Difference between revisions of "Talk:Hydrogen"
Jarogers2001 (talk | contribs) (Fission reference removal) |
Jarogers2001 (talk | contribs) m (Talk:Hydrogen backup moved to Talk:Hydrogen: revert) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Why was the fission reference removed? -- [[User:Jarogers2001|Jarogers2001]] 21:03, 20 January 2007 (PST) | Why was the fission reference removed? -- [[User:Jarogers2001|Jarogers2001]] 21:03, 20 January 2007 (PST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Because it was incorrect. Deuterium and Tritium are NOT used for fission. | ||
| + | Heavy water can be used as a moderator for some types of nuclear fission, but that is a different topic (and heavy water is not the same thing as Deuterium). Somebody could possibly write something up on that if they are knowledgeable, but I do not think it is particularly relevant to lunar development. A page on nuclear fission power sources is probably something which we do need, but Light/heavy water moderated reactor might not be suitable for space/lunar - there seems to be a lot more interest in particle bed fission reactor for space/lunar applications [[User:Cfrjlr|Charles F. Radley]] 06:48, 21 January 2007 (PST) | ||
Latest revision as of 14:02, 6 February 2007
Why was the fission reference removed? -- Jarogers2001 21:03, 20 January 2007 (PST)
Because it was incorrect. Deuterium and Tritium are NOT used for fission. Heavy water can be used as a moderator for some types of nuclear fission, but that is a different topic (and heavy water is not the same thing as Deuterium). Somebody could possibly write something up on that if they are knowledgeable, but I do not think it is particularly relevant to lunar development. A page on nuclear fission power sources is probably something which we do need, but Light/heavy water moderated reactor might not be suitable for space/lunar - there seems to be a lot more interest in particle bed fission reactor for space/lunar applications Charles F. Radley 06:48, 21 January 2007 (PST)
