Not now.
Also, iron being at the nuclear energy low point, changing it to other elements takes power, rather than releasing it.
2006-11-23 04:50:49
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
A nuclear explosion actually transforms mass into energy. Simply put, at least 7 pounds of plutonium is needed to have a nuclear reaction, but only a very small amount is transformed into energy, less than fraction of a gram.
If you could convert 1 pound of steel into pure energy, it would have the equivalent force of 30,000,000,000,000,000 lbs of force.
2006-11-23 06:42:26
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
If we consider elementry particles with zero rest mass then we can describe them in terms of 4-vectors. Mass and energy are two aspects of four-energy and should be easily interchangable.
The problem is really that of looking at why 'rest-energy' exists and manifests itself as mass. The massive particles seem to be locked up with quantities known as their Quantum Numbers. These Quantum Numbers are said to be conserved. The only way to unlock the energy is to cancel out these Quantum Numbers by supplying materials with equal and opposite quantum numbers.
To convert an electron into energy we need an anti-electron with completely opposite quantum numbers. Bring the two together and we get pure energy - which may then evolve to give mixture of other particles depending on how much energy there is in the 'ensemble'..
To convert a Proton into energy we need an anti-Proton with completely opposite quantum numbers.
To turn your Iron into pure energy would require an equal number of anti-electrons, anti-protons and anti-neutrons - best supplied as an equal mass of anti-Iron. This would ensure that all quantum numbers would sum to zero.
We do not understand why these quantum numbers lock matter up in this way. It is Lucky that it does or we would not exist!
2006-11-23 11:00:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by Rufus Cat 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
i once thought about exactly the same question, except that instead of a block of steel, i considered a SONY WALKMAN (which is a sort of pre-historic form of I-pod)
I calculated, using E=MC squared, that If i could find an antimatter Sony Watchman of the same model number, bringing the two in contact would release all the energy of both masses.
Since this would destroy the earth and everything on it, i hope there is a really, i mean REALLY good song playing on both of them at the time.
2006-11-23 05:15:32
·
answer #4
·
answered by disco legend zeke 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Theoritically, yes ........ in long steps u can do it.
U can't convert steel directly to energy .....
u got to break it in small parts, decay it..... n then convert it.
As said, iron nuclie is one of most stable in all, its very difficult task to achive but none the less can be done.
Another way is much simplar, just find its anti particle n bring them in contact ...... slowly both will be converted in to the energy only. pure energy. :D
relativisticly speaking........... mass is just another form of energy, so pure energy :D
2006-11-23 06:23:33
·
answer #5
·
answered by Mann 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
In concept, moving count number into capacity is available, yet that capacity has no "memory" of the issue it was once and, even in spite of the undeniable fact that theoretically the capacity could desire to be switched over decrease back into count number, it does not be the issue that gave upward push to the capacity in the 1st place. So, all in all, it can be a extraordinarily pointless technique and that i for you could actually choose my count number to stay extraordinarily plenty because it particularly is totally than create my own own mushroom cloud in basic terms for the sake of it!
2016-12-29 09:15:37
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes.. but with nanotechnology. The properties of the element can become radically different. For example, Aluminum, once altered, becomes combustible.
2006-11-23 09:07:42
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes ther is a way but only on paper and if you can heat steel into a gas . god bless you
2006-11-23 05:10:43
·
answer #8
·
answered by srini 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are many theories as to how to go about doing that, but none have been successful.
2006-11-23 05:09:02
·
answer #9
·
answered by krbmeister 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes, that's Einstiens equation e=mc^2. It's very hard to do so though.
2006-11-23 06:22:40
·
answer #10
·
answered by koolguy 2
·
0⤊
0⤋