Two questions about the binding energy chart?

In summary, the binding energy chart shows the binding energy per nucleon for different nuclei. Nickel-62 is considered more stable than iron-58 and iron-56, despite having higher binding energy, due to the total binding energy of the nucleus. Nuclei with fewer nucleons have a lower binding energy due to their larger surface area. However, even though small nuclei have lower binding energy, they are not as radioactive as larger elements like uranium. This is because small nuclei release energy through fusion rather than decays, which is the energy source for stars.
  • #1
magdi_gamal
9
0
Hello I'm a little confused about the binding energy chart and its relevance to nuclei stability.

1) why is nickel-62 nucleas more stable than iron-58 and iron-56 though they have higher binding energy?

2) Why is binding energy lower in nuclei with least number of nucleons?
correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the less nucleones there is the closer they'd be to the nucleus and therefore the strong nuclear force would be more dominant.
So wouldn't make sense that nuclei with the least number of nucleons to be harder to split apart, and so have a higher binding energy? I guess that's not the case seeing that they have the lowest binding energy in the chart, but why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
By the least number of nucleons elements, I meant H isotopes, HE, Li-6 Li-7...etc
 
  • #3
In which respect is Ni62 "more stable"?
The iron nuclei might have more binding energy per nucleon, but what about the total binding energy?

2) Why is binding energy lower in nuclei with least number of nucleons?
correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the less nucleones there is the closer they'd be to the nucleus and therefore the strong nuclear force would be more dominant.
The nucleons are always in the nucleus, as the nucleus is made out of all nucleons. Small nuclei have a large surface relative to the volume, that lowers the binding energy.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #4
mfb said:
In which respect is Ni62 "more stable"?
in the sense that its nucleones are more tightly bound, and not being able/not needing to decay I guess? I read somewhere on the Internet that it's the most stable nucleas.

The iron nuclei might have more binding energy per nucleon, but what about the total binding energy?
Oh, so the values presented in the binding energy chart are per nucleon NOT the overall binding energy?

The nucleons are always in the nucleus, as the nucleus is made out of all nucleons. Small nuclei have a large surface relative to the volume, that lowers the binding energy.
um, not sure I got this. So the nucleus is the entire area that holds the nucleones and not simply just the center point? and elements like Li, H, and helium basically have lower binding energy because they have a smaller nucleas?
okay, but despite their lower binding energy, they're still not even closely radioactive as elements such as Uranium. the reason being their low amount of nucleons right?
Thanks for your answer.
 
  • #6
magdi_gamal said:
Oh, so the values presented in the binding energy chart are per nucleon NOT the overall binding energy?
Right.

um, not sure I got this. So the nucleus is the entire area that holds the nucleones and not simply just the center point? and elements like Li, H, and helium basically have lower binding energy because they have a smaller nucleas?
The nucleus is the whole volume where nucleons are present. This volume depends on the nucleus - in general, the volume is roughly proportional to the number of nucleons.

okay, but despite their lower binding energy, they're still not even closely radioactive as elements such as Uranium. the reason being their low amount of nucleons right?
Thanks for your answer.
Uranium is radioactive as emitting nucleons (-> alpha radiation) brings the remaining nucleus closer towards nickel/iron, towards larger binding energies per nucleon.
The corresponding process for small nuclei would be fusion, not decays. Fusion of small nuclei does indeed release a lot of energy, this is the energy source of stars.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person

1. What is the binding energy chart?

The binding energy chart is a graphical representation of the amount of energy required to break apart a nucleus into its constituent parts. It shows the relationship between the number of protons and neutrons in a nucleus and the amount of energy needed to hold them together.

2. How is the binding energy chart used in nuclear physics?

The binding energy chart is used to understand the stability of different isotopes and to predict the type of nuclear reactions that may occur. It also helps scientists to determine the energy released or absorbed in a nuclear reaction, which is important in areas such as nuclear energy production and nuclear medicine.

3. What is the significance of the "valley of stability" in the binding energy chart?

The "valley of stability" refers to the region on the binding energy chart where the most stable isotopes are located. This is where the ratio of neutrons to protons is at its most balanced, resulting in a more tightly bound nucleus. Isotopes outside of this region tend to be less stable and may undergo radioactive decay.

4. How does the binding energy chart relate to the strong nuclear force?

The strong nuclear force is the fundamental force that holds protons and neutrons together in the nucleus. The binding energy chart shows the strength of this force by representing the amount of energy required to overcome it and break apart the nucleus. The higher the binding energy, the stronger the strong nuclear force is holding the nucleus together.

5. Are there any limitations to the binding energy chart?

While the binding energy chart is a useful tool in understanding nuclear physics, it does have limitations. It is based on theoretical models and does not take into account all factors that may affect nuclear stability. In addition, it does not account for the effects of temperature, which can impact the stability of nuclei. Therefore, the binding energy chart should be used as a general guide rather than a definitive measure of nuclear stability.

Similar threads

  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
602
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
404
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
2
Replies
44
Views
4K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
812
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
9K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top