Talk:Plutonium-239

	Chemistry portal This article is supported by WikiProject Elements, which gives a central approach to the chemical elements and their isotopes on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing this article, or visit the project page for more details.ElementsWikipedia:WikiProject ElementsTemplate:WikiProject Elementschemical elements articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Isotope Taskforce.

‹See TfM›

Physics Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Environment Mid‑importance

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 730 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

Numerical error in "Sum" and "Energy converted into heat"

Is it really possible for the reactor to extract more energy than the total energy released from the fission? (211.5 MeV vs 207.1 MeV) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.74.200 (talk) 15:55, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Internal energy of neutron's emited in fission makes that possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.172.138.4 (talk) 17:48, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Possible error?

At U-236 it says: "When 235U absorbs a thermal neutron, one of two processes can occur. About 82% of the time, it will fission; about 18% of the time, it will not fission, instead emitting gamma radiation and yielding 236U"

At Pu-240 it says: "About 62% to 73% of the time when 239Pu captures a neutron, it undergoes fission; the remainder of the time, it forms 240Pu."

At Pu-239 it says: "239Pu has a higher probability for fission than 235U and a larger number of neutrons produced per fission event, so it has a smaller critical mass."

I'm no nuclear physicist but methinks there's an error there somewhere. 190.100.175.35 (talk) 06:38, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See neutron cross section. Plutonium is about twice as likely as 235-U to capture a neutron in the first place, so it has a higher overall probability to be induced to fission. VQuakr (talk) 06:54, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why no Spontaneous Fission rate?

Military weapons are "poisoned"(less reliable) when several percent of Pu240 accumulates. This occurs from neutrons from Pu239 SF and subsequent fissions and delayed neutrons in the pit. For this to occur with fast neutrons would require a significant Spontaneous Fission rate. What is the SF rate? [Is it US government censorship? Or does noone know this information (hard to believe.)] The upcoming multi Trillion dollar replacement of older Plutonium weapons by the US Pentagon is significant and the SF rate is pertinent. Also no mention of health hazards from neutrons, which goes through most shielding. Rem thermal neutrons decay. TaylorLeem (talk) 18:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]