You tell your friend that no machine can possibly put out more energy than is put into it, and your friend states that a nuclear reactor puts out more energy than is put into it. What do you say?
2006-11-11 02:35:06 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Physics
Energy and mass are equivalent, they can be changed back and forth. That is the meaning of e = mc^2, that energy and mass relate by a constant (a very big constant). The energy of a nuclear reactor comes from converting mass into energy. It is exactly the same as saying that a gas engine puts out more energy than it takes in - a gas engine takes in energy in the form of chemical bonds and releases taht energy, a nuclear reactor takes in energy in the form of mass and releases it.
2006-11-11 02:51:55 · answer #1 · answered by sofarsogood 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"i never thought of that - but i don't think a nuclear reactor can exactly be called a machine, because a machine is defined as 'a device that alters the magnitude or direction, or both, of an applied mechanical force', so technically, a nuclear reactor is not a machine"
2006-11-11 10:39:18 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
It could be argued that many machines produce more energy than what is put in, because it is impossible to compare measurements of different energy sources.
You're not going to win this argument. Either change the subject or agree with him and go have a beer.
2006-11-11 10:53:13 · answer #3 · answered by kidd 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
mass is converted in energy. (E=mc2)
Mind: a heat pump (as a refrigerator) can transport more heat form out to in than it costs electrical energy. So the efficiency > 100% !!! This does NOT conflict the conservation law of energy.
Th
2006-11-11 11:17:20 · answer #4 · answered by Thermo 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you crazy?
2006-11-11 10:41:33 · answer #5 · answered by Juan D 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋