
you may also be confused because the energy is released but it is useful to know that these energy comes due to mass lost (E=mc^2)
Note that the Gravitational force is negligible in comparision to electostsat and nuclear force
I also hope for your response,please reply.
 
  • #8
Amrit N said:
you Know that when two protons is made to come closer then by our knowledge we can say that these protons face electrostatic repulsion.To overcome this electrostatic repulsion external energy that usually comes as force have to applied to overcome the electrostatic repulsion barrier,surely this can cancel the electrostatic repulsion(opposing force effect.But it is useful to know that the energy is conserved whether force is cancelled.And note that these energy appears as the nuclear force which binds the nucleons and surely which can sense that the total binding energy has increased and therefore the binding energy per nucleon supporting the stable nuclei (as u meant as high bound state)
you may also be confused because the energy is released but it is useful to know that these energy comes due to mass lost (E=mc^2)
Note that the Gravitational force is negligible in comparision to electostsat and nuclear force
I also hope for your response,please reply.

Yes, i know there is a good amount of kinetic energy needed to overcome the Coulomb repulsion. 100 million degrees will do.

But my question remains: how can you go from a lower bound state to a higher bound state under the RELEASE of energy? In any other physical system, you need to insert energy to go to a higher bound state. If you climb a mountain, you need to put energy into it. If you want to put an electron in a higher bound state, you need to put a photon (energy) into it. If you want to go up the Harmonic Oscillator ladder, you require energy. You get the point... why is energy released upon going to a higher bound state when two deuterons form one Helium atom?
 
  • #9
Hi there,

It is all a matter of terminology. In "binding energy", one means the energy that binds the nuclei together. Therefore, this energy is a well-type potential energy. This means that you need to give energy to the nuclei so they can escape the attractive potential. Thus, this binding potential energy is less than 0.

Cheers
 
  • #10
LennoxLewis said:
So how can energy be RELEASED when the binding energy is released? My thought is that it requires energy to increase binding energy, in any system.

It's the name that confuses you. "Binding energy" is a negative energy. It is "missing energy".

The binding energy of a bound system is the energy the system is *missing* to be a system with its components separated.

If a hydrogen atom has a binding energy of 13.6 eV, that means that the actual energy of the bound system, as compared to a free electron and proton, is actually -13.6 eV.

A system with "high binding energy" is strongly bound, because it REQUIRES a lot of energy to break it.
 
  • #11
It's clear to me now. Thanks a lot, guys. :approve:
 

Related to Question about nuclear fission/fusion and binding energy

1. What is nuclear fission and how does it work?

Nuclear fission is the process of splitting an atomic nucleus into two or more smaller nuclei. This process releases a large amount of energy, which can be harnessed for various purposes. In nuclear reactors, uranium atoms are bombarded by neutrons, causing them to split and release energy in the form of heat. This heat is then used to produce steam, which turns turbines and generates electricity.

2. What is nuclear fusion and how does it differ from fission?

Nuclear fusion is the process of combining two or more atomic nuclei to form a larger nucleus. This process also releases a significant amount of energy, but it is much more difficult to achieve compared to fission. In fusion, the nuclei must overcome their natural repulsion to come close enough together for the strong nuclear force to take over and bind them together. Nuclear fusion is what powers the sun and other stars.

3. What is binding energy and why is it important in nuclear reactions?

Binding energy is the amount of energy required to hold a nucleus together. It is important in nuclear reactions because it determines the stability of an atom and the energy released during fission or fusion. The more tightly bound a nucleus is, the more energy is required to break it apart. This is why nuclear reactions can release such large amounts of energy.

4. What are the potential benefits and risks of nuclear fission and fusion?

Nuclear fission has been used for decades as a source of energy, producing large amounts of electricity with relatively low greenhouse gas emissions. However, it also produces radioactive waste that must be stored safely for thousands of years. Nuclear fusion has the potential to provide a virtually limitless source of clean energy, but it is still in the research and development stage and has not yet been successfully harnessed for practical use.

5. How does nuclear energy compare to other forms of energy production?

Nuclear energy is a highly efficient source of energy, producing much more electricity per unit of fuel compared to fossil fuels. It also has a relatively small carbon footprint and does not contribute to air pollution. However, the risks associated with nuclear accidents and the long-term storage of radioactive waste make it a controversial form of energy production. Other renewable energy sources such as solar and wind power are becoming more popular and may eventually surpass nuclear energy in terms of efficiency and safety.

Similar threads

Back
Top