Talk:Nuclear model

Real physical models

File:Models1.jpg

Real Physical Models

You should have a category called "Real Physical Models" since I have built a set of them (One model per Element) and am trying to figure out how to explain them. The basic concept is that each element has a basic structure made up by the accumulation of Z (atomic number z) deuterons, on the surface of which are accumulated an A-2Z number of "excess neutrons" for each isotope A number. The Z number of accumulated deuterons provide a balanced structure in the case of the even Z numbers and a one deuteron degree of unbalance in the case of odd Z numbers. This unbalance can be partially corrected by the judicious adding of a varying numbers of "extra neutrons" to the top and/or bottom of the inner structure with only one extra neutron being permitted in any position. Accordingly, for a balanced original structure, it is much easier to maintain a balanced structure by the addition of 2 (or multiples of 2) than for the addition of odd numbers of "extra neutrons". The protocol for the accumulation of deuterons and up to 2 extra neutrons can be learned by the accumulating up to 20 of the new 3/8 inch (diameter) by 3/8 inch long Neodymium magnets around a central axis of rotation (and noting that magnets are like gears and that you cant side by side mesh 3 magnets and that parallel polarity magnets resist side by side conjunction. The accumulation of additional deuterons and extra neutrons involve what I call the "checkerboard protocol", where after 2 layers of checkers are accumulated in the center 4 squares (Protons on red and neutrons on black), each succeding series of deuteron additions, (adjacent red and black) requires 4 more deuterons than required by the previous series. Thus the accumulation process starts with the accumulation of 2 layers of 4 nucleons, (2 deuterons) in the the center of the checkerboard, followed by additional layers with additional numbers of accumulated deuterons as follows: Layer/Deuterons 1/2, 2/2, 3/8, 4/8, 5/18, 6/18, 7/32, 8/32, for a total of 120 accumulated deuterons which is the capacity of the standard 64 square checkerboard. It is also easy to see that with a 10x10 = 100 square checkerboard the accumulation of 2 layers of the next series would each involve the accumulation of 50 deuterons in each layer making the total accumulation values to be 170 for layer9 and 220 for layer 10. However the magnet protocol suggests that in the 3 dimensional accumulation process the successive layers do not pile up as they do on the checkerboard, but rather accumulate along a plane perpendicular to the axis of rotation of the atom and approximately in the center of balance of the longest (first) columns. This results in the creation of an octahedral structure with maximum symmetry at Z=118 and with locations for the addition of 64 "extra neutrons". I hope that this preliminary discussion will intrigue you into establishing an additional category for discussing real physical nuclear models. WFPMWFPM (talk) 04:55, 28 April 2008 (UTC)WFPM.WFPMWFPM (talk) 19:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a policy about Wikipedia:No original research you may want to examine. This isn't really the appropriate platform for atomic models that are not substantiated per Wikipedia:Citing sources. Do you know any published articles that could be used as citations for such an article? Thanks.—RJH (talk) 14:59, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

The original discussion was about the relative merits of periodic tables. And after I built a set of models trying to figure those merits out you guys allowed me to talk about them in Talk:Alternative periodic tables, which I think added to the discussion about same. But if you dont want to consider the implications of alternative nuclear models on the standard nuclear model concept then I guess I'm guilty of original research in that area. Kind of like your reported John Dalton Dalton's's Atomic theory Models. WFPMWFPM (talk) 16:53, 10 October 2008 (UTC)WFPM.WFPM (talk) 17:04, 10 October 2008 (UTC)WFPMWFPM (talk) 17:12, 10 October 2008 (UTC)WFPMWFPM (talk) 19:44, 10 October 2008 (UTC)WFPM (talk) 20:06, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

There's no point in trying to make something physical out of something that isn't physical. For example, it is known that the nuclear charge of helium-3 and helium-4 is concentrated at the exact center of the nucleus, and spreads out symmetrically from there. This is only possible if the two protons occupy the same space at the exact center of the nucleus, and have no angular momentum, just as the two electrons in helium do. You can't model this physically. Physical models also do not account for magic numbers, nor do they explain spins. How is N-14, which has a spin of 1, going to be explained by a model made of 7 deuterons? And what do you do for helium-3? Just stick an extra proton "on"? SBHarris 21:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)