安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語(日文)
한국어(韓文)
ไทย(泰文)
Български(保加利亞文)
Čeština(捷克文)
Dansk(丹麥文)
Deutsch(德文)
English(英文)
Español - España(西班牙文 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希臘文)
Français(法文)
Italiano(義大利文)
Bahasa Indonesia(印尼語)
Magyar(匈牙利文)
Nederlands(荷蘭文)
Norsk(挪威文)
Polski(波蘭文)
Português(葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙)
Português - Brasil(葡萄牙文 - 巴西)
Română(羅馬尼亞文)
Русский(俄文)
Suomi(芬蘭文)
Svenska(瑞典文)
Türkçe(土耳其文)
tiếng Việt(越南文)
Українська(烏克蘭文)
回報翻譯問題
There is also that light atoms do not split into heavier ones in fusion, they fuse, over simplified: 2 or more smaller atoms slam together and become a heavier atom, beta particles are electrons, not protons, most helium isnt a good fuel for fusion reactors, the isotope that is a good fuel would be Helium-3, a lighter isotope of helium that is IIRC quite rare on Earth, especially when compared to Helium-4 which is the vast majority of natural helium.
You also cant run fission reactors on most isotopes of most elements, to run a fission reactor you need isotopes of elements that arent too stable but also arent too unstable, or(how most, if not all, reactors are fueled) a mix of specific isotopes.
This is correct. First: I reused previous paragraph to make post faster, so I missed the verb. Also, I didn't check particle composition, which is why I claimed protons being b-particles while b-particles are electrones(beta-minus-particles) and positrones (beta-plus-particles), which are also charged particles. I purposely left isotopes out as oversimplication, but I see that it allows confusion.
Ahem. In theory, fission can be induced blah blah blah. In practice, specific isotopes are used because they are cost-effective. Also, this was my attempt to tell why iron is most abudant, I admit that I carried away. So, correct. Thank you for correct my mistakes in the name of enlightening people (or in the name of "Someone is WRONG in the internet", I really don't care as long as it lessens confusion).