Serious answer: A huge negative amount. Anything above iron requires energy to fuse (which is why it produces energy from fission.) and I’m pretty sure nothing with 184 protons could be stable enough to count as being produced - the nuclei be more smashed apart than merging at that point.
Comment on logs are for quitters
IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 1 month agoHow much more energy would you get if you fused uranium?
davidgro@lemmy.world 1 month ago
PunnyName@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Ask Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
In alphabetical order.
Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Those are fission. Fusion bombs don’t fuse uranium. They use a fission bomb to fuse Lithium.
anindefinitearticle@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
[deleted]IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Look at all these nuclear scientists on Lemmy.
Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 month ago
ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 1 month ago
For that matter, even the Nagasaki bomb (“Fat Man”) didn’t use Uranium at all - its fuel was Plutonium.
frezik@midwest.social 1 month ago
Oh, they do, but not as the primary or secondary. You can wrap depleated uranium around the core to capture fast neutrons that are leftover from the rest of the process. Changing the number of layers is how you can dial in a desired yield.
PunnyName@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Damnit, you’re right and I’m wrong!
davidgro@lemmy.world 1 month ago
That’s fissed, not fused.
PunnyName@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I stand corrected, because I done forgetted.
Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Using the rule of thumb, anything heavier than iron requires energy input to fuse. So you lose energy fusing uranium.