There are a lot of posts on here than presume that if things on the smallest scales (elementary particles etc.) are different from everyday objects, then that is strange or weird. But, in my opinion, it is almost impossible to imagine elementary particles having the properties of everyday objects and this is a case in point.Thanks. It's a funny universe we live in.
Protons, like electrons, are fermions and this means that must have anti-symmetric wave functions. One significant consequence of this is the Pauli Exclusion Principle. Applied to electrons this is what determines the limit on the number of electrons in each shell of an atom.I read that protons have anti-symmetric wave functions and that this tells us something profound about what they are.
Ah well, if you don't know that, we've probably taken this thread beyond your ability to understand what is being said. There must be loads online about the structure of the atoms, electron shells and identical particles. If you are interested, start reading about the structure of the atom.Are there shells inside a nucleus?
Yes! The shell structure of nuclei was first suggested by Maria Goppert-Mayer, and it is necessary for explaining many nuclear properties. For example, like nobel gasses in atoms, nuclei have closed shells of increased stability- for example, 208Pb and 40Ca - these are called "magic" nuclei. When both the neutrons and proton shells are full, we call these "doubly magic". This is why physicists shouldn't name things.Read as "Are there shells for protons and neutrons (particles that exist in the nucleus)."
Not everybody agrees that cats can't be in a superposition. I, for one, understand the experiment as *requiring* the cat to be in a superposition of "dead" and "alive" as long as it is entangled with the unstable atom and is not disturbed (observed) by the rest of the Universe.One reason why I was hoping to find my "cat" in a nucleus is because real cats cannot be in a superposition but subatomic particles can.