Extending the range of the nuclear force
Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2020 1:55 am
First off, let me say that I have no education in physics outside of honors physics in high school. I was planning to take several physics classes in college, but had to drop out due to financial issues (read: my parents kicked me out (understandable,) forcing me to get a full time job to make ends meet.) But, I'm a bit of an engineering "hobbyist." (Or would be, if i had access to machine tools and whatnot.)
Anyway, this is just an idea I had.
As we all know, the main issue with "practical" fusion is a direct result of the coulomb barrier. The coulomb barrier itself rests in the finite range of the residual nuclear force (correct me if I am wrong at any point in this post, please.) And the finite range of the residual nuclear force is due to the transient nature of mesons.
According to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (time energy uncertainty,) mesons borrow energy from the quantum vacuum during their formation. However, the more energy "borrowed" the shorter the time span a meson can exist for. Since they have both mass (limiting their top speed) and a limited lifespan, this results in a maximum distance they can travel.
"The more energy borrowed, the shorter..." does this imply that a thermodynamic gradient is created when a meson forms? For what I understand of thermodynamics, the rate of energy transferred is dependent on the difference between two samples.
If mesons create a thermodynamic gradient during their formation, what if we could reduce the gradient? What if we could provide an alternate source of energy for their formation (or at least, some of the energy required?) If we could, this would imply a lower thermodynamic gradient between the meson and the quantum vacuum, and, as a result, a longer lifespan. That, in turn, means meson exchange could occur over longer distances.
Since electromagnetic repulsion dies off rapidly with distance, the farther we could extend the range of the residual nuclear interaction, the less kinetic energy a proton would need to achieve fusion. See where I'm going?
Like I said, I have ZERO formal physics education beyond high school. Which means this idea is either the stuff of genius, or, far more likely, a perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
WHERE am I wrong here?
Anyway, this is just an idea I had.
As we all know, the main issue with "practical" fusion is a direct result of the coulomb barrier. The coulomb barrier itself rests in the finite range of the residual nuclear force (correct me if I am wrong at any point in this post, please.) And the finite range of the residual nuclear force is due to the transient nature of mesons.
According to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (time energy uncertainty,) mesons borrow energy from the quantum vacuum during their formation. However, the more energy "borrowed" the shorter the time span a meson can exist for. Since they have both mass (limiting their top speed) and a limited lifespan, this results in a maximum distance they can travel.
"The more energy borrowed, the shorter..." does this imply that a thermodynamic gradient is created when a meson forms? For what I understand of thermodynamics, the rate of energy transferred is dependent on the difference between two samples.
If mesons create a thermodynamic gradient during their formation, what if we could reduce the gradient? What if we could provide an alternate source of energy for their formation (or at least, some of the energy required?) If we could, this would imply a lower thermodynamic gradient between the meson and the quantum vacuum, and, as a result, a longer lifespan. That, in turn, means meson exchange could occur over longer distances.
Since electromagnetic repulsion dies off rapidly with distance, the farther we could extend the range of the residual nuclear interaction, the less kinetic energy a proton would need to achieve fusion. See where I'm going?
Like I said, I have ZERO formal physics education beyond high school. Which means this idea is either the stuff of genius, or, far more likely, a perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
WHERE am I wrong here?