US Department of Energy: Fusion Ignition Achieved

Re:US Department of Energy: Fusion Ignition Achieved by jameshart on Tuesday December 13, 2022 @01:32PM (#33973537)

Except… chemical bonds don’t ‘store’ energy. Molecules are a low energy configuration. It takes energy to rip them apart!

But, O2 molecules, with their double bond, don’t take much energy to break apart. If they do, and then pair up with say a bunch of Hydrogen and Carbon atoms that were nearby in some long chain or something, they form bonds that are stronger - that take more energy to break - and you end up with some leftover energy. Water and CO2 molecules are an even lower energy configuration.

but the extra energy you get wasn’t exactly ‘in’ the oxygen bond though - any more than when you have a ball at the top of a hill it has potential energy ‘in’ it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:US Department of Energy: Fusion Ignition Achieved by dsfyu404ed on Tuesday December 13, 2022 @01:49PM (#33973804)

There's a fundamental tradeoff between technical precision and explaining things in a way that's relatable to simpler stuff. Deal. With. It.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:US Department of Energy: Fusion Ignition Achieved by davrosthedalek on Tuesday December 13, 2022 @02:28PM (#33974390)

Not if the original description is exactly the opposite of what happens. You get energy out by making stronger bonds.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:US Department of Energy: Fusion Ignition Achieved by m55au on Wednesday December 14, 2022 @05:52PM (#33991923)

Stronger bonds by definition are lower energy bonds. So you get energy out by making the total bond energy go lower or "releasing it".

[ Parent | on HN ]