• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

why Nuclear Physics cannot be entirelly correct

The Norseman said:
Again, Pedrone, it's ridiculous to argue your point based on a translation when the original English version is available and for not too much money (something like nine dollars US, used, from Amazon.com for example).


Page 518:
Click to expand...

Thanks.
 
pedrone said:
Of course not.

I said to Tubbythin that he had the chance to prove he is not a liar.
He did not used his chance.
So, he has to apologize himself.
Click to expand...

Uh-huh. It is all my fault. My fault that you made a completely unsubstantiated allegation. My fault that that completely unsubstantiated allegation was completely false. My fault that somebody posted the relevant page on the forum showing that your completely unsubstantiated claim was completely false.
The facts remain.
1) You accused me of lying with not a shred of evidence.
2) You were shown to be wrong.
Whether you want to apologise is entirely up to you.
 
pedrone said:
:mad:
No, actualy you are tying to fool everbody in here.

What you say is just as it's written bellow the graphic in Eisberg-Resnick book.


What I said in my previous post is NOT regarding to the left side of the graphic, as you smartly are suggesting that should be my interpretation.

What I said is concerning the right side, just where it's considered the interaction WITH a spin-orbit potential.


As it can be seen easily, the Mayer-Jensen theory is disagree to the RIGHT side of the graphic (with spin-orbit potential) for the nuclei 20Ca and 8O.
They could not be magic numbers.
Instead of, 14Si and 6C would have to be, according to the Mayer-Jensen theory.
:rolleyes:

Tubbythin, stop trying to fool us.
:mad:
Click to expand...

I'm not. You said (my bolding):
2- However, with Z=8 and Z=20, it is taken in consideration the higgest level of energy. We can see in the graphic of the page 676 that the level 1d is lower in the level 1d5/2 , and therefore from Mayer-Jensen theory the nucleus 14Si would have to be a magic number, and not the nucleus 20Ca (this one has four protons in the highest level 1d3/2).
Click to expand...
You mentioned the 1d level not me! The 1d level is on the left-hand side of the figure. If you didn't mean the 1d level but something else then fair enough, typos happen. But that typo is still your fault not mine.
Now, if you'd like to explain what you mean again in a form that makes more sense, I'd be only too happy to comment.
 
Tubbythin said:
I was enjoying this thread :(.
Click to expand...

Elvis has left the building... or so it appears.

While I'm primarily a biologist, and some many of the posts go way over my head, I actually manage to understand and learn a few things. :)
 
Emet said:
Elvis has left the building... or so it appears.
Click to expand...
Yup. Wonder where he could have gone?

While I'm primarily a biologist, and some many of the posts go way over my head, I actually manage to understand and learn a few things. :)
Click to expand...
That's pretty cool. I've learnt a bit about biology while being here too. Has kinda made me want to learn more at some point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom