Talk:Nuclear model

Physics Redirect‑class

This redirect 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 Redirect This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

You should have a category called "Real Physical Models" since I have built a set of them (One model per Element) and am trying to figure out how to explain them. The basic concept is that each element has a basic structure made up by the accumulation of Z (atomic number z) deuterons, on the surface of which are accumulated an A-2Z number of "excess neutrons" for each isotope A number. The Z number of accumulated deuterons provide a balanced structure in the case of the even Z numbers and a one deuteron degree of unbalance in the case of odd Z numbers. This unbalance can be partially corrected by the judicious adding of a varying numbers of "extra neutrons" to the top and/or bottom of the inner structure with only one extra neutron being permitted in any position. Accordingly, for a balanced original structure, it is much easier to maintain a balanced structure by the addition of 2 (or multiples of 2) than for the addition of odd numbers of "extra neutrons". The protocol for the accumulation of deuterons and up to 2 extra neutrons can be learned by the accumulating up to 20 of the new 3/8 inch (diameter) by 3/8 inch long Neodymium magnets around a central axis of rotation (and noting that magnets are like gears and that you cant side by side mesh 3 magnets and that parallel polarity magnets resist side by side conjunction. The accumulation of additional deuterons and extra neutrons involve what I call the "checkerboard protocol", where after 2 layers of checkers are accumulated in the center 4 squares (Protons on red and neutrons on black), each succeding series of deuteron additions, (adjacent red and black) requires 4 more deuterons than required by the previous series. Thus the accumulation process starts with the accumulation of 2 layers of 4 nucleons, (2 deuterons) in the the center of the checkerboard, followed by additional layers with additional numbers of accumulated deuterons as follows: Layer/Deuterons 1/2, 2/2, 3/8, 4/8, 5/18, 6/18, 7/32, 8/32, for a total of 120 accumulated deuterons which is the capacity of the standard 64 square checkerboard. It is also easy to see that with a 10x10 = 100 square checkerboard the accumulation of 2 layers of the next series would each involve the accumulation of 50 deuterons in each layer making the total accumulation values to be 170 for layer9 and 220 for layer 10. However the magnet protocol suggests that in the 3 dimensional accumulation process the successive layers do not pile up as they do on the checkerboard, but rather accumulate along a plane perpendicular to the axis of rotation of the atom and approximately in the center of balance of the longest (first) columns. This results in the creation of an octahedral structure with maximum symmetry at Z=118 and with locations for the addition of 64 "extra neutrons". I hope that this preliminary discussion will intrigue you into establishing an additional category for discussing real physical nuclear models. WFPMWFPM (talk) 04:55, 28 April 2008 (UTC)WFPM.WFPMWFPM (talk) 19:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has a policy about Wikipedia:No original research you may want to examine. This isn't really the appropriate platform for atomic models that are not substantiated per Wikipedia:Citing sources. Do you know any published articles that could be used as citations for such an article? Thanks.—RJH (talk) 14:59, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The original discussion was about the relative merits of periodic tables. And after I built a set of models trying to figure those merits out you guys allowed me to talk about them in Talk:Alternative periodic tables, which I think added to the discussion about same. But if you dont want to consider the implications of alternative nuclear models on the standard nuclear model concept then I guess I'm guilty of original research in that area. Kind of like your reported John Dalton Dalton's's Atomic theory Models. WFPMWFPM (talk) 16:53, 10 October 2008 (UTC)WFPM.WFPM (talk) 17:04, 10 October 2008 (UTC)WFPMWFPM (talk) 17:12, 10 October 2008 (UTC)WFPMWFPM (talk) 19:44, 10 October 2008 (UTC)WFPM (talk) 20:06, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's no point in trying to make something physical out of something that isn't physical. For example, it is known that the nuclear charge of helium-3 and helium-4 is concentrated at the exact center of the nucleus, and spreads out symmetrically from there. This is only possible if the two protons occupy the same space at the exact center of the nucleus, and have no angular momentum, just as the two electrons in helium do. You can't model this physically. What do you do for helium-3? Just stick an extra proton "on"? It still can't go where the other one is. Physical models also do not account for magic numbers, nor do they explain spins. How is N-14, which has a spin of 1, going to be explained by a model made of 7 deuterons? SBHarris 21:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I Appreciate your consideration and input concerning some of the details of my structural models. First the models do not come forward with a nuclear charge concept other than that what is occurring is a process of nucleon accumulation. And the original premise was that the nucleus is the result of a process of alpha particle accumulation in the presence of a surplus of neutrons. Thus the first 2 element period resulted in the 2He4 alpha particle. But then the models suggest that the next period should be a 2 element period resulting in the creation of an atom having 2 alpha particles which we call 4Be8, and which is unstable unless an additional nucleon is attached to bind the 2 alpha particles together. This can be accomplished by an "extra neutron", which stops the accumulation process or by the addition of up to 6 additional deuterons leading the the creation of the 10Ne20 nucleus. Then when a third alpha particle is accumulated to create 12Mg24, The 6 deuteron accumulation process can continue up to 18Ar36. When a 4th alpha particle addition is added at 20Ca40, The nucleon accumulation process is noted to first occur in the central plane of the nuclear structure, and involve the accumulation of up to 10 deuterons up to 30Zn60, during which time the nucleus is also cabable of being stable with an accumulated number of "excess neutrons" which are located on the nucleus in a dynamically balanced configuration. Then the nucleus accumulates 6 more deuterons resulting in a nucleus of 36Kr with varying amounts of accumulated excess neutrons. If this process is continued, we wind up with a nuclear structural concept of an 8 period accumulation process leading to the accumulation of 120 deuterons. And with a periodic table equivalent to the Janet Periodic table showing the element/period relationships. And it is to be noted that the models can be built using the binding force of magnets, and in accordance with their protocol of accumulation. Except that in the instance of 4Be9 the 9th magnet will not bind opposite polarity side by side magnets together but will only bind opposite polarity end to end magnets together, thus indicating that the 4Be8 nucleus consists of 2 alpha particles with very weak end to end bonding characteristics.  ::I am also concerned and note your concern about spin. And I dont understand how the reported values are arrived at. For example the spin of 4Be8 is reported as zero (as are all EE's) but the spin of 4Be9 is reported as -3/2 and the reported spin of 5B10 is +3. And the spin of the deuteron is reported as +1  ::It is finally to be noted that the individual nucleons are considered to be spinning mass particles and thus capable of storing angular momentum, and that the implied structure of the models is such as to allow the nucleus to store a maximum amount of angular momentum. Of course the nucleons of the models touch each other, but that doesn't necessarily imply that the actual nucleons touch each other, only that they be spin compatible.WFPM (talk) 16:12, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SB HArris wrote above:"Physical models also do not accout for magic numbers." Yes, they do. Try this link: http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/nucl-th/0309035.69.138.209.253 (talk) 15:12, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the basic problem with these models is that the nucleus is a quantum system, in which the nucleons do not occupy fixed positions. These models remind me of the cubical atoms of Gilbert N. Lewis, which did explain some atomic properties such as the usual values of chemical valence, but failed completely to explain other properties such as atomic spectra and magnetic properties. Quantum mechanics is necessary for a complete explanation of the atom.

For the nucleus also, a simple model with nuclei in fixed positions may happen to explain some facts, but will not explain everything because it does not indicate the real nature of the nucleus. The correct model is quantum-mechanical, and what we want to know are the orbitals (or quantum states) of the nucleons. Dirac66 (talk) 01:01, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That argument reminds me of one I had with my next door neighbor when I was trying to sell my house. He asked for first rights of refusal before I sold and I asked him why he didn't just buy the house and resell it, and he said I was asking too much. So I asked him how much I was asking, and he said "I don't know but I know it's too much".WFPM (talk) 16:48, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly appreciate your review and comments about my models and realize that they are a simplistic representation of the real thing. However they have construction features that show the relative size of the represented nuclei as well as the same accumulation period logic as that indicated by the Janet Periodic Table and I know you're way ahead of me concerning nucleon orbitals and/or quantum states, but they allow me to mentally visualize the periodic table and the relative position of each element within its row and period. They also suggest certain changes in the formatting of the Table of nuclideschart which better emphasizes the existence of certain nuclear stability trend lines (through the EE and OE elements) that is not indicated in the standard n versus p nuclear charts. The lines have the formula A = 3Z - an even numbered constant, with the number 38 being a good number near the 80Hg area. And I thank you for the reply.WFPM (talk) 04:54, 23 July 2009 (UTC).WFPM (talk) 22:23, 23 July 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Please note that an image of the Janet left step Periodic table is now shown in the article Charles Janet and has the property of representing the same periodicity of occurrence of the series of the elements as does the real physical models.WFPM (talk) 19:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also note that the shape of the created atomic model structure is that of an Octahedron , or 8 sided structure but that the incremental number of elements (deuterons) in each layer required to increase it's size is only 4.WFPM (talk) 18:15, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As a summary, it is to be noted that the models illustrate the easily conceivable concept that the atomic nucleus could be created by the accumulation of successive series of 6, 10, 14, 18, + deuteron nuclei (plus a variable number of excess neutron additions), around an initial core nucleus consisting of two adjoined alpha nuclei.WFPM (talk) 10:48, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As a start in this process, it is to be noted that 2 alpha nuclei with a reported individual mass value 0f 4.002603254 Amu plus 1 deuteron nucleus, with a 2.014101778 value add up to a total mass value of 10.01922429 Amu, whereas the reported of the composite mass value of OO5Be10 is 10.0129370, or 0.00628729 amu's less. Which indicates the ability of such an accumulation process to result in lesser mass value composite nuclei.

I have inserted this new model into the list. The model is described in a paper written by myself in preparation to be published. So far the only public reference to it is in Wikinfo. My Flatley (talk) 18:54, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed this little-known theory. It can be re-added after it appears in a peer-reviewed journal - see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources - Ttwaring (talk) 05:20, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To see a Nuclide chart that has been modified to show the number of "extra Neutrons" (above the Z number) that is required to be accumulated by the various elements and associated isotopes, that has been formatted in such a manner such that the (A = 3Z - an even number) stable isotope trend lines can be drawn as diagonal lines thereon, see the chart User:JWB/Nuclide chart with skew 1 and read about the trend lines in Talk:Isotopes of lead.WFPM (talk) 17:35, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the article, it is noted that the Sun's fusion of 1H (hydrogen) into 2He4 (helium) is the result of a fusion process which involves the creation of first 1H2 (deuterium from the hydrogen, and then 1H3 (tritium), And then further the fusing of 2 of the 1H3 (tritium) atoms to create a 2He4 (helium) atom. This happens in the interior of the star at high densities and temperatures, and would result in the occurrence of the existence of a mixture of both deuterium and helium atoms, and thus offer the possibility for their fusion, as well as for the fusion of a deuterium atom with 2 2He4 (helium) atoms to make a 5B10 (boron) in a manner similar to the proposed triple alpha process for the creation of 6C12 (Carbon).WFPM (talk) 18:35, 9 October 2010 (UTC) This might be an explanation of why the existence of 5B10 (Boron) was reported to occur in the solar system as reported in the Nucleosynthesis article.[reply]

In the May 1985 there is an article in the National Geographic magazine entitled "Worlds within the Atom" which shows an artistic drawing of the nucleus of an atom of 6C12 which was supposed to present the prevailing opinion of the time concerning the nucleus. What it shows is a spherical volume of space containing 3 different loosely bound groups of 4 neutrons, without differentiation between them except to note that there are "6 protons and 6 neutrons". This brings up the question of what the combined "triple alpha accumulation nucleus", or some equivalent carbon nucleus is really like at the end of the assimilation process.WFPM (talk) 13:39, 21 November 2010 (UTC) And it is to be noted that the implication of the Charles Janet periodic table is that the accumulation procedure is for the accumulated "double alpha" nucleus to be stabilized by successive side bonded deuteron additions (up to 6) up to EE10Ne20. After which a third alpha particle may then added to the top of the combined nucleus at EE12Mg24.WFPM (talk) 13:54, 21 November 2010 (UTC) SeeTriple-alpha process and Alpha process.WFPM (talk) 00:35, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The number of excess neutrons required for the occurrence of a stable structure are indicated by the existence of a condition of either stability or else the instability (log second halflife) of the individual isotopes. This data is reported in the CRC Handbook and in Nubase, and can serve to indicate the amount and possible location of the additional extra neutrons on the structure in addition to those involved in the proton-neutron deuteron pairs. This data can be better understood as a stability structure indicator related to the more significant stability property indications when presented as an Element stability profile chart such as the example shown in the Talk:Isotopes of lead article, which indicate the increasing number of excess neutrons required for stable isotope structure as the nucleus becomes larger in the number of accumulated nucleons.WFPM (talk) 22:43, 15 May 2011 (UTC) BUTD[reply]