Completely stable nucleus question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sigma Rho
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Nucleus Stable
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the stability of a helium isotope's nucleus, which contains two protons and one neutron. The electrostatic force between the protons is significantly stronger than the gravitational force, raising questions about the nucleus's stability. It is concluded that another force, likely the strong nuclear force, must be at play to hold the nucleus together despite the strong repulsive forces. The term "completely stable" indicates that the nucleus does not decay into separate particles. The presence of a single neutron is acknowledged as a contributing factor to this stability.
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.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top