Strong and weak nuclear forces

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by lbiarge, Feb 25, 2013.

  1. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    (hypothesis against the mainstream)

    (the forum not permit me links)

    The strong nuclear force and weak nuclear forces are considered two of the four fundamental interactions of nature

    Strong interaction is in 2 areas : “is the force that binds protons and neutrons together to form the nucleus of an atom” and also “that holds quarks together to form protons, neutrons and other hadron particles.”

    Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    Weak nuclear force: “It is responsible for the radioactive decay of subatomic particles and initiates the process known as hydrogen fusion in stars.” -

    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    weak or unstable: “Outside the nucleus, free neutrons are unstable” -

    strong or stable: “However, inside a nucleus, protons can also transform into a neutron via inverse beta decay.” - - also “The transformation of a proton to a neutron inside of a nucleus is also possible through electron capture:” and “The same reasoning explains why protons, which are stable in empty space, may transform into neutrons when bound inside of a nucleus.”

    Non stable ““free neutrons decay by emission of an electron and an electron antineutrino to become a proton, a process known as beta decay” -

    We can make a translation, so “strong” for stable and “weak” for unstable.

    Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    So really only is the difference of stable or unstable in the same force.

    Look that in this definition all are same both: strong is “also “that holds quarks together to form protons, neutrons and other hadron particles”, and also weak is “Outside the nucleus, free neutrons are unstable” the same neutrons is stable according to quarks and unstable according to decay”

    Nucleus stable and unstable : “When certain combinations of protons and neutrons form an atomic nucleus, there is the possibility that the nucleus may be unstable. There may be too few or too many protons for the number of neutrons present, or there may be too few or too many neutrons for the number of protons present. In any case, if the nucleus is unstable, that nucleus is said to be radioactive. There is another case in which a nucleus can be unstable, and that is that it is simply too large to be able to stay together” and “Recall that atoms of the same element that have differing numbers of neutrons in them are isotopes of that element.” -

    Xxxxxxxxxxxxx

    From here I can say that an stable nucleus is strong nuclear and a unstable nucleus is weak nuclear or radioactive and this is normally by difference in number between protons and neutrons.

    Another form is that nucleus too large is always unstable and against it the short are stable.

    So weak and strong force only can to be the same.

    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    What is stable (strong) and unstable (weak)?: I go to make example with magnet and magnetism but the example is not complete because all magnet we know have both poles.

    The magnet has both poles (+ and -) and by that can to join to other poles of other magnets or only to charges + and also charges -. A stable nucleus has protons and neutrons and this means that have magnets with both poles (+ and -) and charges only +.

    Imagine then that you have magnets bipolar and charges +, according to this the magnets can to be null charge total and join with charges +, in a stable relation.

    When the nucleus has many neutrons bipolar or many protons + or many in total become unstable but not excessively and by that say that the force is weak (slowly) by decay or radioactivity.

    Against the weak (slowly) by a few difference in charges, the so called strong is strong because a stable relation the magnetic is quick. So stable is quick or strong like the union of 2 magnets by the contrary poles and unstable lose the stability and by that has a few fail in the form (we cannot make with magnets where were a excess of one of the 2 charges in form that many + charges reject theirs without compensation of – charges). Look that we not have in our common life charges of only one sign, all are bipolar.

    There are many examples of stable and unstable: for example more with magnets, if you take a magnet any time with the correct polarity, later in any connections you put other perpendicular go losing stability. Another example making a wall, if you put the correct brick all go well, but if sometimes you introduce an irregular brick the wall go taking unstable, and many other examples.

    Remember that a + nucleus is stable because the atom is neutral with the electrons around the nucleus.

    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    All this you can also by study at lower level, protons and neutrons are combination of quarks and this also say “strong force” but really this are the combination final in the nucleus to make strong union or weak decay.

    Also, really neutron has charge in bipolar form “Even though the neutron is a neutral particle, the magnetic moment of a neutron is not zero because it is a composite particle containing three charged quarks” -


    Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    More: free neutrons are not stable, against the example of magnet, in the magnet the combination is bipolar but in charges are from one only pole and by that neutrons out of the nucleus is unstable and the 2 charges end separates.

    Non stable ““free neutrons decay by emission of an electron and an electron antineutrino to become a proton, a process known as beta decay” – this is a decay to separate the charges.

    Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    Now it’s moment to understand that the neutron is the particle that permit the universe like we know, without neutrons the protons could not join and by that only would exist the hydrogen (1 proton and 1 electron). And also for the antineutron.

    This is well asked in the history of the page of strong interaction () “It was known that the nucleus was composed of protons and neutrons and that protons possessed positive electric charge while neutrons were electrically neutral. However, these facts seemed to contradict one another. By physical understanding at that time, positive charges would repel one another and the nucleus should therefore fly apart.” – the proton with their double charge is what admit this combination.

    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    Thanks.

    © Luis Biarge Baldellou. - webpage :
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    31,713
    The strong and weak interactions are different from one another and cannot be aspects of a single force (except beyond the high energies where symmetry breaking occurs).

    For example, as I understand it, the weak interaction affects leptons as well as quarks, whereas the strong force only affects quarks.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    An example: you can consider a good made building, the structure is good, the cement is firmly, this is stable, but after years, .. the building begin to be unstable by crack, lose of elements and cement, ... the bricks not take out full, but lose part of its structure.

    So, this example may to be a solution to the strong (stable) and weak (unstable). In same form an unstable (weak) has flavor, ... that only exist in weak interaction. While the building is stong not lose parts or decay nothing, only when is unstable or weak.

    I make a new ask: How is possible the same elements in strong (stable) form use stron nuclear forces and in weak (unstable) form manifest weak forces.

    According to wikipedia : strong “that holds quarks together to form protons, neutrons and other hadron particles.” but weak make decay neutrons in quarks, ...

    Also look that when appear strong forces not exist weak forces and viceversa.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    According to weak interaction a property is "It is the only interaction capable of changing the flavor" so according to this no flavor is not weak.

    Well, now imagine a property of light is dispersion, like laser light has not dispersion is not light.

    Or in the building, like a strong building not lose pieces or decay is not a building.
     
  8. eram Sciengineer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,875
    Sorry lbiarge but I'm having a lot of trouble trying to understand what you've written.

    Nuclei do not age like buildings, the strong interactions do not get progressively weaker over time.



    These two statements appear to contradict.



    Also, take note that the weak force is responsible for flavor-changing and hence plays a role in beta decay. But in a large nucleus, there is an interplay between Coulomb repulsion of the protons and the strong interactions between all nucleons, this precipitates alpha decay.
     
  9. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    True, another example, a magnet, with few iron or another imans the conection is strong, but with many other iron around it the conection is not so strong and any irons are not well atract.

    The example of the building is not for time, is for stable and unstable.
     
  10. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44

    Where is the contradiction?

    "in a large nucleus, there is an interplay between Coulomb repulsion of the protons and the strong interactions between all nucleons, this precipitates alpha decay" - no, in large nucleus exist strong in any particles and weak in other (really if there is not strong is weak and in large nucleus are not well strong), this other are that decay. Also in nucleus with big differences in number between protons and neutrons.

    And really large nucleus are unstables. All scientists know that radioactive particles are unstables in general.
     
  11. eram Sciengineer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,875
    I really can't understand what you're trying to say.
     
  12. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    This is, in a little nucleus there are strong forces, if the nucleus is bigger or differences between neutron and protons certain neutrons are unstables, the a part of nucleus is stable (strong) and other part is unstable (weak) so is the radiactive elements.

    The phrase is taking probably of wikipedia, I cannot remember now and I cannot add links.

    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    more:

    Strong interaction is in 2 areas according to wikipedia : “is the force that binds protons and neutrons together to form the nucleus of an atom” and also “that holds quarks together to form protons, neutrons and other hadron particles.” - from wikipedia



    Weak nuclear force according to wikipedia: “It is responsible for the radioactive decay of subatomic particles and initiates the process known as hydrogen fusion in stars.” - from wikipedia



    both act with neutrons, in stable nucleus act only strong, if the nucleus is unstable (many difference proton - neutron or many atomic number) any neutrons lose the strong force and decay by weak force, also a neutron only decay.



    In the same neutron only act or strong or weak force, but at same time can act the other forces.
     
  13. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,620
    You do not get to use your ignorance of physics to just make stuff up and have it called science.
     
  14. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    Thanks. I consider this your personal opinion.

    Thank you. Normally many advances always have been considered like origin of ignorance and reject.
     
  15. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    Supposing I’m wrong and you have reason, these are different forces:

    Why only 1 force is on each neutron?

    Why the strong forces act in stable neutrons and weak in unstable?

    Why strong foce “holds quarks together to form protons, neutrons” and also weak force decay neutrons?

    Why in few atomic number nucleus act strong forces and in very large atomic number and also in very different quantity between neutrons and protons act weak forces?

    Why in a decay neutron act gravity, electromagnetic and weak force only? Why in a stable nucleus act gravity, electromagnetic and strong force only?

    Why atoms with very large atomic number and also in atoms with very different quantity between neutrons and protons are unstable or radioactive?

    Why are elements with isotopes stable and isotopes unstable? And why the isotopes stable have strong forces? And why unstable have weak forces?

    Only weak force has flavor, then Do you understand that a strong and stable force could have decay (i.e., of changing one type of quark into another)?
     
  16. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    Really these forces are not like that affect one or the other, in same form that a person that makes force in one direction, they are like temperature where cold really is the absence of heat.

    You need think more in a force of attraction that in their errors admit the decay. An example maybe a person with several dogs taken by cords, where an error in any cord makes that the dog at the end of that cord escapes. Also you can think the same with magnets and atoms.
     
  17. eram Sciengineer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,875
    I don't mean to be rude, but at this stage you should use Google Translate because it can do a better job.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    http://translate.google.com/
     
  18. Maximum_Planck Registered Member

    Messages:
    54
    You have a point. Magnets and atoms also follow strong nuclear forces
     
  19. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    Yes.

    I say:

    A stable atom use strong nuclear forces, electromagnetism and gravity.

    A unstable atom use weak nuclear forces, electromagnetism and gravity.

    Strong and weak are the same, but like is a relation hot - cold an atom can to be strong in a part and weak in any neutrons. In same form that a magnet can hold strong any iron materials and bad anothers or like a person with any dogs with ropes can take strong any dogs but also can take bad others.
     
  20. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    This is your problem. The Strong and Weak forces are NOT the same with the difference being their relative strength. They are two completely different forces (once symmetry is broken), act differently, and have different realms of applicability.

    Perhaps due to translation problems, you have confused two different forces with each other.
     
  21. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    Magnets are electromagnetic. They do not utilize the strong nuclear force, other than the composition of the atoms .
     
  22. lbiarge Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    No. I affirm against you that are the same force.

    By that I'm against the mainstream.
     
  23. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    You may affirm all you like. Your affirmation is meaningless in light of your ignorance of particle physics.
     

Share This Page