Why can a star shine for so long, and why do hotter stellar cores favor different nuclear reactions? A useful theory must supply both an adequate energy reservoir and the right stellar energy-generation rate. Nuclear binding energy supplies the reservoir; the thermonuclear reaction rate, stellar composition and stellar structure determine how quickly it is spent. The proton–proton chain and CNO cycle are two routes for hydrogen burning with very different temperature sensitivities.
In his 1967 lecture, Hans Albrecht Bethe contrasted the short Kelvin-Helmholtz cooling time with long ages inferred from terrestrial and stellar evidence.[ref]
Energy production in stars by Hans Albrecht Bethe (1967). 1967 Nobel lecture, History, pp. 218–219
For an original solar-scale estimate, choose mass , radius and luminosity . The characteristic Kelvin-Helmholtz cooling time is about ; the precise gravitational reservoir has a structure-dependent coefficient. If a fraction of the mass can burn its initial hydrogen mass fraction , with a chosen rest-energy conversion fraction , the fuel estimate isThis assumes fixed luminosity and neglects neutrino losses. It demonstrates the reservoir advantage, rather than predicting the Sun's age or its full stellar evolution. Having enough fuel still does not identify a reaction: the fuel must release energy at a rate compatible with hydrostatic equilibrium and radiative transfer.
Hans Albrecht Bethe and Charles Louis Critchfield calculated deuterium formation from two protons in 1938, combining quantum tunnelling with a weak conversion of a proton into a neutron. Their calculated nuclear reaction cross-section was a theoretical input to hydrogen burning.[ref]
The Formation of Deuterons by Proton Combination by Hans Albrecht Bethe and Charles Louis Critchfield. The Formation of Deuterons by Proton Combination, 15 August 1938, abstract and p. 248
In 1939, Hans Albrecht Bethe analysed the catalytic carbon–nitrogen route and compared required stellar core temperatures with stellar structure estimates in Table VIII. His reported solar agreement used historical abundance and structure assumptions; it should not be read as a modern demonstration that the CNO cycle dominates the Sun.[ref]Energy Production in Stars by Hans Albrecht Bethe (1939). Energy Production in Stars, 1939, abstract p. 434 and section 9, Table VIII, pp. 449–450
Hans Albrecht Bethe's 1967 lecture credits Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker's independent 1938 carbon–nitrogen cycle discovery, distinguishing it from calculation of rates and temperature dependence.[ref] The 1967 Nobel Prize in Physics recognized Hans Albrecht Bethe's contributions to nuclear reaction theory, especially stellar energy production.[ref]
All Nobel Prizes in Physics by Nobel Prize Outreach. 1967 entry, recipient and award motivation
Laboratory nuclear reaction cross-sections were inputs, not measurements of an artificial star. The 1939 paper converted thick-target yields to nuclear reaction cross-sections using a range–energy relation and tabulated capture data.[ref]
Energy Production in Stars by Hans Albrecht Bethe (1939). Section 2, p. 436, Tables II–III and discussion of thick-target yields
A concrete apparatus example is the Cockcroft-Walton lithium disintegration experiment, with an accelerated proton beam, lithium target, zinc sulfide screen and beam-blocking control. Its nuclear reaction differs from both stellar burning routes. The 1967 lecture stresses extrapolation below laboratory access and tests for nearby nuclear levels.[ref] Articles by others on the same topic
There are currently no matching articles.