(no subject)
Wikipedia
"...Spencer states that nuclear power must be a manifestation of the Aquarian Age and comments on the parallel between the 25,000 years it takes for uranium to decay with the 26,000 cycle of the astrological ages.[16] No isotopes of uranium have a half-life of 25,000 years though, naturally occurring forms have half-lives of 4.46 billion years(U-238), 700 million years(U-235), and 245,000 years(U-234).
"Nuclear fission : Nuclear fission is the process of splitting atoms. When a nucleus of an (e.g. Uranium 235) atom is hit by a neutron bullet and splits into two parts, it is called fission. The total mass of the two parts will be less than the initial mass. The "lost" mass will be converted into energy according to Einstein's equation, E = mc2 (E = energy | m = mass | c = speed of light ~ 3 x 108m s-1.)"
Put equal energy back in at a faster rate than a half life (which is generally very long) and "replenish" (I guess you could call it that) U-235 which is generally used in nuclear reactors. As opposed to depleting uranium (DU) which takes a single amount of natural uranium and creates an amount of DU and an amount of enriched uranium. I'm all of this stuff is super non linear and there's a lot to learn.
Initial thought: instead of a neutron bullet hit two atoms pushed together somehow with an energy bullet.
I guess the thought of solving a nuclear waste problem is worth the thought and research that will be fun to do if nothing else.
Think fusion power but instead of smashing two masses (using external energy source) together with the intention of creating large amounts of energy apply some amount of energy, the right amount of energy, to replenish the uranium. Maybe energy can be collected and applied at a rate quicker than the half life.
Or this would be done already if it were that easy. It just seems right that, as with most laws, some theoretical reciprocities can have their real wold irreversibilites designed around with enough knowledge and effort. At worst I'll read about it and maybe there will be a good nuclear question at trivia night.
"...Spencer states that nuclear power must be a manifestation of the Aquarian Age and comments on the parallel between the 25,000 years it takes for uranium to decay with the 26,000 cycle of the astrological ages.[16] No isotopes of uranium have a half-life of 25,000 years though, naturally occurring forms have half-lives of 4.46 billion years(U-238), 700 million years(U-235), and 245,000 years(U-234).
"Nuclear fission : Nuclear fission is the process of splitting atoms. When a nucleus of an (e.g. Uranium 235) atom is hit by a neutron bullet and splits into two parts, it is called fission. The total mass of the two parts will be less than the initial mass. The "lost" mass will be converted into energy according to Einstein's equation, E = mc2 (E = energy | m = mass | c = speed of light ~ 3 x 108m s-1.)"
Put equal energy back in at a faster rate than a half life (which is generally very long) and "replenish" (I guess you could call it that) U-235 which is generally used in nuclear reactors. As opposed to depleting uranium (DU) which takes a single amount of natural uranium and creates an amount of DU and an amount of enriched uranium. I'm all of this stuff is super non linear and there's a lot to learn.
Initial thought: instead of a neutron bullet hit two atoms pushed together somehow with an energy bullet.
I guess the thought of solving a nuclear waste problem is worth the thought and research that will be fun to do if nothing else.
Think fusion power but instead of smashing two masses (using external energy source) together with the intention of creating large amounts of energy apply some amount of energy, the right amount of energy, to replenish the uranium. Maybe energy can be collected and applied at a rate quicker than the half life.
Or this would be done already if it were that easy. It just seems right that, as with most laws, some theoretical reciprocities can have their real wold irreversibilites designed around with enough knowledge and effort. At worst I'll read about it and maybe there will be a good nuclear question at trivia night.