what would the impact be to the rest of the rate of fusion if one assumes a particle energy greater than Vo making the sigma value without tunneling be multiplied by an imaginary number?
These lectures are so alike my Indian teachers, they would solve everything on the blackboard and make you understand, in the US they leave you to learn on your own, really great lectures, I wish there were similar calculus lectures
The sun is definitely there. But you cannot tell which of its many protons will change to a neutron at any given time. That is governed by probability.
You talk about not being able to use a collider. Why not accelerate all particals in one direction, then when they are moving enough. Slam the breaks on some section of particles, by reversing acceleration. This would cause the tail to crash into the head. I doubt the delta will be great but maybe it could reduce temperature.
Beam vs. beam collision. Relativistic waves should be small for heavy particles, heavier with velocity. Need to use energy released to drive chain reaction. H-bomb is the answer.
@12:00 You don't explain specifically why accelerator-based fusion is impractical. You say there "aren't enough interactions," so why not just crank up the beam intensity? The reason, as it's usually stated, is bremsstrahlung interactions with the (assumed cold) target of the accelerated beam. (But does this also apply for beam-beam fusion? Why or why not?) In any case, it would be useful to go through the math.
All that trouble to produce kinetic energy. Envisioning hairy people rejoicing, dancing before their cave, waving clubs and shouting fire! We have mastered fire! No oops when all the X's were Y's? Waiting to see what happens as one attempts to fuse larger elements than those abundantly found in sea water. Maybe next time... to Iron56.
This is very interesting. I was never aware the sun's core wasn't actually hot enough (on average :)) to produce nuclear fusion. What is the actual probability?
Dr Physcis, Can you kindly let me know what is the difference between the graphs (both on the binding energy per nucleon) in video 23 (Nuclear Fusion - Part 1 of 2) at 40 sec and video 25 (Nuclear Fusion, Continued) at 11 sec? All your videos are very good and i enjoy them very much. Many thanks. Tam TW
+twtam73 They are the same except that one is inverted. The one in this video is the usual way it is drawn. I drew it the other way up on the other video because I wanted to make clear that as Binding Energy increases the energy state is lower.
This is an amazing lecture - thank you for posting
Great videos on nuclear physics!
This is awesome :D
Thank you
Again your lecture was very clear and enjoyable
Thank you!
Keep making this kind of contents...keep teaching
what would the impact be to the rest of the rate of fusion if one assumes a particle energy greater than Vo making the sigma value without tunneling be multiplied by an imaginary number?
Nicely explained
It should be area of a quantized sphere instead of a circle?
amazing
40:35 Biggest plot twist in history 😂
It is an excellent lecture. Thankyou
brilliant thanks
These lectures are so alike my Indian teachers, they would solve everything on the blackboard and make you understand, in the US they leave you to learn on your own, really great lectures, I wish there were similar calculus lectures
Try "Physics Videos by Eugene Khutoryansky" I think he has some animations demonstrating calculus eg ua-cam.com/video/rjLJIVoQxz4/v-deo.html
Are you saying that the Sun operates by way of probability. That would mean the Sun is probably there.
The sun is definitely there. But you cannot tell which of its many protons will change to a neutron at any given time. That is governed by probability.
You talk about not being able to use a collider. Why not accelerate all particals in one direction, then when they are moving enough. Slam the breaks on some section of particles, by reversing acceleration. This would cause the tail to crash into the head. I doubt the delta will be great but maybe it could reduce temperature.
Beam vs. beam collision. Relativistic waves should be small for heavy particles, heavier with velocity. Need to use energy released to drive chain reaction. H-bomb is the answer.
6:15 I died 😂
at 46:40..how can we derive the whole expression?
@12:00 You don't explain specifically why accelerator-based fusion is impractical. You say there "aren't enough interactions," so why not just crank up the beam intensity?
The reason, as it's usually stated, is bremsstrahlung interactions with the (assumed cold) target of the accelerated beam. (But does this also apply for beam-beam fusion? Why or why not?) In any case, it would be useful to go through the math.
It appears you are up against some spring action to me. A as hard problem. Just guessing.
hi ..Amazing..you solved a riddle..could you please explain how can we derive coloumb probability factor appeared in cross section?
Wooooowwwww
All that trouble to produce kinetic energy. Envisioning hairy people rejoicing, dancing before their cave, waving clubs and shouting fire! We have mastered fire! No oops when all the X's were Y's? Waiting to see what happens as one attempts to fuse larger elements than those abundantly found in sea water. Maybe next time... to Iron56.
Your lecture are really awesome explanation i easily understand please upload the mathematical method physics.
Sir please upload the Particle physics lectures
This is very interesting. I was never aware the sun's core wasn't actually hot enough (on average :)) to produce nuclear fusion. What is the actual probability?
are you kidding me ? 40 years ago ,you sound like you are about 25 or 30
Maybe his videos stopped because he died... that's rather gloomy
Hahah so true
@@EugeneOneguine yes good videos
Dr Physcis,
Can you kindly let me know what is the difference between the graphs (both on the binding energy per nucleon) in video 23 (Nuclear Fusion - Part 1 of 2) at 40 sec and video 25 (Nuclear Fusion, Continued) at 11 sec?
All your videos are very good and i enjoy them very much.
Many thanks.
Tam TW
+twtam73 They are the same except that one is inverted. The one in this video is the usual way it is drawn. I drew it the other way up on the other video because I wanted to make clear that as Binding Energy increases the energy state is lower.
+DrPhysicsA
many thanks, you are so kind
kind regards
i just copied everything for my assignment lol
Thank you!