• Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    155
    ·
    6 months ago

    I mean, you can heat any old rock & make it look like that … what I’m saying is that every rock, when heated to 500+°C, will gain delicious orange flavour, but scientists don’t want you to know that!!

      • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Hey, sexy bone-marrow pelvis, shake them atomic gains!

        (OK, but like, if I produced synthetic plutonium I would make the box look like a chocolate box. Those workers & engineers deserve to have a fun work environment, engage in some shenanigans, make an oopsie from time to time.)

    • FiskFisk33@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Not dietal calories.

      The calorie numbers we assign to food, measure how much energy our body extracts from them when eaten.

      In this context, plutonium is closer to 0

      If we instead want to measure the actual total physical energy content of materia, we would turn to E=mc^2, telling us that a gram of anything has about 20 million kcal, no matter if its plutonium or diet coke. which is a slightly less useful value on food labels :D

      • atomicorange@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        6 months ago

        Technically it measures how much you can heat up a known volume of water if you burn the food. We have no way of measuring how much of that energy released by combustion actually gets absorbed and translated to ATP in the body, but it’s the best estimation we have of the relative energy content of foods.

        There’s some carbohydrates, proteins, and fats that our bodies don’t seem to convert to energy (or only partially convert) but still technically contain “calories” because they’re combustible. Sugar alcohols, fiber, etc.

        Plutonium doesn’t combust, but it would heat up water in a calorimeter. Really the test method’s applicability kind of falls apart when you start testing undigestible materials.

          • atomicorange@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I did a little digging. The heat of decay (so plutonium 238 just sitting around, not burning) is about .48 kcal/hr per gram. So if we were able to convert that energy to ATP like we do carbohydrates, eating about 300g of plutonium would be like eating a twinkie (150kcal) every hour. In about 88 years the energy output of that plutonium would have reduced to about a half-twinkie per hour.

            Assuming you need 2000 kcal per day to maintain weight, that’s only 83 kcal per hour needed. So, if you could survive eating it and actually utilize the energy generated, you’d be set for life on food after eating less than 300g. We’d have to come up with a dosing schedule or you’d have to work out pretty hard as a young person to keep from getting fat.

            The heat of combustion for plutonium based on a very cursory search (take it with a grain of salt) is about 1 kcal/g. So assuming your body could oxidize it, you’d get a one-time burst of about 2 twinkies worth of energy immediately upon eating that 300g.

  • Lvxferre [he/him]@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    6 months ago

    We need a cosmological law dictating harmful to humans = boring-looking. I mean, it isn’t just plutonium, look at uranium yellowcake! It’s lemon flavouring!

  • LOGIC💣@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    6 months ago

    Isn’t it just that color because it’s hot? Like, if you cooled those off to room temperature, wouldn’t they be metallic gray?

      • ArtemisimetrA@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        The fact that Thorium and Uranium are just “probably not a good idea” makes me think that the scale is based on licking like an ore that contains them rather than the pure element

        • andros_rex@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          I’m pretty sure I could get away with licking my uranium ore sample. Not going to test it apropos of nothing though.

          A lot of those trans-uranium (and astatine) aren’t going to exist in lick-able quantities anyway.

    • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      In order to lick something at the very least it needs to be liquid, or better yet, solid.

      Trying to kick hydrogen, with this in mind, will be the last lick you ever do in your life

  • expatriado@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    6 months ago

    if you can wait a few million years, after few decay steps it turns into lead, which is known to be sweet

  • VerilyFemme@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    6 months ago

    Yes, it does look delicious.

    But I can’t help but think about this being the consequences of dying everything we eat unholy colors. Maybe radioactive material wouldn’t be so tasty looking if we didn’t give kids candy that looks like radioactive material.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    It’ll kill ya in loads of inventive and horrible ways, but sure, you can give it a try!