Author Topic: Quark Fusion More Powerful Than H-Fusion  (Read 1710 times)

Offline sanman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3850
  • Liked: 485
  • Likes Given: 7
Quark Fusion More Powerful Than H-Fusion
« on: 11/06/2017 01:15 PM »
Fusion of 2 Bottom Quarks can release nearly an order of magnitude more energy than fusion of hydrogen nuclei:

https://phys.org/news/2017-11-theoretical-quark-fusion-powerful-hydrogen.html

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/215268/20171106/particle-physics-discovery-fusing-heavy-quarks-can-produce-10-times-more-energy-than-nuclear-fusion.htm

https://www.nature.com/articles/551040a


Needless to say, the short lifespan of Bottom Quarks means that it would be impossible to turn into a bomb.
However, could it be possible to reliably create briefly-lived quarks inside a collider in such a way as to facilitate quickly combining them with each other before they expire?

At least quarks, unlike atomic nuclei, have no Coulombic repulsion. Quarks actually have a very strong affinity for each other, which is why they like to combine in triplets to form particles such as protons and neutrons.

Is it possible to imagine a Rubbia-style accelerator-driven reactor (obviously this wouldn't be for mere nuclear fission, but for hammering particles together to form the Bottom Quarks) that could achieve the conditions for Bottom Quark Fusion?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerator-driven_subcritical_reactor

Offline meberbs

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1330
  • Liked: 1224
  • Likes Given: 313
Re: Quark Fusion More Powerful Than H-Fusion
« Reply #1 on: 11/06/2017 03:49 PM »
However, could it be possible to reliably create briefly-lived quarks inside a collider in such a way as to facilitate quickly combining them with each other before they expire?
With what purpose?

With the purpose of demonstrating the theoretical calculations (this research was a theoretical exercise, not an experiment): then maybe.

With the purpose of generating energy: No. You are just getting back some of the energy that went into making the heavy quarks to begin with, and that you would generally get back anyway as it decays.

Offline Mark K

  • Member
  • Posts: 51
  • Wisconsin
  • Liked: 21
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Quark Fusion More Powerful Than H-Fusion
« Reply #2 on: 11/06/2017 03:53 PM »
You would need to be creating doubly charmed hadrons ... I think the people writing this paper didn't think about the efficiency of doing that in the paper... You you might get 200% (roughly) of the energy of creating that hadron out when you have that hadron being created with just what is needed to create it, not the system energy.

But the efficiency to create those in best case in going to be 1% or less of input energy to an accelerator. So your doubling of energy out when they are created (and follow the right decay route)  would be drowned in the inefficiencies of creation. You are going to have to create those from whole cloth as there is no particle that is around normally that has charmed quarks in it or decays to one with charmed quarks in it. The building efficiency of that particle would be important as well as the lifetime which, as the paper says, is to short to get any kind of chain reaction going.
 
So you can't store them since the lifetime is too short, and thus have to produce them on the fly at horrible efficiency. You could look for different hadrons to start with but all of the ones with heavy quarks have very short lifetimes.

Note to meberbs. The idea to me would have been to use a horrible efficiency process to create the particles and store them so when they decay they are an energy source - a super radioactive battery. But that just doesn't work because of the super short lifetimes.

Offline Asteroza

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 480
  • Liked: 52
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Quark Fusion More Powerful Than H-Fusion
« Reply #3 on: 11/06/2017 10:08 PM »
In isolation they may be too short lived to be useful by themselves, but perhaps the quark fusion might be suitable as a trigger mechanism for something else? The energy density may be useful within the confines of some kind of reactor/propulsion system...

Offline meberbs

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1330
  • Liked: 1224
  • Likes Given: 313
Re: Quark Fusion More Powerful Than H-Fusion
« Reply #4 on: 11/07/2017 03:11 AM »
However, could it be possible to reliably create briefly-lived quarks inside a collider in such a way as to facilitate quickly combining them with each other before they expire?
With what purpose?

With the purpose of demonstrating the theoretical calculations (this research was a theoretical exercise, not an experiment): then maybe.

With the purpose of generating energy: No. You are just getting back some of the energy that went into making the heavy quarks to begin with, and that you would generally get back anyway as it decays.
The terms you used... "demonstrating theoretical calculations" is a awkward, meandering, anachronistic pleonasm implying "this is acceptable science if it is theoretical only".  If you read the article in the link, the theoretical calculations have already been done.  Understanding this should not be so evasive if you read the article.  They want to experiment.
The phrasing might have been slightly awkward, but it was not meandering, anachronistic, or a pleonasm. If anything it was too pithy, since you obviously failed to understand what I said at all. The long version of what I said is that "an experiment could possibly be run to observe if the predicted reaction occurs and releases the amount of energy predicted by the theoretical calculations."

The title of the article in the link is "Theoretical quark fusion found to be more powerful than hydrogen fusion".  This is an exciting article.
The title of the journal article is "Quark-level analogue of nuclear fusion with doubly heavy baryons." The title of the news article is less relevant.

Offline meberbs

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1330
  • Liked: 1224
  • Likes Given: 313
Re: Quark Fusion More Powerful Than H-Fusion
« Reply #5 on: 11/07/2017 04:31 AM »
berbs... you are being too sarcastic.
Nothing I have said in this thread has been sarcastic.

You need to read the articles and strive to understand what is being said. 
I did, but you need to actually read my posts, because nothing you said is even relevant to my posts. You seem to think I disagree with the original research, when there is nothing to disagree with in it.

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3520
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 2083
  • Likes Given: 2466
Re: Quark Fusion More Powerful Than H-Fusion
« Reply #6 on: 11/07/2017 06:48 AM »
berbs... you are being too sarcastic.
Nothing I have said in this thread has been sarcastic.

You need to read the articles and strive to understand what is being said. 
I did, but you need to actually read my posts, because nothing you said is even relevant to my posts. You seem to think I disagree with the original research, when there is nothing to disagree with in it.

Nothing you said in this thread sounded the least bit sarcastic to me.  It was all very clear and well reasoned.

Offline rdheld

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 146
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Quark Fusion More Powerful Than H-Fusion
« Reply #7 on: 11/07/2017 11:23 AM »
does not seem practical any time soon, but experimental verification would be important.

Offline stefan r

  • Member
  • Posts: 57
  • pennsylvania
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Quark Fusion More Powerful Than H-Fusion
« Reply #8 on: 11/08/2017 02:57 AM »
does not seem practical any time soon, but experimental verification would be important.

For what application will this be practical in the distant future?

Offline sanman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3850
  • Liked: 485
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Quark Fusion More Powerful Than H-Fusion
« Reply #9 on: 11/08/2017 10:50 AM »
For what application will this be practical in the distant future?

What if we don't want this for net energy production, but rather for bandgap coherence - like for lasing?

138 MeV is a huge bandgap, but it's a bandgap nonetheless.

This quark-fusion reaction pathway is then a theoretical means to generate packets of energy, all 138MeV in size.

We know that lasing with nucleons is possible, for producing gamma-ray lasers.

https://phys.org/news/2011-05-gamma-ray-laser-emit-nuclear.html

Can we do lasing with quarks?
« Last Edit: 11/08/2017 10:55 AM by sanman »

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6057
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 788
  • Likes Given: 4892
Re: Quark Fusion More Powerful Than H-Fusion
« Reply #10 on: 11/15/2017 12:09 AM »
I propose we refer to the 2 bottom quarks involved as the cheeks of the process.  :)
"Solids are a branch of fireworks, not rocketry. :-) :-) ", Henry Spencer 1/28/11  Averse to bold? You must be in marketing."It's all in the sequencing" K. Mattingly.  STS-Keeping most of the stakeholders happy most of the time.

Offline ppnl

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 179
  • Liked: 104
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: Quark Fusion More Powerful Than H-Fusion
« Reply #11 on: 11/15/2017 03:12 PM »
I propose we refer to the 2 bottom quarks involved as the cheeks of the process.  :)

In the early days when these particles were still theoretical there was a naming conflict. Some called the bottom quark the beauty quark. So the search was either for naked beauty or bare bottom.

I think truth and beauty were far better names than top and bottom.

Tags: