I'm confused about a textbook question that asks how the power of a homogenous uranium reactor would be affected by a person standing next to the core.  Would the person change the fuel moderator ratio (since people are mostly water), or would there be no effect?\n\nAlso, how would launching the core into outer space affect its power?  \n\nThe textbook does not discuss these particular questions, nor was I able to find the answers by web search.  Thank you in advance :-)
205655
a person should not change the fuel moderator ratio, if anything the person would feel warm because their body would help dissipate the heat from the core, so there should be no effect. \nlaunching the core in to space shouldnt affect its power output, being that there is not air in space to cool it or contain it it may just overheat and melt-down, or become an uncontrolled reaction and explode like any other nuclear weapon. but i am not too sure
5714
Interesting scenario first of all i would like to comment. Well actually the bond is due to electronic forces. Hence mass has litle effect on the bond strength. Thus i thikn the effect of mass change should be a small one!! unless you change the charge of proton too!!
377528
You have to learn how to do simple arithmetic, and understand simple physics like the conservation of momentum and the conservation of energy.\n\nThen you will see that the effect of the biggest possible nuclear explosion on the Earth's orbit is like the effect of an insect landing on the Empire State Building.  The Earth has been pushed by radiation from solar flares with enormously more energy, hit by asteroids with enormously more momentum, than any puny little man-made nuclear explosion, and its orbit was still not affected measurably.
546895
I suppose the power is inversely proportional to the square of the distance. Thus a square meter on Pluto gets 1/1600 as much power as one on Earth, or 1400/1600, 7/8 of a watt.
548293
Uranium is used in atom bombs, \nIt is definitely not very calm. \nRadioactivity is a scare, \nThis will burn your skin off without a care. \nWalton figured out how to split it up. \nWith nuclear fission, he could blow things up. \nThis helped America win World War II, \nThey bombed Japan and saved many poor Jews. \nKlaproth found Uranium in pitchblende, \nIt’s mainly in Australia, whom we depend \nOn for fuel in a nuclear reactor \nOr a dangerous annihilator. \nIts orthorhombic structure is so fun, \nIt can be converted to plutonium. \nBy Carsen Stringer\nUranium: Friend or Foe? \nThis poem might give you some ideas
169814
Only U-235 and Pu-239 and slow neutrons. fast neutrons just pass through. Uranium has some spontaneous fission. \nCollisions with moderate size atoms will leave the new atom spinning and it can then fission. \nAlphas lose a lot of energy just overcoming the coumb barrier then the protons/neutrons are absorbed more than splitting.
5841
All nuclear plants that are producing power must be "critical."  The plant is shut down when it is "subcritical."  A nuclear accident can occur if the reactor goes "supercritical."  A supercritical plant can release uncontrolled heat drying the core and melting it.  A melted core would fall by gravity toward the center of the world (like anything else that falls).  Since Canton OH was almost directly opposite Canton China on the globe, the core would fall toward China, thus the China syndrome.  Of course the core would have to melt its way past the plant barriers but would not release enough energy to reach China let alone deeply penetrate the earth.  For those with a wild imagination, China would also be protected by the massive molten layer in the center of the earth that surrounds the extremely hard metal core.  None-the-less, China Syndrome is a catchy phrase.
18008
This is too hypothetical to be a real problem.  The heat generated would also deform the steel.  For the current largest Thermonuclear bomb you would be looking at something approaching distances in the wall of the container approaching a mile.  Even this depends upon the volume contained within.\n\nFrom a practical aspect, if one took all of the world's current steel production for one year, you might have enough steel to construct such a device (about 5 million metric tons).  If you miscalculated, you would get an even larger boom (like putting a cherry bomb in a sealed pipe).\n\nA bomb is not a nuclear generator.  Read at the site below for information on a Soviet 100 megaton bomb:
204215
If you are really interested in this topic, I recommend reading "The Plutonium Files," a recently published book. It reports on the negative health effects of uranium and plutonium, specifically the results of secret tests performed on civilian citizens and members of the military, by our government. (Almost all of whom were unaware they had unwittingly become guinea pigs.) Very interesting and informative.
595355
Consider the graph of effective potential (i.e. that including the angular momentum contribution) vs. radius 'r' for a test particle in orbit around a Schwarzschild hole. i.e. for timelike geodesics.   The slope of this graph at any value of r can be regarded as the force required to keep an object in orbit at that radius.  At r=3M, the slope can be zero (if the angular momentum's right), but for smaller r (i.e. approaching the Schwarzschild radius r=2M from larger values of r), this slope increases rather sharply (as r->0 the r^-3 term dominates).  Now, this is still FINITE, not infinite at r=2M (so the thread posted by the Canadian guy has incorrect info) but it can still be very large...  So, to keep your arm intact, you'd have to keep your whole arm more or less in orbit at a succession of raidi approaching r=2M.  \n\nThis then becomes a medical question: how strong is your arm?  If it's not strong enough, your hand breaks off (or something) and the lost bits freely fall into the hole.  If your arm is "strong enough", however... hmmm.  That's a good question!\n\n...Oh, and tell your ship's captain: "Don't forget to compensate for the decay of our orbit due to the gravitational radiation we're emitting!"
378020
A nuclear reactor is critical when the number of neutrons generated is just sufficient for a self sustaining reaction.  Three neutrons are produced when uranium fissions.  If <1 neutron interacts with another uranium nucleus the reaction is sub critical.  If 1 of the 3 neutrons interacts with another uranium nucleus, the reaction is critical and proceeds at a constant rate.  If >1 neutron interacts with another uranium nucleus the reaction rate grows exponentially and, if unchecked, will result in a large explosion.
394782
94,240Pu ---> 40,93Zr + 54,144Xe + _3_ 0,1n\n\nThe first number is the proton number, the second is the nucleon number. Both of these must be conserved in fission. As the number of protons is already conserved, the difference in the nucleon number must come from free neutrons.
181357
heres a show we did on depleated uranium http://www.philipdru.com/rokke_stream.html\n\nwe're tryin to bring things like this to peoples attention. tough going though, nobody wants to listen. weve gotten through to some people, makes it worth it. http://scotthortonshow.com/
395553
CanTexan is on the right path. More specifically, Nuclear Reactors create Heat. This heat energy creates a Pressure in the transfer medium (Water -> Steam) and is transferred to Rotational Mechanical Energy in a turbine. The attached Generator produces Electrical Energy.
631749
Nuclear Powered Space Missions - Past and Future by Regina Hagen 11/8/98 \n\nhttp://www.space4peace.org/ianus/npsmlit.htm\n\nhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/science/space/exploration/futurespaceflight/nuclearpower.shtml\n\nhttp://www.spacedaily.com/reports/BoeingLed_Team_to_Study_NuclearPowered_Space_Systems.html\n\nhttp://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/space_policy/000476space_science_and_nu.html
564531
It would do nothing.  In 1994, a comet (Shoemaker-Levy) crashed into Jupiter.  I don't have the exact numbers on the equivalent to a nuclear bomb, but it was much more powerful than any bomb.  Jupiter kind of sat there and shrugged it off without much effect.\n\nEdit:  Found a site that says *one* fragment of the comet was the same as 225,000 megatons.  The biggest fragment was the same as 6 million megatons.\n\nhttp://www.isc.tamu.edu/~astro/sl9/cometfaq2.html
122169
well depending on how well it's built, the same thing that would happen to any reactor hear in the US if it core was breached. You would have a radiation leak