Can atom annihilate by 58 nuclear megatons to nothing?

[hellwing]

Can atom annihilate by 58 nuclear megatons to nothing?

[YT2095]

there isn`t Anything that will annihilate to "Nothing", there will always be something even if it`s just Photons (as in Antimatter annihilation).

[hellwing]

you mean if human annihilated by antimatter means he turn to ashes?

[insane_alien]

no, s/he would turn into photons.

[hellwing]

thank you sir,(turning to photon) is this the same affect as 100 nuclear megatons?

[insane_alien]

100 megatons of energy doing what? and applied to what? and how quickly.

[Edtharan]

Can atom annihilate by 58 nuclear megatons to nothing?

There is not such measurement as a "Nuclear Megaton".

 

Megaton is not a unit of mass or weight, it is a unit of explosive potential.

 

Megatons is a unit of measurement that is rated against TNT. So when they say that a Nuclear bomb has a rating of 50 megatons, then the energy from its detonation is equivalent to 50,000,000 tons of TNT .

 

Now that you know this, could you rephrase your question, as you are asking a question about a unit or measurement that does not exist then we can't actually give you an answer that is not a guess that what you a mean.

[hellwing]

100 megatons of energy doing what? and applied to what? and how quickly.

 

I mean is if s/he caught by this 100 megatons (ground zero) what would happen to her/he?turn also to photons?or what else?

 

There is not such measurement as a "Nuclear Megaton".

 

Megaton is not a unit of mass or weight, it is a unit of explosive potential.

 

Megatons is a unit of measurement that is rated against TNT. So when they say that a Nuclear bomb has a rating of 50 megatons, then the energy from its detonation is equivalent to 50,000,000 tons of TNT .

 

Now that you know this, could you rephrase your question, as you are asking a question about a unit or measurement that does not exist then we can't actually give you an answer that is not a guess that what you a mean.

thank you!

[insane_alien]

if someone was standing next to a 100megaton nuclear bomb upon its detonation they would be vapourised and ionized. they would not be turned into photons.

[ajb]

Are you trying to ask if a nuclear explosion can completely destroy an atom?

 

Well, the typical energy released in a nuclear explosion is or the order 200 MeV per reaction (~ nuclear binding energies). The ionisation energy of an atom is tens of eV. Nuclear binding energies are 100's Mev.

 

That should help.

[hellwing]

if someone was standing next to a 100megaton nuclear bomb upon its detonation they would be vapourised and ionized. they would not be turned into photons.

 

does this means it did not destroy the atoms or subatomic particles?

i'm just a newbie in this kind of topics.

 

Are you trying to ask if a nuclear explosion can completely destroy an atom?

 

Well, the typical energy released in a nuclear explosion is or the order 200 MeV per reaction (~ nuclear binding energies). The ionisation energy of an atom is tens of eV. Nuclear binding energies are 100's Mev.

 

That should help.

 

yes.

[insane_alien]

no it would not destroy them.

 

i think that you would benefit from coming on irc as comunication is a lot faster there and we can discuss it a bit more indepth if you want.

 

this will help you get on there, http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=33273 i'll be in the chat room for the next few hours anyway.

[hellwing]

no it would not destroy them.

 

i think that you would benefit from coming on irc as comunication is a lot faster there and we can discuss it a bit more indepth if you want.

 

this will help you get on there, http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=33273 i'll be in the chat room for the next few hours anyway.

 

actually i'm not yet install java right now,i'll try that tommorow.

 

even the nuclear bomb has the same energy joules of antimatter?

[ajb]

no it would not destroy them.

 

What insane means here is that the atoms will get broken into electrons and atomic nuclei. Due to the energy released per reaction being 100's MeV's I expect that some of the near by atoms will actually get broken into electron, positrons and neutrons.

 

So, in that respect yes it can destroy an atom. But the constituents don't just disappear.

[insane_alien]

yep, even if it was far exceeded. unless anti matter actualy contacted you, you would not be turned into photons. you'd just be turned into a cloud of ions.

[hellwing]

What insane means here is that the atoms will get broken into electrons and atomic nuclei. Due to the energy released per reaction being 100's MeV's I expect that some of the near by atoms will actually get broken into electron, positrons and neutrons.

 

So, in that respect yes it can destroy an atom. But the constituents don't just disappear.

 

but cannot destroy the electron, positrons and neutrons?and this is the difference between antimatter and nuclear bomb?

 

yep, even if it was far exceeded. unless anti matter actualy contacted you, you would not be turned into photons. you'd just be turned into a cloud of ions.

 

wow,thank you 2.

[ajb]

but cannot destroy the electron, positrons and neutrons?and this is the difference between antimatter and nuclear bomb?

 

You are confusing two different things here.

 

A nuclear bomb "supplies" energy (high energy particles and photons) which can be absorbed by an atom and then split it up into it's constituent parts. Simply, the parts now have enough energy to overcome what is keeping them together.

 

Now, "roughly" matter + antimatter = photons. They annihilate, which means "turn into photons".

 

Both processes conserve electric charge and energy.

[hellwing]

yep, even if it was far exceeded. unless anti matter actualy contacted you, you would not be turned into photons. you'd just be turned into a cloud of ions.

 

i have a problem i don't have right now windows xp sp1,maybe i'll try in the future.

 

does this mean turning to photons is more worst than cloud of ions?

[YT2095]

define "Worst".

[insane_alien]

well, it leaves your constituent components in a state less like their origional configuration than mere vapourisation and ionization with a bit of nuclear augmentation thrown in.

 

both result in you being exceedingly dead so i guess from the human perspective the result is the same.

[hellwing]

well, it leaves your constituent components in a state less like their origional configuration than mere vapourisation and ionization with a bit of nuclear augmentation thrown in.

 

both result in you being exceedingly dead so i guess from the human perspective the result is the same.

 

what if we say something like made of iron,still the same?

 

define "Worst".

 

paintfull.

hehehe..

[YT2095]

well if "Painful" is your parameter, then either and neither, as it would be instantaneous with both.

[insane_alien]

even with iron, or any other form of matter for that matter(no pun intended)

[hellwing]

is it correct to say that if he/she contacted by 100 megatons nuclear means automatically turn to ions?just like antimatter.

[insane_alien]

well, it is a lot of energy so yes, if someone is close to a 100megaton nuclear bomb detonating, they will be fataly ionized. ions are not the same as antimatter though.