It is said that since the energy of a bound system is lower
than that of an unbound one, its mass is lower as well.
This being the explanation why when a proton and neutron
merge, it has to release energy in the form of nuclear
binding energy. Can anyone tell me what concept in physics
does this belong to? I mean.. When two people copulate,
they are binded. But they don't lose any mass and
converting to energy. Or when you stick two bubblegum
or any objects together, you don't get mass lost and
conversion to energy. So why do the nuclues do that.
Is it directly connected to the strong force? What is
its relationship to the strong force? What other examples
where bind energy occurs without the strong force. I want
to understand "why" the energy of a bound system is
lower than that of unbound one and the mass is lower
as well.

Thanks.

David

why dont you give credit ti people?
it was me who was puting the question:

'i whant to know why bound satte is less ebergy than
unbound'
so why dont you note that this is Porats question??
have you heared about decency/?

now i gave you there an ansewr as well
but you didnt got it

Y.Porat
-------------------------------

You deserve credit Porat.

I have a question. Why would only a bound electron radiate while they
say loose electrons can't absorb or emit light?

That'smy question

1 i am not an expert for electrons
i know more about the nucleus.

2 i never hear ed that 'only' bound electrons radiate
and if they are bound may be they dont radiate at all??

so as i said i never invested on that issue

AFAIK even isolated electrons that move in space
and are hitted by some other particles radiate??

so lets first find out the right data facts.

ATB
Y.Porat
----------------------

David wrote:
It is said that since the energy of a bound system is lower
than that of an unbound one, its mass is lower as well.

Right.


This being the explanation why when a proton and neutron
merge, it has to release energy

Right.


in the form of nuclear binding energy.

Wrong. The *released* energy is not the binding energy. The
binding energy is *negative*.


Can anyone tell me what concept in physics does this belong to?
I mean.. When two people copulate, they are binded.
But they don't lose any mass and converting to energy.

Say, is this supposed to be a bad joke???


Or when you stick two bubblegum
or any objects together, you don't get mass lost and
conversion to energy.

How do you know? Hint: you do. The mass lost in such *chemical*
reactions is just *way* to small to be noticed.


So why do the nuclues do that.
Is it directly connected to the strong force?

Yes.


What is
its relationship to the strong force? What other examples
where bind energy occurs without the strong force.

Electromagnetic force, gravitational force, ...


I want
to understand "why" the energy of a bound system is
lower than that of unbound one and the mass is lower
as well.

Because you need to put energy into the system in order to break the bond.


Bye,
Bjoern

Nick wrote:
You deserve credit Porat.

I have a question. Why would only a bound electron radiate while they
say loose electrons can't absorb or emit light?

That'smy question

Look up "conservation of energy and momentum". Do the math.

Bye,
Bjoern

David wrote:
It is said that since the energy of a bound system is lower
than that of an unbound one, its mass is lower as well.
This being the explanation why when a proton and neutron
merge, it has to release energy in the form of nuclear
binding energy. Can anyone tell me what concept in physics
does this belong to? I mean.. When two people copulate,
they are binded. But they don't lose any mass and

your example is wrong IE
not relevant to what happens in binding of nucleid
in binding of nucleid they are 'squeezed closer to each other
and therefore there is no room to some of its peripheral
orbitals therefore they have to be shot out
in order of squeezing them closer you need energy
IE pressing them closer needs outside energy
and as a result those peripheral orbitals pop out
and here is a tricky situation
you might expect that the output energy from that process
will be exactly the same as the impute energy
but
here comes a surprise:!!!
not necessary at all you cant know in advance
if it will be more or less than the input energy!!
for instance in fusion
the output energy is (surprisingly) bigger than the input energy!
how come??
it is because some peripheral orbitals were sot out
yet there mass equivalent energy was bigger than the
impute energy!!
it is metaphorically as if you had energy sored in
bottle and all you needed is some trigger
to open the seal of the bottle
or another metaphor
a mass located on a high cliff
you need only Little push in order to let it fall
and release a lot of energy
so you cant know in advance while you invest energy in a process
if it will be 'endothermic' or exothermic'
(unless you have previous experience!!)
in-the nuclear processes that of existing particles
while the connection is already done
we forget about th energy that *was* invested in it
and we start only from the 'connected situation'
so we can know that in order to separate those
combined particles we have always to invest energy
first in order to separate them geometrically
and second
there is a need to 'heal the wound' by addition of matter
and matter is mass in motion IE energy.

that answer of mine was just of hand
so i might not be wrong here and there
so please correct me if wrong!!

TIA
Y.Porat
---------------------

Y.Porat wrote:
why dont you give credit ti people?
it was me who was puting the question:

'i whant to know why bound satte is less ebergy than
unbound'
so why dont you note that this is Porats question??
have you heared about decency/?

now i gave you there an ansewr as well
but you didnt got it

Y.Porat
-------------------------------




You are funny Porat... even a question needs to be
credited?? Well. I am perplexed by nuclear binding
energy and that's why I asked it. I only now got
interested in nuclear physics.

Hmm.. you are either crazy or a super genius Porat.
Here's some idea to make you busy.

Try to invent something where you can make every
matter become fissionable by modifying the nucleus thru
your snake nucleus model. Does your model have this
possibility? For example one can use a pencil, stone,
wood and put it inside a Porat Fission Chamber to
convert it to a fissionable substance (Porat Patent).
Then hit it with neutron gun to initiate thermonuclear
detonation. I'm sure you will become the greatest scientist
in the entire planet.

Standard model may not allow this to happen. But since
you mess up the nucleus so much by turning it upside
down. Maybe you can figure out a way to make
ordinary matter fissionable? Try to invent some Porat
Ray where you can shine it on any matter to transmute
it to fissionable.. then we can use a satellite to say beam
it at a building at iran.. then send neutron projectiles
on the building to turn lose every proton and neutron
and release all the binding energy enough (or as needed)
to vaporize Iran or North Korea in one blast. How about
that?

Porat. Try to spend your remaining years on the above
task. Do more experiments at home and stay away from
the internet. You are way more advanced than anyone
and only you can understand yourself. Goodluck.

David

David wrote:
Y.Porat wrote:
why dont you give credit ti people?
it was me who was putting the question:

'i want to know why bound state is less energy than
unbound'
so why dont you note that this is Porats question??
have you hear ed about decency/?

now i gave you there an answer as well
but you didnt got it

Y.Porat
-------------------------------




You are funny Porat... even a question needs to be
credited?? Well. I am perplexed by nuclear binding
energy and that's why I asked it. I only now got
interested in nuclear physics.
----------
there is one thing that a (probably Young) goat
still dont know:

a good question is half the way to a good solution
so even a good question could Be copyrighted
got it?
----------

Hmm.. you are either crazy or a super genius Porat.
Here's some idea to make you busy.

i can assure you that i am neither of the above possibilities
i may have some personal properties may be a very
unique personal history that by rare coincidence of its components
enabled me to do what i did.
------------

Try to invent something where you can make every
matter become fissionable by modifying the nucleus thru
your snake nucleus model.

1 it is not a snake model
it is 'chain of orbitals' unprecedented suggestion
so just remember it
one day it will pay off
it is indeed revolutionary
now you should know that wile i started my nuclear research
i followed all the conventional way
and realized after a long agonizing time that it leads to no advance
you will also do all that way wast your time
and come as well to no where
but there is only one difference
for me there was no one to worn me that i am wasting my time

for you there was one !!!.....
--------------

Does your model have this
possibility?

not at all
it shower you dont understand the basic of physics

it is possible to dismantle any nucleus
yet the to be or not to be question is
is it a gaining energy process or a loosing process
now the trend of all matter in our world is
to loose energy with time
to get to the 'bound state'
if you like the entropy rule
and once you realize that our universe is say
15 billions years
you can imagine that most of its matter went a long way
on that loosing energy road
so no magic can extract miraculously energy
while there is no potential energy in it
IE getting more of it than investing in it!!
----------
For example one can use a pencil, stone,
wood and put it inside a Porat Fission Chamber to
convert it to a fissionable substance (Porat Patent).
Then hit it with neutron gun to initiate thermonuclear
detonation. I'm sure you will become the greatest scientist
in the entire planet.

-----------
i appreciate wild thinking
btw it is one of my secrets to let imagination go on
but later
the sever critic side of your personality has to come in
and 'cool you down' by merciless criticism
it seems that you didnt do the second job
that i mentioned above so
please do not call me* crazy while do seem to do it much better!! (:-)
--------------

Standard model may not allow this to happen. But since
you mess up the nucleus so much by turning it upside
down.
wrong
i didnt turn it upside down i only corrected some paradigm.
for instance that for any proton there is an electron---
in the heavy Atoms !!
it took me a long agonizing way to get to it
while wasting a lot of time just by that paradigm
and mind you one of the reasons that QM never went far beyond
decoding the iron Atom is that false paradigm!1
--------

Maybe you can figure out a way to make
ordinary matter fissionable?

a dead by arrival idea!
------------
Try to invent some Porat
Ray where you can shine it on any matter to transmute
it to fissionable.. then we can use a satellite to say beam
it at a building at Iron.. then send neutron projectiles
on the building to turn lose every proton and neutron
and release all the binding energy enough (or as needed)
to vaporize Iran or North Korea in one blast. How about
that?
----------
and you talk about crazy??

-------------

Porat. Try to spend your remaining years on the above
task. Do more experiments at home and stay away from
the internet. You are way more advanced than anyone
and only you can understand yourself. Goodluck.
----------------
do you imagine that i will stop my activity
and
LEAVE IT TO PEOPLE LIKE YOU ?? (:-)
keep well
and keep your advices for yourself first!!

ATB
and best wishes especially for your mental condition.

Y.Porat
-----------------

Y.Porat wrote:
David wrote:
Y.Porat wrote:
why dont you give credit ti people?
it was me who was putting the question:

'i want to know why bound state is less energy than
unbound'
so why dont you note that this is Porats question??
have you hear ed about decency/?

now i gave you there an answer as well
but you didnt got it

Y.Porat
-------------------------------




You are funny Porat... even a question needs to be
credited?? Well. I am perplexed by nuclear binding
energy and that's why I asked it. I only now got
interested in nuclear physics.
----------
there is one thing that a (probably Young) goat
still dont know:

a good question is half the way to a good solution
so even a good question could Be copyrighted
got it?
----------

Hmm.. you are either crazy or a super genius Porat.
Here's some idea to make you busy.

i can assure you that i am neither of the above possibilities
i may have some personal properties may be a very
unique personal history that by rare coincidence of its components
enabled me to do what i did.
------------

Try to invent something where you can make every
matter become fissionable by modifying the nucleus thru
your snake nucleus model.

1 it is not a snake model
it is 'chain of orbitals' unprecedented suggestion
so just remember it
one day it will pay off
it is indeed revolutionary
now you should know that wile i started my nuclear research
i followed all the conventional way
and realized after a long agonizing time that it leads to no advance
you will also do all that way wast your time
and come as well to no where
but there is only one difference
for me there was no one to worn me that i am wasting my time

for you there was one !!!.....
--------------

Does your model have this
possibility?

not at all
it shower you dont understand the basic of physics

it is possible to dismantle any nucleus
yet the to be or not to be question is
is it a gaining energy process or a loosing process
now the trend of all matter in our world is
to loose energy with time
to get to the 'bound state'
if you like the entropy rule
and once you realize that our universe is say
15 billions years
you can imagine that most of its matter went a long way
on that loosing energy road
so no magic can extract miraculously energy
while there is no potential energy in it
IE getting more of it than investing in it!!
----------
For example one can use a pencil, stone,
wood and put it inside a Porat Fission Chamber to
convert it to a fissionable substance (Porat Patent).
Then hit it with neutron gun to initiate thermonuclear
detonation. I'm sure you will become the greatest scientist
in the entire planet.

-----------
i appreciate wild thinking
btw it is one of my secrets to let imagination go on
but later
the sever critic side of your personality has to come in
and 'cool you down' by merciless criticism
it seems that you didnt do the second job
that i mentioned above so
please do not call me* crazy while do seem to do it much better!! (:-)
--------------

Standard model may not allow this to happen. But since
you mess up the nucleus so much by turning it upside
down.
wrong
i didnt turn it upside down i only corrected some paradigm.
for instance that for any proton there is an electron---
in the heavy Atoms !!


You are as silly as Lockyer who can't even understand the
mathematical and physical basis of HUP. The electron can't
be confined inside a proton or even nucleus. It seems you
have some mental block for that knowledge to be absorbed
in your head. Hmm... maybe instead of inventing things.
How about things. Do you have contact with any personnel
in Israel that has accessed to the nuclear assets?? Can you
smuggled to nearly Gaza a good amount of fissionable
material where it can be rerouted to another country?
We'd pay you for it. Don't worry. We want to arm ourselves.
I am a muslim living in country oppressed by the United
States. We don't have any defenses. Our people are being
victimized without let up. We are desperate and only nukes
can give us the hope. Can you help us build one too?

David Sayaf



it took me a long agonizing way to get to it
while wasting a lot of time just by that paradigm
and mind you one of the reasons that QM never went far beyond
decoding the iron Atom is that false paradigm!1
--------

Maybe you can figure out a way to make
ordinary matter fissionable?

a dead by arrival idea!
------------
Try to invent some Porat
Ray where you can shine it on any matter to transmute
it to fissionable.. then we can use a satellite to say beam
it at a building at Iron.. then send neutron projectiles
on the building to turn lose every proton and neutron
and release all the binding energy enough (or as needed)
to vaporize Iran or North Korea in one blast. How about
that?
----------
and you talk about crazy??

-------------

Porat. Try to spend your remaining years on the above
task. Do more experiments at home and stay away from
the internet. You are way more advanced than anyone
and only you can understand yourself. Goodluck.
----------------
do you imagine that i will stop my activity
and
LEAVE IT TO PEOPLE LIKE YOU ?? (:-)
keep well
and keep your advices for yourself first!!

ATB
and best wishes especially for your mental condition.

Y.Porat
-----------------