B Why Is Binding Energy Subtracted in Nuclear Mass Calculations?

Alex_physics
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
The mass of the nucleus is calculated as follows:

mass (nucleus) = [Number of protons * Mass of proton] + [Number of Neutrons * mass of neutron] - [Binding energy/c^2]

Why is the contribution to mass from the binding energy subtracted from the mass of the nucleus rather than being added to the nuclear mass ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Because that is the definition of binding energy. If you had to spend energy in order to make a system bound, that system would be unstable and decay to the original constituents.
 
  • Like
Likes jim mcnamara and Alex_physics
Two hydrogen atoms come together to form a stable helium atom. Surely the mass of the helium atom's nucleus should be the sum of the masses of the two protons and neutrons i.e.

mnucleus = (mproton * 2) + (mneutron * 2)

But, this does not add up to the actual mass of a helium atom. There is a loss of ≈0.0303 amu which is the mass defect. Using Einstein's equation relating mass and energy, E = mc2, we find that the nuclear binding energy is 4.53 x 10-12 J.

Thus in the equation which you stated above, the mass defect is calculated by dividing by c2, thus getting mass back. And to obtain the actual mass of the nucleus it has to be subtracted.
NOTE: By switching the positions of 'binding energy' and 'mass(nucleus)' we get the mass defect equation.
Δm = Zmproton + (A - Z)mneutron - M
Where, Δm = mass defect
Z = number of protons
A = number of nucleons
M = mass of the nucleus.
 
  • Like
Likes Alex_physics
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
Back
Top