| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"erken" |
| Date: |
01 Feb 2005 09:52:08 AM |
| Object: |
Atomic Mass u |
Atomic mass unit u is defined to be the mass of the Carbon-12 isotope,
which has a total of 12 protons and neutrons. But the mass of the
proton and that of the neutron are larger than 1u as given in the data
tables, so the total mass of the Carbon-12 must be larger than 12u, not
counting the electrons. Do you have any ideas about the resolution of
this problem?
.
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: Atomic Mass u |
01 Feb 2005 12:39:57 PM |
|
|
erken wrote:
Atomic mass unit u is defined to be the mass of the Carbon-12 isotope,
which has a total of 12 protons and neutrons. But the mass of the
proton and that of the neutron are larger than 1u as given in the data
tables, so the total mass of the Carbon-12 must be larger than 12u, not
counting the electrons. Do you have any ideas about the resolution of
this problem?
Binding energy, stooopid. This homework assignment has already been
posted and answered. Look it up in Google Groups.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Atomic Mass u |
01 Feb 2005 10:55:09 AM |
|
|
erken wrote:
Atomic mass unit u is defined to be the mass of the Carbon-12
isotope,
which has a total of 12 protons and neutrons. But the mass of the
proton and that of the neutron are larger than 1u as given in the
data
tables, so the total mass of the Carbon-12 must be larger than 12u,
not
counting the electrons. Do you have any ideas about the resolution of
this problem?
Binding energy in the carbon-12 nucleus. The electrons are typically
not included. You'll note that almost EVERY nucleus (except hydrogen --
or specifically the protium isotope) has a total mass than what you
would expect from summing the protons and neutrons.
Look up binding energy in Google.
PD
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Atomic Mass u |
02 Feb 2005 02:23:52 AM |
|
|
you wil be surprised to know that in the heavier Atoms
you dont fing so many electrons as the conventional model demands why
???
Y.Porat
---------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Atomic Mass u |
02 Feb 2005 08:33:05 AM |
|
|
Y.Porat wrote:
you wil be surprised to know that in the heavier Atoms
you dont fing so many electrons as the conventional model demands why
???
Y.Porat
---------------------------
Excuse me? The conventional model requires that neutral atoms have the
same number of protons and electrons. If they didn't have the right
number of electrons, they wouldn't fit in the periodic table where they
do, based on their periodic properties. Would you care to provide an
example and cite the number of protons, neutrons, and electrons in that
example?
PD
.
|
|
|
| User: "Y.Porat" |
|
| Title: Re: Atomic Mass u |
06 Feb 2005 06:12:22 AM |
|
|
Mr PD
there is one little posibility that bever ocured to you:
there are some protons inside the nuc that .....
guess what?
that are not positively chrged (they lost their electric charge
whi the nuc was created and that loss is part of the binding loss!
now i have acounter question to you:
plese bring experimenlat vwrification that Lead has :(quotw from
memory)
shells with :
2 8 16 18 32 18 4
excuse me if i somwwhat blew the exact figures
but in general that is the general concept
if you do it i take of my hat for you
(i amnot in a posisin to recomensd you to the Nobel
but once you do it you certainly deserve it
and
2 you are alowed to recrute for your help
the biggest scince institues
ps if you cant do it please say honsetly
'cant do it'' do we have a deal???
because if is important for a whole world ful of parrots.
TIA
Y.Porat
------------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
