Quote:
aiken said:
Quote:
Slick said:
Quote:
aiken said:
Offense? No, it's always good to learn something new or dispel delusions. What equation would be correct? Asking this out of curiosity.
|
I'm not vouching for everything on this website, but here's an overview. Any college textbook also has the basics.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ne/fusion.html
|
So what was wrong with an equation? It was just written in simplified form, and equalent to strict equation:
edit: see Last reaction
|
Aiken, sorry for the confusion, but I never said your equation was wrong. This is what I said:
Quote:
Slick said:
<snip>
Fusion is considered "clean" because we won't have to mine fissionable materials from the ground; we can pull deuterium out of the ocean - ocean water is abundant, right? and has an infinite supply of deuterium, right? They also think that the the reaction is Hydrogen -> Helium. I don't see any "dirty" by-products in that reaction (that equation is not correct, by the way, but it is "common knowledge") And Helium is very safe and very clean. We all know that. We put it in our kids' balloons. We inhale it to make our voices sound funny.
|
What I did disagree with is the Last sentence here:
Quote:
aiken said:
Probably it came from the most trivial fusion reaction: D+T->He+n+E. It doesn't have a decay products in form of radioactive isotopes, so it's considered "clean".
|
because of unmentioned following reactions involving the free neutron and I said:
Quote:
Slick said:
Again, no offense, but even in your example of one of the basic fusion reactions:
D+T->He+n+E
Free neutrons just don't hang around, the free neutron "n" in that equation can/does activate surrounding materials and does create radioactive isotopes.
|
I see that I am becoming a pain here and that wasn't my intention. I'll leave this thread quietly now. Sorry if I upset anyone.