Er.. come again?Quasitrium said:I was wondering that if neutrons stablize that atomic nuclei then it should stablize other systems.
Or can other particles be stablized by the proton,electron or neutron?
There is (roughly) an optimum proton/neutron ratio for each element. For lighter elements, it tends to be 1-1, while for heavier elements, there are more neutrons. In any case too many or too few neutrons tends to be unstable.why does the addition of neutrons stabilize some nuclei and not others ?
As Tina Turner would say, "What's luck got to do with QM" ? Let us hope that QM can explain the reason why Tc and Pm have no stable isotopes, or I hold that this fact alone would falsifies QM as being a complete hypothesis. Really, does not anyone have a reference from an introductory textbook or a peer review paper on nuclear physics to explain lack of stable isotopes for Tc and Pm ? --I have not yet found any.mathman said:I presume that there are explanations in the texts which address the general question of stability. Tc and Pm just happened to have bad luck in having no stable isotopes.