The discussion centers on the differences in binding energy calculations during beta decay processes, specifically using the example of 163Dy. It is established that the binding energy is derived solely from the masses of the nuclei, excluding electron masses. The beta decay of 163Dy, which has a half-life of 47 days when stripped of electrons, demonstrates that electron binding energies can influence nuclear stability. The experimental observation of bound-state beta decay at CERN highlights the complexities in predicting radioactive behavior based on mass calculations alone.
PREREQUISITESPhysicists, nuclear engineers, and students studying nuclear decay processes, particularly those interested in the interplay between atomic structure and nuclear stability.
See the threadmathman said:The binding energy is the difference between the masses of the nuclei - the electron masses don't enter into the calculation.
In the case of 163Dy and 163Ho, neither the difference in atomic masses nor the difference in nuclear masses (using semi-empirical mass formula) predict that the 163Dy atom or the bare 163Dy nucleus is radioactive, after accounting for the decay beta mass. But 163Dy is radioactive anyway, only because the decay beta final state is the bound 1s atomic state of 163Ho (about 61 KeV). So electron mass and the atomic electron binding energies (including the atomic binding energy of the decay beta) sometimes play a key role in determining whether a nucleus is stable.mathman said:I learned something new. It still doesn't address the original binding energy question.