What could probably happen....
What could probably happen....
33 comments
-
-
As I've learned more, the energy from a single atom is not much. They split nitrogen long before uranium but it didn't really matter. You need the chain reaction of uranium.
From Gemini:
The energy released from a single uranium atom splitting is an infinitesimally tiny fraction of what's needed to even warm a mug of water. You would need the simultaneous fission of approximately 1.96 quadrillion (1,960,000,000,000,000) uranium atoms to heat a single mug of water.
*JFC what's up with the downvotes? Because I used Gemini?
-
I'm not downvoting you, but I think a lot of people, including me, would read "from Gemini" (or any AI) as "you can't trust this information".
-
For me, whenever anyone includes AI generated crap in their comment, I think three things:
- Great, I now need to fact check this because you can't trust AI
- If I wanted AI generated crap, I'd go get it myself
- The commenter couldn't even* be bothered to actually author their comment, this is the lowest of low effort content, and is definitionally deserving of a downvote
-
ChatGPT will straight up hallucinate numbers (or any information). Gemini is much more accurate. Haven't tried others.
-
-
You would need the simultaneous fission of approximately 1.96 quadrillion (1,960,000,000,000,000) uranium atoms to heat a single mug of water.
heat by how much? AI as useful as ever.
-
I just cut that bit out. 20 C to 80 C.
-
-
-
Isn't that common knowledge? I don't think that anyone seriously believes that splitting a single atom causes an explosion.
-
I mean I'm not saying that you're an expert, but my us highschool education regarding nuclear fission was pretty handwavy, and won't come up again in most careers
-
-
Even MY anium???
-
No, I amanium!
-
-
-
The energy from nuclear reactions can be astonishingly large (compared to, say, chemical reactions).
But atoms are really, really, really small.
-
people with good vision can probably see a single gold atom, I seem to remember that one useless fact about the smallest things we can see
-
Nope. Atoms are WAY too small to see, even with the most powerful optical microscopes.
You may be thinking of a human egg cell, which can be seen with the naked eye.
-
Not even close, a gold atom is about 140 pm, while the diffraction limit for optical microscopes is around 200 nm, so 1000 Times bigger. And this does not mean that you could see a 200 nm object, only that you can differentiate 2 objects that are at least 200 nm apart. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction-limited_system So no it is not possible to see atoms with visible light photons.
-
A single atom of gold is far too small for any photon in the visible spectrum to interact with.
A single atom of gold is 0.2 nanometres (a nanometre is an incredibly small thing and a gold atom isn't even half of 1% of that), meanwhile the wavelength of blue light (The smallest wavelength of visible light) is a hulking 380 nanometres. No matter how much you zoom in you would never see anything a single atom is just too small to interact with light.
-
Sorry you're getting down voted --- lots of replies from folks unclear on what the diffraction limit means, atomic resonances, etc.: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2161094-a-single-atom-is-visible-to-the-naked-eye-in-this-stunning-photo/
-
No shot.
-
The width of human hair is the tiniest distance that people can notice
-
-
-
-
What's this from?!
-
The Amazing World of Gumball. It's a great show.
-
-
33 comments
I remember growing up as a kid, doing my time in Sunday School, and getting this story pitched as "Wise King Solomon ferret's out the truth of maternity by determining which claimant truly cares about the life of the child".
It's kinda crazy how the story has permuted into "Two women fight over a thing and both agree splitting it in half is the fair solution."
What I like about the story is that true motherhood isn't about biology or DNA but about caring. And I get why even people who care about the well-being of a child wouldn't care about the well-being of an atom
You are waaaay overthinking this
They're just describing the plot of the actual story though...
I think the permutation is because it works better on a comedic level. Probably started out as basic "But what if king Solomon did cut the baby in half" arguments and eventually became a general joke. The base level of "cut the baby in half" is already dark by itself all it takes is going through with it and you have a good bit of dark humor.
Also the whole scenario of king Solomon almost comes across as him not necessarily being particularly smart but moreso that the people he was dealing with were crazy or stupid.