| | Dr. Curlz asked a question under the previous post. Here's the answer:
RYC re E=MC2...
What I can tell you about this equasion is limited to its application to nuclear physics. The atom, as you probably know, is made up of neutrons, protons, and electrons. The electrons exist in a "shell" outside the nucleus and for our purpose we can ignore them. In the nucleus we find protons and neutrons. Although these are actually constructed of tinier particles called quarks, we don't need to break it down that far to understand the basics. The number of protons in a nucleus determines the chemical characteristics (element) of the atom. Protons have a net positive charge and so they tend to want to repel one another. On their own they would do so very quickly and violently. But there's this other thing inside the atom called a neutron. The neutron doesn't have any charge (technically a net charge of zero, but we don't have to go there either). The neutron is roughly the same size as the proton. In other words, about the same mass. Now, if you know about gravity, you know there's this weak force in nature that causes mass to attract. Its what holds us onto the earth when we should otherwise be flung from the surface. Well, at the atomic level there's a similar force that is called nuclear binding energy. Protons have some, but without neutrons there's not enough to hold multiple protons together.
Over a century ago it was learned that if you hit an atom square in the face with a neutron its like hitting a stack of milk bottles with a baseball. Okay, so you break an atom apart and what do you get, two little atoms, right? Well, yes, that's basically true. But you get something else. You see, when a large atom splits, you get two smaller atoms, a few free neutrons that are like fragments, and you get some extra "energy" that was formerly being used to hold the original atom together. The emitted energy is in the form of heat (vibration of the new smaller nucleii) and in beams of radiation called gamma rays. Also, if you add up the total mass of the parts that break off, they weigh less than the original large atom. Something has to account for this odd differential, thus the aforementioned equasion...
Now let's look at the math. E stands for energy. The unit of measure at the nuclear level is called an "electronvolt" (eV). Mass, at the nuclear level, is measured in what is called an atomic mass unit (AMU). Through a long process of testing at a handful of labs from before Einstein wrote that equasion early in the 20th century until well after, the mathmatic constant used to convert between mass and energy was found to be 931 MeV per AMU. Some wiseguy broke down the equation to show the constituent mathmatic components of energy having a time variable (which it does). This makes sense, however, since pure energy travels with the restrictions of mass at the speed of light. Light is, after all, photon energy. Duh. In other words, there is a mathmatic relationship between the speed of light (photon energy given off (or absorbed) by a nuclear reaction) and energy and mass. This equasion does NOT mean that mass converts to energy by speeding up enough, nor that all mass in a nuclear reaction can be converted to energy.
Everything I've described so far applies to heavy elements being torn apart. That's called fission. Fission is used in a controlled environment to generate heat in reactors for power plant use. The first atom bombs dropped on Japan used an "uncontrolled" reaction.
For elements lighter than iron energy is instead given off when they are combined. Joining two protons (and enough neutrons to cause stability) is called fusion. There's no practical way for us as humans to generate fusion for any elements heavier than hydrogen, so hydrogen is the basic element used in the hydrogen bomb. Because we have not yet figured out how to sustain a controlled chain fusion reaction it has thus far not been used for power generation. Fusion, however, just like fission, uses the same mathmatic model (E=MC2) to relate energy and mass.
Well. You asked.
PS - The fact that a wide range of nucleii exist in our world is proof to me of God's existance. According to the law of entropy everything should break down to a common chaos state. In physics this implies everything should either be iron (the most stable element) or hydrogen (protons NOT tethered to each other with the glue like force of neutrons). That protons combine with neutrons in the right proportions to create carbon (the base element of amino acids and thus life) is astounding. That even heavier atoms like oxygen exist defies reason, even moreso because there's enough oxygen on our planet to make not only breathable air, but enough water to cover the right amount of surface area for suitable weather, drinking, subtarranian natural filtration, plant life, not to mention enough free oxygen in salt or fresh water for fish to live and enough water vapor in our atmosphere for temperature and radiation control. I am baffled by "scientists" who can't see God in nature when His fingerprints are all I can see. |
This is my book. It is for sale online. Ask James is a bible study in Q&A format. It is perfect for individual or small group studies. This book covers a multitude of topics from joy to anger, death to salvation, faith to doubt, temptation to religion, and many more. Learn to ask hard questions and how to find satisfying answers. Buy my book today. Buy enough for your next group study.
Yeah, I'll blame the hour. 
