Re: Periodic Table of Nucleus Shapes

Martin Brown wrote on 8/18/2017 5:23 AM:

>> >> It is extremely unlikely that nucleons will take up simple cubic >> arrangements the short range nuclear forces are so strong that they will >> almost always be in the tightest close packed configuration available and >> with the protons as far apart from each other as they can get. >> >>
formatting link
>> >>
formatting link
>> >> Although a chemistry URL for atoms it applies equally well to nucleons in >> terms of how close to each other they will sit at equilibrium. > > You are treating this as if the protons and neutrons are tiny spheres. > We don't have much reason to believe that. In fact research has shown > that the apparent shape varies and can even look like a torus or a peanut.

Or even a bagel, but on average they *are* a pretty good approximation to an incompressible sphere with quantum fluctuations to more esoteric shapes. That holds good until you get nuclear material in quantities of up to about a couple of stellar masses in neutron stars beyond that not even degeneracy pressure can prevent formation of a black hole.

Modern models take that nucleon soupiness into account and give better results than the earlier nuclear physics theories. Parts of which were still considered classified material even as late as the 1970's.

--
Regards, 
Martin Brown
Reply to
Martin Brown
Loading thread data ...

Bagels don't pack into crystal formations the same as spheres.

--

Rick C
Reply to
rickman

Fortunately, very little uranium gets compacted into neutronium for that to be an issue. And then it's neutronium, not any particular atom anymore, so it doesn't matter.

Tim

--
Seven Transistor Labs, LLC 
Electrical Engineering Consultation and Contract Design 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Tim Williams

Sure they do: Not exactly a crystalline structure, but close enough.

--
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com 
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jeff Liebermann

Tim Williams wrote on 8/18/2017 12:05 PM:

I believe it is protons that have the non-spherical shapes, not the nucleus of atoms. The issue is what determines the arrangement of particles *in* the nucleus.

--

Rick C
Reply to
rickman

To a first approximation it's spherical. The nucleus is held together by the strong nuclear force. Which is dang complicated. When I was in grad school a theorist friend was working on models for the deuteron. (The simplest nucleus besides just a proton.) Whereas we've had 'perfect' models for the hydrogen atom for decades... since QED.

George H.

Reply to
George Herold

"First approximation"? To a first approximation the Washington Monument is a sphere. Again, the issue is not the shape of the NUCLEUS! So what's your point?

--

Rick C
Reply to
rickman

Oh my God, you mean terrorists have known how to weaponize black holes since the 1970s?!

Reply to
bitrex

I didn't think weaponization of a black hole would be all that hard. Making one is the problem.

Just like weaponizing anti-matter wouldn't be so hard, but getting it is very hard.

--

Rick C
Reply to
rickman

Dear Rick, Thank you for your interest in reality. Please visit again tomorrow. Alan

Reply to
Alan Folmsbee

A lot of the stuff that the HEP and TCM folk who were in physics academia then had worked on in WWII was for nuclear bomb making.

Others had worked on radar and servo gun tracking controls. They had stories about the hazards of working in a rotating frame of reference.

--
Regards, 
Martin Brown
Reply to
Martin Brown

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.