It's been speculated that hydrogen.. at the right pressure is a metal (been theorized since the creation of the current periodic table which is why its the only gas in the metal section, and also thought to be in Jupiter's core).. Wouldnt such a material be easier to fuse than say.. regular hydrogen gas? obviously its a solid its coulomb limit is much different, its proton's spacing being much closer than in a normal gas form. Does make interesting questions in regards to its superconductivity.. would it even reach that state? or would it be similar to pure uranium and just.. "not"

Couple things for consideration:

 

- fusion of proton with proton, gives very little energy (from the all fusion reactions)

[math]p^+ + p^+ \rightarrow D^+ + e^- +\bar{V}_e + 0.42 MeV[/math]

From 0.42 MeV energy part of it takes anti-neutrino. So reasonable amount of usable energy is probably 0.21 MeV per reaction.

 

- solid material has very slowly moving/vibrating atoms. To overcome Coulombs barrier there are needed fast moving particles. Or great pressure. f.e. using current models of stars, our Sun has ~ 150 g/cm^3 density in the core. That's >7 times more than any solid state matter on the Earth.

 

- after fusion particles release energy. This energy cause increase of temperature. If metallic Hydrogen require very low temperatures, each successful reaction will be ruining low temperature requirement...

 

Couple things for consideration:

 

- fusion of proton with proton, gives very little energy (from the all fusion reactions)

[math]p^+ + p^+ \rightarrow D^+ + e^- +\bar{V}_e + 0.42 MeV[/math]

From 0.42 MeV energy part of it takes anti-neutrino. So reasonable amount of usable energy is probably 0.21 MeV per reaction.

 

- solid material has very slowly moving/vibrating atoms. To overcome Coulombs barrier there are needed fast moving particles. Or great pressure. f.e. using current models of stars, our Sun has ~ 150 g/cm^3 density in the core. That's >7 times more than any solid state matter on the Earth.

 

- after fusion particles release energy. This energy cause increase of temperature. If metallic Hydrogen require very low temperatures, each successful reaction will be ruining low temperature requirement...

 

You just need pressure to make it condense right? Cooling the temperature while slowly increasing the pressure should allow it to bind appropriately into a solid block of hydrogen. From there bombard it with an energetic high neutron containing isotope of a radioactive element (preferably one that can be produced on site and has a relatively short halflife) the energy by the particles decaying and the neutrons produced should locally fuse a substantial margin of the hydrogen atoms, as to whether you can produce more than our current methods that aren't breaking even.. probably. Seems a little more efficient and easier to do (assuming the idea radioactive isotope isn't rare/expensive/over radioactive.

It's been speculated that hydrogen.. at the right pressure is a metal (been theorized since the creation of the current periodic table which is why its the only gas in the metal section, and also thought to be in Jupiter's core).. Wouldnt such a material be easier to fuse than say.. regular hydrogen gas? obviously its a solid its coulomb limit is much different, its proton's spacing being much closer than in a normal gas form. Does make interesting questions in regards to its superconductivity.. would it even reach that state? or would it be similar to pure uranium and just.. "not"

Wait wait WHAT? gases turning into metals without fusion? Show Sources, I MUST KNOW!

Wait wait WHAT? gases turning into metals without fusion? Show Sources, I MUST KNOW!

 

 

Hydrogen turns into a metal at extreme pressure, google is your friend..

You just need pressure to make it condense right? Cooling the temperature while slowly increasing the pressure should allow it to bind appropriately into a solid block of hydrogen. From there bombard it with an energetic high neutron containing isotope of a radioactive element (preferably one that can be produced on site and has a relatively short halflife) the energy by the particles decaying and the neutrons produced should locally fuse a substantial margin of the hydrogen atoms, as to whether you can produce more than our current methods that aren't breaking even.. probably. Seems a little more efficient and easier to do (assuming the idea radioactive isotope isn't rare/expensive/over radioactive.

To create free neutron, there is used Deuterium typically. As it's isotope that has the smallest energy needed to separate neutron from nucleus.

[math]D^+ + 2.22 MeV \rightarrow p^+ + n^0[/math]

You also need source of 2.22 MeV energy.

You spend 2.22 MeV to get average 0.21 MeV energy back.

Make no economical sense. Good only for scientific work, and testing theory.

 

But if you fuse Deuterium with proton, right:

[math]D^+ + p^+ \rightarrow _2^3He + \gamma + 5.49 MeV[/math]

5.49 MeV / 0.21 MeV = 26 times more energy..

 

Other fusions, D+D, D+T, He-3 + He-3, release even 2-3 times more energy than D-p, and >60 times more than p-p reaction.