How the nuclear binding energy gives mass to the nucleus?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of nuclear binding energy and its relation to mass, particularly in the context of high-energy particle collisions. Participants explore how energy transforms into mass and the implications of quantum field theory in this process.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions when and how nuclear binding energy converts into mass, using an example of particle production.
  • Another participant suggests that the example provided is more about particle production than nuclear binding energy, noting the transformation of kinetic energy into rest mass.
  • Some participants assert that in high-energy collisions, nuclear binding energy is not relevant, as kinetic energy is converted into the mass of new particles.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of quantum field theory, with one participant stating that it describes how energy converts to mass without a fundamental reason or process.
  • Another participant argues that the theory is not incomplete, emphasizing that physics does not need to explain the "how" in a philosophical sense, but rather provides models to understand the phenomena.
  • One participant draws an analogy to plane geometry, suggesting that just because a theory does not explain the "how" does not mean it is incomplete, and highlights the role of mathematics in quantum mechanics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relevance of nuclear binding energy in high-energy collisions and the completeness of quantum field theory. There is no consensus on these issues, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific examples and theoretical frameworks, but there are unresolved questions regarding the assumptions underlying their arguments and the definitions of key terms like "mass" and "energy." The discussion also touches on the mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics without reaching a definitive conclusion.

HakimPhilo
Messages
77
Reaction score
10
Hello everybody! :wink:
I have some difficulties concerning the concept of nuclear binding energy.
First, look at this example:
http://www.freeimagehosting.net/newuploads/jtefo.png
In the first case, the two protons have big energy. But this energy is not changing it's weight. And in the second case, when they collided, the energy that they contained transformed to new particles, so more mass.
But in the nuclear binding energy, when this energy converts into mass?

Thank you in advance...∞ :happy:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The example seems to be one of particle production rather than nuclear binding energy.

On the left side, the initial (rest?) mass is 0.3 unit, and on the right side one has 9 tracks, which are ostensibly particles and the total rest mass is now 1 unit. So the unknown or unspecified kinetic energy has been transformed into rest mass. It's not clear if the new particles are stable however.
 
Yes, but my question is when the energy of the proton converts to mass an how? We are speaking about the nuclear-binding energy.
 
For high-energetic particle collisions, nuclear binding energy is not relevant. You convert the kinetic energy of particles to mass of new particles.

"How": quantum field theory. It just happens, and theories can calculate the probabilities. There is no fundamental "reason" or "process" why/how it happens.
 
mfb said:
For high-energetic particle collisions, nuclear binding energy is not relevant. You convert the kinetic energy of particles to mass of new particles.

"How": quantum field theory. It just happens, and theories can calculate the probabilities. There is no fundamental "reason" or "process" why/how it happens.
We know that it happens but then the theory is incomplete since it can't explain how it happens.
 
The theory is not incomplete.
It is physics, not philosophy.
The theory can give you a model "how" it happens, it does not care if it is "real" (whatever that means).
 
HakimPhilo said:
We know that it happens but then the theory is incomplete since it can't explain how it happens.
Every theory has axioms. Plane geometry says that two lines meet in a point, but it's meaningless to pose the question "how" they do. That fact does not make plane geometry incomplete.

In this case we have an initial state A and a final state B, both with the same energy but with different particles having different masses. There is a term in the Hamiltonian that connects state A with state B, and therefore Schrödinger's Equation tells us there's a probability per unit time that A will evolve into B.

You may consider this to be mathematical and unintuitive, but mathematics is necessary for an understanding of quantum mechanics.
 

Similar threads

High School Is Comparing Binding Energy and Mass to Kinetic and Potential Energy Valid?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Undergrad Some confusion with the Binding Energy graph of atoms
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
High School Why don't neutrons bind into large out of control masses?
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
High School Why Is Binding Energy Subtracted in Nuclear Mass Calculations?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Undergrad How Does Binding Energy Relate to Nucleon Distance in Atomic Nuclei?
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Is my understanding of nuclear fusion and binding energy correct?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Undergrad Binding energy, fusion and fission
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Undergrad Breaking an atom down in it's components.
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
High School What causes mass defect in the nucleus?
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
6K
Undergrad Q: Binding energy per nucleon & energy released in reaction
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K