English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

like what sort of actions and reactions would need to take place for somthing like this to work.

2006-06-27 12:05:06 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics Physics

im talkin about a machine that could run off of anything that u could put in it like trash for example to convert that from mass to energy what kind of machine would u need for that?

2006-06-27 12:11:33 · update #1

7 answers

Cf: atomic bombs and nuclear power plants. They use the conversion of a tiny amount of mass to lots and lots of energy.

2006-06-27 12:09:41 · answer #1 · answered by poorcocoboiboi 6 · 0 0

Actually in any machine that produces energy, there is a measurable conversion of mass to energy. For example, in some of the early scientific studies trying to refute the conservation of mass theory, there was measurable loss of mass in a simple experiment measuring the by products of hydrogen combustion. Measure the mass of the hydrogen and oxygen gases before combustion, and the mass of the water by-product (assuming 100% combustion). There is a measurable conversion of mass to energy that is bound by E=MC**2. THe energy was measured by the temperature difference of a water bath. Any generation of energy requires the conversion of mass, which is why there is not, nor will ever be a perpetual motion machine.

2006-06-27 12:54:26 · answer #2 · answered by odu83 7 · 0 0

In theory, you would need something that would be able to cause the nuclei of the elements in whatever you input to break apart, i.e. fission. The difficulty is when you have lighter elements... they are more difficult to break apart, as the nuclei are more compact.

The problem with fission is that you generally need lighter elements for that... and you can't fuse anything with a higher atomic number than iron. Iron just won't fuse. That's why the heavier elements are only produced in supernovae.

The biggest problem you would face would be containing the sheer amount of energy involved... first, you would need a huge amount to get either to start, and then, the amount released would be tremendous. Secondary would be what to do with the waste products... many might be radioactive.

It's a big problem, and if you can figure it out, you'll be rich.

Good luck!

2006-06-27 13:22:20 · answer #3 · answered by Bubbajones 3 · 0 0

To actually produce, not convert from another form, energy, you've already answered your ? This machine will have to turn matter into energy, and the amount of energy is given by E = mc^2. The units are joules, kilograms and meters/sec.

So far, this process is only known to take place at a nuclear level involving fission or fusion.

Good luck at the patent office..........

2006-06-27 12:15:22 · answer #4 · answered by Steve 7 · 0 0

The e=mc^2 you're talking about is the conversion of rest mass to energy. Very few interactions on earth actually do this. Here's what's happening in various reactions:

- Combustion (normal burning) releases the energy in chemical bonds between atoms. No noticeable conversion of mass to energy*
- Nuclear fission releases the energy in nuclear bonds between nucleons (protons and neutrons). This is not really mass to energy conversion although the binding energy is usually included in the bulk nucleus mass so there is a measurable "mass loss"
- Nuclear fusion releases the energy in creating nuclear bonds between nucleons (protons and neutrons). This is not really mass to energy conversion although the binding energy is usually included in the bulk nucleus mass so there is a measurable "mass loss"
- Antimatter-matter collisions result in the total conversion of mass to energy. A typical matter-antimatter reaction is the collision of an electron and positron (anti-electron) to create two photons (a 1MeV pair).

So the only full mass to energy conversion reaction is matter-antimatter. You'd need to react your trash with antimatter to fuel it. The bad news is that antimatter is rare and unstable. the good news is that you don't need very much at all to create enormous energy (after all, c^2 is a big number!)


Hope this helps!
The Chicken

2006-06-27 13:23:21 · answer #5 · answered by Magic Chicken 3 · 0 0

In short, it would require either A) a matter to energy conversion, or B) an energy to matter conversion. (not thermal, but nuclear)

2006-06-27 12:12:12 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The machine would think about it

2006-07-02 22:18:40 · answer #7 · answered by 22 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers