New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: We've recently made changes to our user database and have removed inactive and spam users. If you can not login, please re-register.

#1 2005-11-09 05:30:06

karov
Member
From: Bulgaria
Registered: 2004-06-03
Posts: 953

Re: Artificial Fluorine Nucleosynthesis?

From the C3F8 greenhousing of Mars theme, lets discuss the industrial applicability of artificial nucleosynthesis of F via giant in space accelerators ( ? ). My feeling is that it may occur to be cheaper than to mine fluorine from Mars. Alchemy/transmutation vs. mining option.
===================================================

"The Haxton-Woosley mechanism may solve this problem too. The abundant neon-20 isotope in the outer parts of the exploding star has a high probability of being kicked into a giant-resonance vibration by the out-streaming neutrinos. When this happens, the neon nucleus is very likely to spit out a neutron or proton as a way of carrying away its excess energy. If a proton is thrown off, the stable isotope fluorine-19 is left behind. If a neutron is evaporated, the isotope neon-19 results. But neon-19 is radioactive and will rapidly decay into fluorine-19. Thus, both processes contribute to the formation of fluorine-19 during a supernova. Calculations by Haxton and Woosley predict just about the observed the 1/1000 fluorine-to-neon ratio.
"
=====================================================
from -- http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw31.html

So, in principle we could produce it from neon-20, being hit by, say, one antiproton per nuclei...???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spallation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neon

or bombarded by hyperrelativistic electrons (positrons ?) , cause http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_decay

Neon is very abundant compared with fluorine...

It is possible, also, to be built fusor , which mimics the heavy stars carbon burning, etc...

Offline

#2 2005-11-12 07:30:34

karov
Member
From: Bulgaria
Registered: 2004-06-03
Posts: 953

Re: Artificial Fluorine Nucleosynthesis?

http://www.iqo.uni-hannover.de/ertmer/nebec/  - a way to handle? -- metastability, cryotechs???

What to use to beat out a nucleon from Ne-20 ( ~ 90 % of all Ne`s isotopes mix in Universe) -- electron, proton... ( other short living particles appearing for enough time to react on the nucley)??? in order to have eventually F-19???  Other non-collisional, but "wave" or "Field" ways to excite nucleus resonance big enough to kick out a nucleon from the Ne-20...?

What`s the binding energy of the upmost nucleon in an Ne-20? 

http://www.google.com/search?hl=bg&q=el … isions&lr=

What proces would be economical and easy to supply with rough materials ( i.e. both the target and the impactor nuclei or particle is widespread...)? , Because Neon is very abundant in the universe, in the Sun, and IN the planets, but in space where it will be better to deploy the Neon-to-Fluorine Spallator, not much neon cause its high volatility. In the Earth most of the Ne is of course Ne-20 as anywhere , solar or fusion neon, and fortunatelly Ne-21 and Ne-22 , the natural fissional forms are less than 10%... 

If Ne-20 nucleus-electron collision is efficient to excite a Ne-20 nuclei to expell a nucleon and to become a nucley of F-19, than we could "just" undress the Ne-20 nuclei from all their electrons and to accelerate the electrons and the naked nuclei in one and a same "pipe" -- because of their different electric charges, they`ll choose the opposing, collision course directions.  The opposite charges will have also the advantage not to repulse from the nucleus , as the problem infront the fusion reactors...

How do behave the relativistic electron beams?

Is it possible to treat the beam of electrons the same way as we manage to work with light?

I know that the wave nature of an electron is far more "surpressed" by its mass, than to the massless in rest photons, but is it possible, and if you have some data, please point me it the electron beam to be handled as kinda "ELECTRON-beam "LASER"???   

I mean all electrons in coherent and equal waves? 
Otherwise I suppose the uneven electron croud in the beam will react too much with each other causing too much X-ray bremstrahlung losing energy.

Offline

#3 2005-11-12 08:02:05

karov
Member
From: Bulgaria
Registered: 2004-06-03
Posts: 953

Re: Artificial Fluorine Nucleosynthesis?

1. relativistic electron beams:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=bg&q=re … +beams&lr=

all the things I find through superficial google-ing are for REB hitting various plasmas, and the logical energy scattering oin from of X-rays ( photons )?

What if ONLY electrons accelerated to very close to "c" speeds collide with ONLY "naked" nuclei?

2. "Nuclear shell model" --

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_model

What nuclear shell modfel has Ne-20... are the outermost nuclonic layers weekly bonded enough to be kicked out by electron hit???  --

http://www.google.com/search?hl=bg&q=Ne … +shell&lr=

http://www.google.com/search?hl=bg&q=el … lation&lr=

http://www.google.com/search?hl=bg&q=%2 … ion%22&lr=

3. If the Ne-20 is not enough:

http://www.vectorsite.net/tastga4.html

C12+C12 = Ne20 + He4 at 500 000 000 millions degrees ( which is achievable with deep plasma focus)...

If someday we begin to burn Boron and/or He3 at 1 000 000 000 degrees, to mimic the stellar and supernova nucleosynthesis will be childish game.

Offline

#4 2007-03-11 03:03:32

RickSmith
Member
From: Vancouver B.C.
Registered: 2007-02-17
Posts: 244

Re: Artificial Fluorine Nucleosynthesis?

Hi Karov, everyone.
I browsed thru some of your links.  Very nice.  But nuclear synthesis makes the atoms a handful at a time and requires tonnes of energy.

When a volcanic melt starts rising towards the surface and then cools the flourine and chlorine compounds freeze out first at the top.  Heavier, denser materials collect at the bottom.  Finally the minerals with the highest melting points form large crystals in the middle.

If this pluton is exposed, the fluorine and chlorine minerals are brittle so they erode quickly and are scattered.  But if you mine a pluton that was never eroded the flourine is reasonably concentrated.

It seems to me that this would be cheaper than trying to create new fluorine wholesale.  Would you like to address the relative costs of mining fluorine as opposed to nuclear synthesis?

Warm regards, Rick

Offline

#5 2019-06-07 17:02:53

Void
Member
Registered: 2011-12-29
Posts: 3,476

Re: Artificial Fluorine Nucleosynthesis?

In the interest of not starting a new topic I will discuss Fluorine here.

Karov had an interesting notion, RickSmith countered with some mining information.

Make no mistake, I am a learner for this, but I have some thoughts and some information on the notion of Fluorine.  It seems like something to want, or at least to at first want the manufactured things involving Fluorine.

Robert Dyke can also be mentioned for some contribution to my thinking.

This is rather old, but interesting.  I would imagine updates in technology now exist.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Fl … &FORM=VIRE
My current understanding is you might find the Calcium Fluoride (I think) in some limestone and some sandstone.  RickSmith indicated that it might be gotten from certain volcanic deposits, I think.

I think there may be some association with certain clays.  My thinking is that if volcanic rock is exposed to water for a prolonged time, it can erode into clay, but perhaps the Fluorine containing crystals do not decompose.

But I have much to learn.  The mining looks like a lot of trouble, and on Mars we have the problem of locating some at a convenient place for extraction.

There has been a detection by Curiosity, but that does not guarantee a minable pocket.

I think that typically any such eroded deposits may exist under heavy sediments in the northern basin, and Hellas, and I suppose elsewhere.  Under wind sediments and ice slabs.  Good luck finding it I guess.

So, that sort of suggests that mining Fluorine on Mars will come later rather than sooner.

Imports are probably the way to go at first I expect.  At first importing manufactured items from Earth most likely, and then perhaps importing Hydrogen Fluoride.  A very nasty thing.  If you get the liquid on your skin, it will not only injure you then, but without treatments, it will keep on injuring you internally.  But it goes to vapor above room temperature I believe.  Of course you then would not want to breath it in a confined space.

Perhaps transport could be of an ice of it.  That may be easier to handle.  That's most of what I know about it at this point.

But it does bring a question.  Louis has approached it at times.  Insitu is a nice idea, and especially when it can be done for a minor effort, but we are not reptiles.  In planting an offshoot of the human race on Mars, I think that the nurture of a child is the pattern which will prosper the effort the most.  In other words, it will be important to have robust methods to transport some items which would be burdensome to produce on Mars, until the settlement will reach "Adulthood".

Starship and it's speculated offshoots, may well be able to do that.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2019-06-07 17:22:15)


I like people who criticize angels dancing on a pinhead.  I also like it when angels dance on my pinhead.

Offline

#6 2019-06-07 19:09:33

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 19,235

Re: Artificial Fluorine Nucleosynthesis?

Fluorines is interesting and as you put it sort of dagerous...but so are many more things that we use daily so why not on mars?

https://www.thoughtco.com/fluorine-element-facts-606534

The element is found in fluoridated water, toothpaste, and refrigerants.

Fluorite crystal
aHR0cDovL3d3dy5saXZlc2NpZW5jZS5jb20vaW1hZ2VzL2kvMDAwLzAzOS8wOTMvb3JpZ2luYWwvc2h1dHRlcnN0b2NrXzI1NDYwNzEwLmpwZw==

The mineral fluorspar was used in metal refining. Known today as calcium fluoride (CaF2), it was used as a flux to separate pure metal from the unwanted minerals in ore.

The green that Timco sees with enlarged images could indicate that we have grains of this all over the place.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorite

Element substitution for the calcium cation often includes certain rare earth elements (REE), such as yttrium and cerium. Iron, sodium, and barium are also common impurities. Some fluorine may be replaced by the chloride anion.

It may occur as a vein deposit, especially with metallic minerals, where it often forms a part of the gangue (the surrounding "host-rock" in which valuable minerals occur) and may be associated with galena, sphalerite, barite, quartz, and calcite.

It is a common mineral in deposits of hydrothermal origin and has been noted as a primary mineral in granites and other igneous rocks and as a common minor constituent of dolomite and limestone.

We know the surface has lots of iron so its possible for a win win from the quick loss soils....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minerals

Offline

#7 2019-09-16 14:57:14

knightdepaix
Member
Registered: 2014-07-07
Posts: 236

Re: Artificial Fluorine Nucleosynthesis?

From oxygen-16 to fluorine 19, a proton and two neutrons. Assume anything goes in nucleosynthesis,

O-16 + helium -3 = Neon-19 = fluorine-19 + positron.

2 positrons + O-16 = N-14 + 2 proton + energy OR 1 positron + O-16 = N-15 + proton + energy

O-16 + deuterium = F-18 = O-18 + positron or electron capture
O-18 + proton = F-18.

Then fluorine-19, nitrogen isotopes and energy are harvested; all have their uses. The critical point is looking for helium-3. On the moon, helium-3 can be mined and reacted with oxygen-16 from lunar rocks. The released energy is used for sustaining the operation and human residence. When enough nitrogen isotopes and fluorine-19 are made, the released energy is used to ship the nuclides to the Mars.

In other words, helium-3 if mined is better used for nucleosynthesis than nuclear fusion power with deuterium.

OR part of the mechanism can be independent.

O-16 + deuterium = F-18 = O-18 + positron or electron capture
O-18 + proton = F-18.

This way, the benefit of coproducing nitrogen isotopes is not possible.

Anyhow, as https://www.webelements.com/periodicity … scape.html hydrogen, https://www.webelements.com/periodicity … up_18.html helium and https://www.webelements.com/periodicity … d_2sp.html oxygen nuclides are most abundant in the milky way, nucleosynthesis would be started with those and producing less abundant nuclides such as fluorine and nitrogen.

Last edited by knightdepaix (2019-09-16 15:21:02)

Offline

#8 2019-09-17 15:09:30

elderflower
Member
Registered: 2016-06-19
Posts: 1,260

Re: Artificial Fluorine Nucleosynthesis?

HF is to be avoided at virtually all costs. Really nasty stuff! IF7 is very slightly less nasty provided there is no water about but I still wouldn't fancy shipping fluorine in that form either. However there are compounds like CF4, C2F6,SF6 and PTFE which are pretty inert and incorporate a goodly amount of fluorine so these are probably how we would ship it. But these are exactly the compounds we might want if we are going to warm a planet or make low friction and inert coatings.
So, if there is convenient fluoride or fluorapatite (a major source on earth) available on Mars we can mine it and make the desired Fluorowhatever there, but if not it should be shipped in its manufactured form from earth.

Offline

#9 2019-09-17 16:16:51

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 19,235

Re: Artificial Fluorine Nucleosynthesis?

We have heard some exotic life on the extreme does mean that life could use different chemicals for the energy that sparks life.

Offline

#10 2019-10-11 18:35:58

knightdepaix
Member
Registered: 2014-07-07
Posts: 236

Re: Artificial Fluorine Nucleosynthesis?

elderflower wrote:

HF is to be avoided at virtually all costs. Really nasty stuff! IF7 is very slightly less nasty provided there is no water about but I still wouldn't fancy shipping fluorine in that form either. However there are compounds like CF4, C2F6,SF6 and PTFE which are pretty inert and incorporate a goodly amount of fluorine so these are probably how we would ship it. But these are exactly the compounds we might want if we are going to warm a planet or make low friction and inert coatings.
So, if there is convenient fluoride or fluorapatite (a major source on earth) available on Mars we can mine it and make the desired Fluorowhatever there, but if not it should be shipped in its manufactured form from earth.

The element fluorine is waste or by-product from metal or mineral ore refining and metal and mineral extractions from ore. For example,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_tetrafluoride
SiF4 is a by-product of the production of phosphate fertilizers, resulting from the attack of HF (derived from fluorapatite protonolysis) on silicates, which are present as impurities in the phosphate rock.

Can relatively clean silicon tetrafluoride GAS in tanks be the chemical compound vehicle to carry the element fluorine into the space station factory on earth ortbit where space debris, garbage and junk are turned into fluorides.

1) The element silicon is then either retreived in element or its oxide. Either way, the silicon element is used in situ for repairing ONLY (not making new) solar panel.
2) Those space junk fluorides is either sent down to Earth atmosphere for vaporization into gas or better, stored and delivered to Mars as raw material.
3) Needless to say, the element fluorine within is then reacted with carbon dioxide in Martian atmosphere into carbon fluorides as global warming gas on mars and releasing oxygen for settlers' consumpation.

Killing birds with one fluoride stone?

Last edited by knightdepaix (2019-10-11 18:36:26)

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB