Confused about nuclear binding energy

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concept of nuclear binding energy and its implications for mass in atomic nuclei. Participants clarify that a nucleus has less mass than the sum of its nucleons due to binding energy being a negative quantity, which contributes to the overall mass deficit. The energy required to hold the nucleus together is indeed related to mass through the equation E=mc², but it is the binding energy that accounts for the mass difference. Additionally, the stability of iron and nickel is highlighted as a threshold due to their optimal binding energy, making them the most stable nuclei.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of nuclear physics concepts, particularly binding energy
  • Familiarity with Einstein's mass-energy equivalence principle (E=mc²)
  • Knowledge of nuclear fission and fusion processes
  • Basic concepts of nuclear stability and isotopes
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the concept of nuclear binding energy in detail
  • Study the mass defect and its calculation in atomic nuclei
  • Explore the stability of isotopes and the role of iron and nickel in nuclear reactions
  • Learn about the processes of nuclear fission and fusion and their energy implications
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in nuclear physics, educators teaching atomic structure, and anyone interested in understanding the principles of nuclear stability and energy transformations.

metalmaniac
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
hi there,

now I've been googling around for ages now trying to find this answer but i cant

i have read time and time again that a nucleus always has less mass than the sum of the masses of the nucleons in it. This is put down to the binding energy, this is where i get confused

surely if it takes energy (binding energy) to hold the nucleus together and energy = mass then the nucleus would have more mass than the sum of the masses of the nucleons wouldn't it?
because its mass would be the mass of each of the nucleons plus the mass of the binding energy given by e=mc^2

can someone please explain how this works?
and another thing...

i know that the energy released from fission and fusion is because the total binding energy of the resultant nuclei is less than the binding energy of the original nuclei, but why is it less? and why is iron/nickel the 'threshhold'
any help greatly apreciated

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
binding energy counts as negative, just as potential energyless means more negative thus strongly bound (here you have the hint for the answer for the first question!)

why Iron/Nickel : some nucleus has to be the most stable one
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Some confusion with the Binding Energy graph of atoms
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Undergrad Why the binding energy per nucleon has specific pattern?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
High School Is Comparing Binding Energy and Mass to Kinetic and Potential Energy Valid?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
High School Why don't neutrons bind into large out of control masses?
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
High School Nuclear Binding Energy: Is my understanding correct?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad How Does Binding Energy Relate to Nucleon Distance in Atomic Nuclei?
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Undergrad Q: Binding energy per nucleon & energy released in reaction
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K
Undergrad Binding energy, fusion and fission
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
High School The difference in the binding energy per nucleon
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
High School Mass Defect: Is my understanding correct?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K