Completely stable nucleus question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sigma Rho
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Nucleus Stable
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the stability of a helium isotope nucleus, which contains two protons and one neutron. Participants are exploring the forces at play within the nucleus, particularly the electrostatic and gravitational forces, and their implications for nuclear stability.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning why the nucleus remains stable despite the stronger electrostatic forces acting to pull it apart. They are also examining the meaning of "completely stable" and the role of the neutron in maintaining stability.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants offering insights and raising further questions. Some have suggested that another force must be present to account for the stability, while others are clarifying the implications of having a single neutron in the nucleus.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of the forces involved being unequal, which raises questions about the nature of nuclear forces and stability. The original poster's assumptions about the number of neutrons required for stability are also being challenged.

Sigma Rho
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
"completely stable nucleus" question

The nucleus of a helium isotope contains 2 protons. I have just worked out the magnitudes of the electrostatic force and the gravitational attraction between the 2 protons.

The question now reads "the nucleus is completely stable. Considering the magnitudes of the forces [the previous questions], what conclusions can you draw about the forces that are holding the nucleus together?"

My initial thoughts on reading the question before doing the math was that the forces would turn out to be equal, otherwise the nucleus would fall apart. I then realized that the electostatic force is always much more powerful than the gravitational one, which was the case when I worked out the magnitudes.

So, that leaves me wondering...
1. Why isn't the nucleus ripped apart, as the forces pulling it apart are many times stronger than the ones holding it together?
2. What exactly does "completely stable" mean?
3. What conclusions can be drawn from the magnitudes of the forces?
4. The question also mentions that there is a single neutron in the nucleus - does this have anything to do with it?

Thank you in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
2. It means that the atom won't decay into individual protons and electrons and neutrons.

1/3. There clearly must be another force!

4. Yup.

cookiemonster
 
Shouldn't there be two neutrons? I didn't think that only one could provide a stable nuclear environment.
 
turin said:
Shouldn't there be two neutrons? I didn't think that only one could provide a stable nuclear environment.

The question says just one! Thanks for the answers guys, most helpful.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
15K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K