"Bo Warming" <bwng@bwng.dk> wrote in message
news:55Prf.11637$_e3.5405@fe77.usenetserver.com...
(...)
> > Tror lige, at du skal se på det periodiske system én gang til..
> >
http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Det_periodiske_system
> > Især nr. 99, 100 og 107
>
> Jeg gad godt se en ældre udgave med Hahnium, som altså ændredes,
> selvom ingen kunne påpege nazisme ved Hahn (og hvad ville det også
> vedkomme hans blændende fysik-indsats.)
>
> Hvorfor oplyser du ikke navnene på de numre du giver?
> Vær lidt brugervenlig - vi søger alle sandheden - og det er kun jul en
> gang om året.
Jamen dog da, Bo..... Er du ikke kommet længere? Hvordan var det vi
diskuterede det her emne sidste? Er det ikke 2 år siden eller mere?
Men siden det *er* jul, så lad gå da.
(...)
> _Sidsnævnte_ forsker Szilard er der vist ikke opkaldt noget efter
> Fermium kender jeg, men kan du begrunde at Enrico Fermi - eller
> Einstein eller Bohr - betød mere end Hahn som man af politiske,
> national-chauvinistiske årsager degraderede og fratog grundstof-navn
>
> Meitner fik grundstof opkaldt efter hende, selvom hun nærmest var
> laborant for Hahn.
> Hendes svoger Frisch påstod LÆÆÆÆÆNGE efter krigen , at relativity
> betød noget inspirerende og væsentligt for hendes assistentarbejde,
> men hun skrev ikke om sådant før krigen, så vidt jeg ved. Kan du
> forklare at den ligegyldige E=mc2 "fyrbøderligning"(dobbet brændsel,
> dobbelt energi - big surprice) skulle være gavnlig for
> eksperimenterne, der gav verden den første brugbare fissionsproces,
> hvilket Hahn fik Nobelpris for i krigens sidste år, trods det at
> _alle viste_ at han var fra tabernationen?
Det var jo slet ikke Hahn der gav verden processen. Det var Meitner og Otto
Frisch:
Her er en god gennemgang:
http://chemcases.com/2003version/nuclear/nc-03.htm
Godt udsnit i midten:
"Hahn and Strassmann repeated the experiment numerous times and were never
able to isolate the 'radium' from barium. They reported their results as
follows: "As chemists, we must actually say the new particles do not behave
like radium but, in fact, like barium; as nuclear physicists, we cannot make
this conclusion, which is in conflict with all experience in nuclear
physics." Hahn, the chemist, was reluctant to go against the ideas of
respected nuclear physicists, despite clear chemical evidence of barium.
Hahn then turned to his colleague, Lise Meitner, for an explanation. Meitner
was a physicist who had recently fled to Sweden to escape the Nazi regime.
During Christmas 1939, Meitner and her nephew Otto Frisch, a physicist also
banished from Germany, read Hahn's letters reporting, with amazement, the
barium results. As Meitner and Frisch searched for an explanation, it dawned
on them that when the uranium nucleus absorbs a neutron, it might become
unstable and split into two particles of approximately equal mass (e.g.,
barium and krypton). They used Bohr's earlier model, which treated the
nucleus as a large drop of liquid. In this model, the absorption of a
neutron could cause the uranium nucleus to become unstable and divide into
two smaller drops. If this division takes place, the resulting drops
(nuclear fragments) would be repelled by their respective positive charges.
This process, termed fission by Meitner and Frisch, would create a large
amount of energy, as well as additional neutrons. They calculated the energy
associated with pushing the two positively charged nuclear fragments apart
to be approximately 200 million electron volts (MeV) per uranium atom. By
comparison, the most energetic chemical reactions release approximately 5 eV
per atom.
From where was the energy required to separate the uranium nucleus coming?
Existing data on the masses of the elements showed that the sum of the
masses of the smaller product nuclei was less than the mass of uranium.
Meitner used Einstein's famous E = mc2 equation to calculate the energy
associated with this mass difference (nuclear binding energy) and the energy
associated with pushing the two fission fragments apart. His calculations
revealed that energy equivalent to the mass difference was equal to 200 MeV!
Frisch quickly returned to his laboratory at the Neils Bohr Institute in
Copenhagen to experimentally verify this hypothesis."
Strike 1,2,3,4 for Meitner/Frisch/Einstein/Bohr.
Det rimer endda.
(...)
> Glistrup har ret i at der bør være vandtætte skodder mellem videnskab
> og politik - og etik og jura og religion.
Måske har han ret her. Vil det være muligt for dig at leve op til det og
adskille dit velkendte og - trods mange opfordringer - uforklarede had til
Einstein fra hans anerkendte videnskabelige bidrag?
Nej, ok - det er nok at forlange for meget. Man skal ikke tage dagdrømmene
fra dig.
mvh & fortsat god jul
Thomas Krogh