THE ATOMIC NUCLEUS II 2023IX10 | a  production ·  |  Senast uppdaterade version: 2023-12-21 · Universums Historia     HumanRight is a knowledge domain

 

content  innehåll denna sida · webbSÖK äMNESORD på denna sida Ctrl+F · sök ämnesord överallt i indexREGISTER  ·  förteckning över allUHwebbsites

 

PO4 ¦ ATOMIC MASS EQUATION — mATOM = Uu ¦ ATOMIC WEIGHT — U [ »relative atomic mass» ] ¦ ATOMIC MASS UNIT — u [ Dalton] = m[ 6C12 ]/12 ¦ ATOMIC MASS defect EQUATION ¦ ComparingNUCLEAR ¦NScredit 

Atomic masses —  AtomicNucleus — INTRODUCTION,  nuclear radii, basic nuclides, comparing early Weizsäcker solutions ¦ STANDARD UNIVERSAL — divergence c0 = 2.99792458 T8 M/S is preserved independent of gravitation.

TheAtomicNucleus  I  Jun2023 — DeducingTHErZ ¦ TAN II  Sep2023 — comparing nuclear physics ¦ TAN III  Nov2023 —  relating Earth crust isotopic compositions ¦ TAN IV  Dec2023 —  FusionLimitMass FULIMA

 

 

 

EXPERIMENTALconfirmations: Atomic masses

The Atomic Nucleus

mDweiz ¦ NSsolutions  ¦ CONOR  ¦ NSUunit ¦ PO4

 

 

 

ATOMIC MASS, ATOMIC WEIGHT, ATOMIC MASS DEFECT, NUCLEAR MASS DEFECT, NUCLEAR BINDING ENERGY, AND THE ATOMIC MASS UNIT

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

 

comparing fundamental atomic-nuclear physics: related-established

See Different Ways in comparing data between theory and experimentally measured

Differences in atomic mass defect electron masses — per mass number

MODERN ACADEMY IS OUTCLASSED BY TNED — related physics and mathematics

NuklidTab4A2023.ods Table4  Columns KMS

 

Left table: The 7 left out  Weizsäcker solution posts are far outside the vertical scale. While the  NS-solution have a more tight experimental connection.

The diagram above is of the same kind as the Comparing diagram. Only difference: diagram above is Comp/A ( yielding .. »per A-square» .. more tight Show).

HOP¦WEZ mD = ( 1 — [HOP¦WEZ U]/AmN)/me ¦ me = 0.000548598¦u, mN = 1.0086652¦u, HOP¦WEIZSÄCKER U = element’s atomic mass in Dalton units u = 1.66033 t27 KG, A = mass number

HOPweizXP.ods Table1 ¦ NuklidTab4A2023.ods Table4 — HOPtable1967, Weizsäcker values¦ WEIZSÄCKER EQUATION DETAILS ¦ ComparingTable ¦ WeizsäckerCALC

1H1-details:  IN GENERAL: THE NEUTRON SQUARE SOLUTIONS OFFERER SEVERAL 3 WAYS TO CALCULATE ATOMIC MASSES THROUGH ATOMIC MASS DEFECTS mD. This is an example:

    mD ¦ NeutronSquare = 6 — (59/56)(1/5)√ 60² — 56² = 1.461075377, HOPmD = 1.518021871, (TNED–HOP)/(A=1) = -0.056946494     basic

    mD ¦ NeutronSquare =    mD  ×   (ProtonRadius/NeutronRadius = [√8]/[1+√3]) = 1.512616535, (TNED–HOP)/(A=1) = -0.005405335     precision

NOTE THAT EXPERIMENTAL VALUES USE SPECTROSCOPIC IONIZATION TECHNIQUES, [WHERE THE ATOMS ARE ACCELERATED] AND HENCE reflect SLIGHT DIFFERENT MASSES.

No explicit specific data on these spectroscopic ionization [»mass affection»] data differences are known here.

The large 7 first Weizsäcker differences. The Element isotopes from 1H1 to 3Li7 are left out in the diagram above as the Weizsäcker values anyway lie far beyond the vertical scale. TNED says — very close to experimentally measured values — the reason is because the idea behind the Weizsäcker solutions — charged liquid drop mathematics — have no corresponding atomic nuclear connection. Only when the atom grows larger and heavier, that difference decreases. See further definite proofs [Jun2023] in THE ATOMIC NUCLEUS.

EXCON: ExpCon

EXPERIMENTAL CONFIRMATIONS

So much credit in present scientific literature is given to Albert Einstein (1905) on the formula E = mc2 — when in fact it is just a ride on (Max Planck 1900) the Planck constant h=mcr: E = hf = mcr/t = mc2. But the form also shows a (differentials ¦ x = yz : x/∞ = x/∞n = dx = dy · dz) more simple deducible nature (not mentioned: divergence energy):

dE = ddd = dma·dd = dm(c/t)dd = (m/∞)(c/t)(d/∞) = (m/∞)(c·d/t)(1/∞) = m(c2)(1/∞2) = m(c2)(1/∞) = dmc2: E = mc2.

dE = d(Fd) = d(mad) = d[m(c/t)d] = d[m(c·d/t)] = d(mc2);  E = mc2. Or just: E=Fd=mad=m(c/t)d=mc2. No big deal.

   light does not connect kinetics Solar eclipse expeditions 1919+ — experimental confirmations:

c and v are not additive in physics — the vic-errorMichelson and Morley experiments 1881+ 

   Curved light paths does not develop centrifugal — kinetics — properties:

   light is massless — light is not gravitation — gravitation is not light — gravitation is NOT a particle:

   Max Planck was right, Albert Einstein was wrong:

The photoelectric effect reflects properties of the atoms (THE PERIODIC SYSTEMresonance matrices) — not properties of light. Light propagates massless through electromagnetic Planck E=hf quanta named photons — also (inductively COEI conservation of energy by induction) interacting (Compton effect) with (±e nuclear structured) matter (atomic particles) where the Planck energy E=hf=mc2 always is conserved (ENERGY LAW ¦ POM):

EnergyLaw: energy cannot be created, nor destroyed, only converted. (±e nuclear structured) mass can be destroyed (COEI) because it cannot be created: light is massless. Particle proof that energy cannot create mass.

   While the scientific community has the idea in particle physics, that energy and mass are substantial equivalents, related physics (Planck equivalents) explains mass-energy exchange properties: the Planck energy E=hf=mc2 is always conserved, under all circumstances. The scientific community introduced the idea of a spin property on the Einstein’s proposed massive photon — ”to make the chart complete”. In related physics, no such invention exist: the sum of all spins and moments in the atom is zero. When (Star physics) mass is destroyed E = (m→γ)c2, COEI certifies that the Planck energy E=hf=mc2 always is conserved.

 

 

The difference is excited (±e nuclear structured) gravitational mass, while modern corridors claim real steel gravitational mass creation — although also these aces know that mass cannot be created out of no mass.

The atomic nucleus compresses all these aspects in also verifying that all collected (Angeli2004) world data merges with the TNED deduced atomic and nuclear properties [The (rZ)2/r complex] — as verified from the coherent RevisitedHofstadter1956 electron scattering experiments: it all exposes the general charge-density distribution characteristics of the atomic nuclei — as so TNED confirmed.

— And so we can return to The Neutron Square — its Planck constant accounted confirmed deduced nuclear size properties — and their following connection to atomic mass properties for comparison on experimentally measured.

— Shorter: »we are just warming up».

 

 

NeutronSquareFundamentals: THE NEUTRAL ATOM — PROVISIONS

EXPERIMENTALconfirmations

CosmicMATHrevelation ¦ Geometric

NeutronSquareSOLUTIONS  ¦ VerticalELLIPTIC

 

For ToroRADIUS, see the Deduction. Basics from ProtonRADIUS.

Neutron Square atomic nuclear solutions has no physical or experimental foundational reference at all, not a single point in space —

except beginning from the Planck constant h = mcr: The Planck Ring: the fundamental atom: the Neutron

(0°K, c=c0=2.99792458 T8 M/S: c0 is preserved as a natural constant independent of gravitation’s influence DGD on local divergence = local light propagation).

All mD(atomic mass defect)-values emanate out of the Neutron Square and its deduced, related and fully explained elliptic-trigonometric (wave)-hyperbolic (CompCALu2023) mathematics equations — with so basic geometric solutions to the first basic light atomic masses on their atomic mass defects, mD. See FIBAPO Comparing Table.

NOTE: (ErrorTransferElectronMass) The 1967 HOP-table uncertainty value for 1H1 in mD electron masses is specified as 0.02277 me (0.08 µu NuklidTab4B2023.ods TableA 4G) — see graph and diagram in ExperimentalErrors. The Neutron square 1H1 mD value difference on 0.0054 to the HOP-table’s is more than four times less (and the HOP error and NS-difference cannot readily be compared). If appropriate, that is an unprecedented precision in pinpointing an experimental result.

 

 

charge does not connect mass — Never18 ¦ NSsolutions

THE PIN POINTING QUESTION — no yet found academic answer:

 

— In what way is the Measured Object’s Electric Charge involved in the object’s Measured mass?

 

Because the Neutron Square Solution has

   no explicit nuclear charge (Z) connectivity to atomic mass:

mD = (1 — U/AmN)/me — no Z.

THE ATOMIC NUCLEUS ¦ CompareQm ¦ Discovery

   nuclear charge does not connect atomic mass, nor nuclear size (rZ)²/r. No way.

ALTHOUGH HOWEVER THESE [±e nuclear structure] ARE INTEGRATED IN THE ATOM

   charge DIVERGENCE — electric field — does not connect mass CONVERGENCE Physics756 

EXPERIMENTAL nuclear-atomic PHYSICS [±e nuclear structure] CANNOT SEPARATE THESE: BOTH NEEDED.

 

 

Modern academy educated freely available papers seem not to get to the chase on relating the quest .. recycling .. NS .. in the beginning ..

 

TNED  concentric atomic production

Related physics and mathematics:

———————————————

NUCLEAR FRAGMENTATION — How The K-cell  Dmax  is regained ¦ Exothermal nuclear reaction law ¦ NUCLEAR REACTION LAW ¦ GeneralCosmicStateLaw ¦ FusionRINGS

Odd and Even Nuclide Groupswhy the core fusion body ends on IRON ¦ CWON from CAP ¦ The IRON CORE ¦ MilkyWay SolarSystems

 

 

REGAINING — from the deduction of the exothermal nuclear reaction/fusion law

————————————————————————————————————

According to K1+K2–(m→γ)=K the Nuclear Reaction Law — related physics deduction — each composed atom and its nucleus from the point (light propagation c in space; see Comparing mathematics between related physics, Schwarzchild, and Einstein) and moment where the enveloping dominant gravitation has reduced divergence to c=0, a reversed situation is born. K+(m→γ=0)=K1+K2. If the atom and its nucleus finds exactly the g-mass corresponding to the energy emission (atomic mass defect) when that atom was formed, K apparently decays back to K1+K2. Further increasing gravitation pulls the net resulting fundamentally rebuilt Neutron (Planck constant h=mcr) masses into a state of Dmax until (COLLECTIVE bounce recoil when contacting on a max gravitation) a following Detonation occurs (The Incompressibility of the atomic nucleus). So it is all governed by gravitation. See further details from CosmoBasics (gravitational redshift, K-cell mathematics) unless already familiar (details in how the expansion and contraction works by related mathematics and physics — modern academic confusion »dark energy» on motion and general cosmological gravitational redshift, no motion: no »dark energy»).

 

 

EXPERIMENTALconfirmations

 

ComAtNu: Comparing Atomic and Nuclear mass defect concepts and values — clarifying the terminology

 

 

Comparing Atomic and Nuclear

CLARIFYING THE TERMINOLOGY — by experimentally measured examples

 

Explaining ¦ EXAMPLIFYING

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ATOMIC AND NUCLEAR MASS DEFECT

 

 

ATOMIC         AmN – U

the work mass-energy WASTE needed to build the atom [Sw., arbetets massa-till- energi bortfall: gravitell svinn-massa; g-mass-svinn].

NUCLEAR       AmN – U – Zv ¦ v = mN – m1H1 = 0.00084u ¦ U = mATOM/u ¦ u = m(6C12)/12 = 1 Dalton

mN = neutron mass 1.0086652u, A = mass number = number of FAMQ fundamental atomic mass Quanta mN

that built the atom ¦ u = 1.66033 t27 KG ¦ Z = atomic number = the atom’s nuclear electric +charge, same as

the atom’s electron mass electric -charge.

 

the work mass-energy WASTE needed to build the atom — minus the Zv mass energy work waste:

v is the NEUTRONIC n nuclear structural mass energy WASTE equivalent 0.00084u in 

becoming [electric displacement rearranging work] the PROTONIC p nuclear structural property

integrating the fundamental PROTONIC p nuclear structure  with the fundamental  NEUTRONIC n nuclear structure into the fundamental atomic NUCLEAR — in related physics NOT the academic nucleonic — structure.

 

 

While the academic idea is that of »separately inside the nucleus spinning neutrons and protons», related physics is dealing with a fundamental nuclear electric displacement ±e structure (Planck fractal structural ring constant): no inside spinning particles — as verified in the (rZ)²/r complex (The Atomic Nucleus).

 

 

EXCONdetails:

Weizsäcker nuclear binding energy form: (AmN – U – Zv)

nuclear mass defect.

Weizsäcker atomic binding energy form:  (AmN – U)

atomic mass defect; Weiz + Zv.

WeizCalifornia

 

 

Related physics — particle and unity

AS IT IS WITH MERGING WATERS

 

 

———————————————

CREATION OR DIVISION — nuclear fragments¦ SPIN SYNCHRONIZATION ¦ The 3Li8 Nuclide ¦ The Water Surface Spinning GIF water drop ¦ UNIT WITHOUT PARTS — nature illustrates the principles

 

EXCON details: While the scientific community (1905+) has adopted the idea in particle physics, that energy and mass are substantial equivalentsreal physical substantial gravitational particle mass creation — related physics (Planck equivalents) explains the Planck constant h=mcr energy-mass equivalence E=hf=mcr/t=mc2 on a principle of exchange properties: the Planck energy E=hf=mc2 is always conserved, under all circumstances. Meaning: When (±e nuclear structured) matter (atomic particles) merge from lighter to heavier atoms/elements — where the Planck energy E=hf=mc2 always is conserved — the general RULE in mathematical physics becomes that the reverse also holds — however with a resulting excited fission product (atomic and nuclear mass defect concepts). In modern quarters, this energy split product is — with no exception — always implied as a fully substantial gravitational spouse.   In related physics that is a grave delusion, and a most honest deep and real steel fundamental physical impossibility;

ENERGY LAW ¦ POM ¦ EnergyLaw: energy cannot be created, nor destroyed, only converted. (±e nuclear structured) mass can be destroyed (inductively COEI conservation of energy by induction) because it (substantial gravitational ±e nuclear structured) cannot be created: light is masslessParticle proof that energy cannot create mass. When (Star physics) mass is destroyed E = (m→γ)c2, COEI certifies that the Planck energy E=hf=mc2 always is conserved: light and heat.

   Max Planck was right. Albert Einstein was wrong. No doubt (EXCON): light is massless. No gravitation. No developed centrifugal property in curved light paths. No way.

— See more comparing academic related details in EXPERIMENTAL CONFIRMATIONS, unless already familiar.

 

 

The most interesting aspect (not explained):

— The experimental measure of the neutron mass:

— Its precision.

It cannot be directly measured (yet).

 

 

ComAtNu

 

NeutralToExperimental:

NS fundamentals

We should not be overly enthusiastic on raising the experimentally measured atomic masses values to the heavens, without certifying that the influence of the experimental ”mass-to charge” complex not significantly affects the actual neutral atomic mass. How do we know?

 

neutral to experimental

We can put it this way — testing how the NS solutions conform on the true physical ones:

— HOW DO WE GET RID OF THE EXPERIMENTAL CHARGE electric magnetic FROM THE EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS — in REFINING THE WHOLE PICTURE TO INCLUDE ONLY THE NET mass VALUES?

The neutral atom. The NSfor comparing purposes.

— We can’t (says the present scientific PhD community as one man, do correct) — unless we have a Gauge — a preference Index — by which to perform explicit advanced experimental tests:

Telling us what to look for. At present, no other is known here than The NS solutions.

 

HowardUniversity:

   Because atoms are much to small to measure individually and do not have a charge, there is no convenient way to accurately measure absolute atomic masses.”,

   Scientists can measure relative atomic masses very accurately, however, using an instrument called a mass spectrometer.”,

   The technique is conceptually similar to the one Thomson used to determine the mass-to-charge ratio of the electron.”,

   First, electrons are removed from or added to atoms or molecules, thus producing charged particles called ions. When an electric field is applied, the ions are accelerated into a separate chamber where they are deflected from their initial trajectory by a magnetic field, like the electrons in Thomson’s experiment.”,

   The extent of the deflection depends on the mass-to-charge ratio of the ion.”,

CHAPTER 1.6: ISOTOPES AND ATOMIC MASSES, Howard University

Libre texts — Chemistry — No date reference ( .. perhaps 1634 .. they were psychic .. ),

sampled @Internet 7Sep2023

 

 

THE INTRODUCED ELECTRIC CHARGE ADDS EXTRA MASS SPECTROSCOPIC DEFLECTING POWER

related physics:  mass and charge — massless electric field: light c property — does not connect

 

What we know: the experimental charge dependency cannot be separated from the actual mass spectroscopic experiment — by no other means than through a (thorough) theoretical insight: some real steel knowledge of the actual mechanism. To trap it, also experimentally, a first encouraging insight must exist that IT is missing.

 

 

What we do know is that nuclear charge (Z) and nuclear mass (m) frequently is used in established works on nuclear (rms) charge radii determinations: nuclear mass and nuclear charge are implied physical cooperators — while (rZ)²/r related physics (Angeli2004data) proves that the charge dependent idea as such to be more of an experimental necessity than a true real physical property: nuclear charge has no volumetric physical reality: Z is a nuclear surface structure extension (NuclearStructure), and has no connectivity to nuclear size — other than the fact that electric charge cannot be removed from atomic/nuclear experimental investigation.

—»It is included in the general computer modeling mathematics».

— It is taken for granted — but has no physical correspondence — related physics TNED NeutronSquare solutions says.

   So: how is it?

 

 

The tight Neutron Square solutions NSdeDIA1 compared to the experimental values strongly suggests — still here with no other proofs — that there really is »an experimental charge issue» in the complex of experimentally measuring atomic masses. Namely also so: Outside the NS solutions (unknown in modern corridors) nothing reflects even such a possibility: it lies hidden, dormant. The experimental charge »issue» becomes apparent first when the NS complex becomes uncovered: mass and charge does not interact, although intrinsically integrated: the atom, the fundamental form of gravitation.

 

 

Continue on

THE UNIVERSAL NATURE OF THE NEUTRON SQUAREhow reliable is it?

and

CosmicMATHrevelationproving the real steel essence of nature ..

 

 

EXPERIMENTALconfirmations

 

NS8Oct2023: NSUunit:  Provisions¦ NScredit ¦ CAUSE ¦ Normalization

 

 

TheQuest of

THE ATOMIC MASS UNIT u=m(6C12)/12 PREFERENCE

— IN THE NEUTRON SQUARE mD Exacting The A=12

 

 

IS THE NEUTRON SQUARE SOLUTIONS COMPLEX VALID EVERYWHERE, UNDER ALL POSSIBLE CONDITIONS, NO EXCEPTIONS?

QUESTIONING A UNIVERSAL NATURE of THE NS

Neutron Square Solutions

NEUTRON SQUARE SOLUTIONS

 

 

NuklidTab4C2023.ods Tabell 2A Col.M ¦ TheActualDifferences

CAUSE:

The basic apparently highly experimentally matching NEUTRAL ATOMIC NEUTRON SQUARE SOLUTIONS NS solutions ¦ TheActualDifferences has introduced a QUESTIONING central atomic mass defect equation

mD       = (1 – U/AmN)/me. THROUGH ITS U FORM U = m/u ¦ m = Uu

U          = AmN(1 – mDme) ¦ THE  neutral atom’s atomic weight  U = m/u CAN BE SPECIFIED FROM A UNIVERSAL

u = m(6C12)/12 = 1 Dalton = 1 cosmological atomic mass unit. The proof below. Original Swedish deduction 2008.

 

Universal atomic mass unit

Giving any a universal credit to such a suggested atomic cosmologically valid m(6C12)/12 mass unit u, its NS suggested atomic mass defect (total atomic binding energy) mD value is exactly 15.6 electron masses. NS solutions Proof (NScredit ¦ Discovery) :

 

Only WHERE — and IF — a single unique  m/u = U = A exists will define a corresponding  1 = mN(1—mDme), mN = 1/(1—mDme); mN/me = 1/(me — mDme²). Only one, otherwise no solid preference.  mD = (1 — 1/mN)/me = Neutron Square order geometrical mathematics = 6 + (60—A)(12/60) = 6 + 12 — 12A/60 = 18 — A/5 =  6 + 12(1 — A/60)  12/60 = 1/5 is a scale transfer

 

NuklidTab4C2023.ods Tabell1 A260+ — exemplifying different me and mN (Wikipedia mNw mew), clarifying the above validity test for a single U=A.

 

In modern quarters, no such explicit occurrence is known (CU). And the academic choice of m6C12/12 (1961 ¦ 1993 coined: one Dalton ¦ 2005 IUPAP) therefore appears arbitrary on »a best fit» (preferred in chemistry) basis (earlier 8O16, first 1H1).

Normalization:

NS8Oct2023

Normalization — see end comparing results in CONOR

The u-condition — U = A only one — not several, under no conditions ever — single unique occasion: it defines the proof:

mN = 1/(1 – mDme)

WE ONLY HAVE TO FIND ONE ANY THE FIRST mD SOLUTION — ANY. Just a first. Any — if at all:

 

 

GEOMETRIC ¦ NuklidTab4C2023.ods Tabell1 A260+

 

The mNw and mew are the present (Oct2023) Wikipedia reported values for neutron and electron mass in Dalton units.

In calculating mD =18–12A/60 all the mD:s for all the mass numbers A, then calculating/seeking U = AmN(1–mDme) a corresponding integer U=A will always return the same answer 12 — provided (CAUSE) the used mN amd me follow the Neutron square suggested general solution’s u-equation provision

mN = 1/(1 — 15.6me) OR me = (1 — 1/mN)15.6. The precision of the me or mN is insignificant;

— A test column (above right) with an me=0.5 giving an mN=-0.1470588235 still returns a single U=A=12, all other have decimal tails. 6C12 it is. A17, 17Clorine35.

 

The approximated solution: mN/me = 1836minimum; U = (1836/2[15.6])(1 — √ 1 — 4(15.6)/1836) = mN = 1.008644262901; me = mN/1836 = 0.0005493705;  mD = 15.6 = 18 — A/5 ; A = 5(18 — 15.6) = 12. 

FROM THIS RESULT, IT DOES NO LONGER MATTER WHICH SPECIFIC mD or meinstitution, laboratory, region, epoch — WE USE, BECAUSE THE UNIQUE

u-CONNECTION  mN = 1/(1 — 15.6me) OR me = (1 — 1/mN)15.6  WILL AUTOMATICALLY ALWAYS CORRECT ON THE SAME END STATION RESULT: m(6C12)/12=u.

BUT THIS mD15.6me NS PREFERENCE ALSO BREACHES ON THE ESTABLISHED EXPERIMENTAL mme PROVISIONS. Type

HOPmN 1.0086652u from the HOPme 0.000548598u: 1/(1 – 15.6me) = 1.0086320026u IS NOT THE SAME AS the HOPmN 1.0086652u. NS SUGGESTING: The experimentally measured masses involves electric and magnetic — not neutral — provisions, and have — therefore — no exact corresponding experimentally proven neutral quantities matching the Neutron Square guaranteed neutral atomic mass defect (atomic binding energy) suggested values.

WHEN IT COMES TO THE QUOTE mN/me THESE DIFFERENCES ARE MINOR (not directly significant);

HOP mN/me  = 1838.6235458387. 1818 + 18 + 2.624.

HOP mN’/me = 1838.5630326577. 1818 + 18 + 2.563. There is a 0.00329% deviation in the relation. We know not here how plausible such is experimentally in measuring mN.

THESE RESULTS MIGHT ALERT A CHALLENGE. NAMELY IN COMPARING THE EXPERIMENTALLY MEASURED ATOMIC MASSES/WEIGHTS WITH THE CORRESPONDING NEUTRON SQUARE VALUES, A NORMALIZATION MUST BE MADE ON THE EXPERIMENTAL [mN’ = 1/(1 – 15.6me)] TO SECURE THE NS REFERENCE ON THE UNIVERSAL ATOMIC MASS UNIT m(6C12)/12=u AS STATED.

Normally — no adjustments — we just would translate the experimental U values to NS mD values by the given

Uexp → mD = (1 — Uexp/AmN)/me — given the laboratory or institutional mN and me values.

However in sequring the NS named m(6C12)/12=u transfer, the translation must respect an atomic mass unit normalization

Uexp → mD = (1 — Uexp/AmN’)/me, = (1 — Uexp/A[1/(1—15.6me)])/me, = (1 — (1—15.6me)Uexp/A)/me.

THE EXPERIMENTAL U IS FORCED MODIFIED THEN. AND THERE IS NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT IF AN EXACT NS ATOMIC MASS UNIT REFERENCE COMPARISON IS ON THE TABLE. If it isn’t, the NS values have no true and fair comparing meaning, and only the experimentally values count.

   That is an especially sensitive task when comparing on the new (WeizCalifornia) Weizsäcker solution quantities — which we already know is aiming at a persistent academic chase on the (new popular academic computer modeling) experimental (NScredit). The NS solution values will breach that dependence: The Weizsäcker quantities (uniformly charged liquid drop nucleonic model) have absolutely no connection to the (TNED toroid Planck constant) NS complex. No way. The comparing diagrams will underline that position (CONOR ¦ ComNorm).

 

QUESTIONING A UNIVERSAL NATURE of

THE NS NEUTRON SQUARE SOLUTIONS

———————————————

Absolute metrics ¦ The Absolut METRIC ¦ The ATOMIC NUCLEUS ¦ NEUTRON SQUARE SOLUTIONS ¦ NSdeDIA1 ¦ Geometric

AllKeplerMATH

 

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

9Oct2023:

 

U          = AmN(1 – mDme)       ;  AtomicMassDefectEquation

12         = 12X(1 – 15.6me)        ;

1           = X(1 – 15.6me)            ;

X           = 1/(1 – 15.6me)           ;

me         = 0.000548598 u           ; Wikipedia Oct2023: 0.000548579909065

X           = 1.008632002589970 ; »NSexMatchTractor»:

             = mXN UNIVERSAL neutron square Experimental Mass-to-Charge Transfer Corrector

 

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

 

THE NEUTRON SQUARE SOLUTIONS EXPLANATION

 Normalized comparison

 

NSdeDIA0:

 

NuklidTab4C2023.ods Tabell2A Col.K ¦ M

———————————————

AtomicMassDefectEquation

 

Discovery:

THE DISCOVERY — TNED Universe History

The original ideas (2003) leading to the NS atomic mass defect (mD) chart:

 

   NuclearSTRUCTURE: (HOP values) mN/me = 1838.6235458387.

PRIME NUMBERS: 1836 + 2.6235458387  = 1818 + 18 + k (BASICmN):

1818 + 18

———————— = 606 + 6 = 3 × (»±101» + »±1»)

3

A prime number certifies a basic barrier on whole number divisibility (Periodic system matrix basics — it is all about structure: resonances: basic whole number solutions): ±e NuclearSTRUCTURE.

   Scrutinizing (2003) the 1967 HOP table on atomic masses, comparing on a first drafted nuclide chart (TheoryExperiment) immediately revealed a possible apparent elliptic (Paintbrush, Windows 3.1) morphological complex — taken on (exothermal) fusion paths (Nuclide/FusionRING ¦ mDmethod ¦ Geometric ¦ VerticalElliptic).

   Attempting to deduce a connection on elliptic equations (EllipticEquation ¦ Deduction), immediately gave response:

   The Neutron Square discovery (2003) was a fact (Comparing Experimental/NS).

— Never mentioned in modern quarters.

   On Aug2008 this UH UniverseHistory domain was introduced @Internet — on the NS discovery credit alone (»a new model of the universe»).

———————————————

ProtonRADIUS ¦ NuclearSTRUCTURE ¦ Atomic Mass DefectATOMIC MASS UNIT — deducing the atomic mass unit

 

See also — mass-to-charge dependency issue:

NeutralToExperimental.

 

The elementary mass-charge independence (Planck equivalents deductions)

NOTE the related deduction to the electric charge (Q), not mentioned in modern quarters:

 

 

———————————————

EXPERIMENTAL CONFIRMATIONS

No matter the electric and magnetic influence on the electron mass (e) — independent of any type of experimentation — under all conditions, no exceptions:

 

Q is preserved — unless ±e annihilated (COEI conservation of energy by induction).

 

The proportionality between affected mass (m) over (space electric) resistance (R) guarantees that electric (particle) acceleration (Planck equivalents as deduced) leaves the electric charge (Q) intact.

 

Assuming, or implying, any idea of ”mass-to-charge ratio” without proper specification and definition, will no doubt expose hazard to the reader.

   As we know: Atomic Particle experimentation is dependent on charge properties. But the academic (Wikipedia Windows) insight into these physical domains seems less developed than the ambition to present modeling data on their nature: the atomic nucleus.

 

See further in

Provisions

   the neutral and optimal unaffected conditions under which the Neutron Square Solution NS neutral atomic mass defect (mD) values can be understood to apply.

   Compare:

The GPS example

— precision (signal) measuring under significantly different gravitational conditions.

 

 

NS8Oct2023

 

ClarifyingTheUequation: 17Oct2023

 

It belongs to a common understanding that the energy needed to complete an assembly is the same energy reversed to restore the original — ideally »the movie backwards».

 

See Wikipedia quote in Not represented.

 

But the present common science set of terms and concepts apparently exposes some lack of a developed and well related, explainable and understandable vocabulary. The reader will be the judge on that in the following.

 

aMAD: CTU

Necessary clarifying concepts from established literature — related, compared and exemplified

ATOMIC MASS DEFECT AND NUCLEAR MASS DEFECT — MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSIONS AND CONCEPTS

The number (A) of Fundamental Atom Quanta (FAMQ) — the neutron mass mN — that made the atom (a), minus the actually (experimentally) measured atomic mass U=mATOM/(u=m[6C12]/12=1Dalton), defines the total mass-energy waste Work MDa needed to complete (a), taken from the masses of AmN through the Planck mass energy equivalent E = hf = mcr/t = mc2.

 

 

atomic mass  defect     MDa = AmN – U ¦ U = mATOM/u ¦ u = m(6C12)/6 = 1 Dalton

U = AmN – MDa

nuclear mass defect     MDn = AmN – U Zv ¦ v = nino = mN – (mP + me) = mN – m1H1 (= 0.00084u)

MDn Zv = MDa        MDn = MDa +  Zv.

v: the work mass energy waste that built the first atom — 1H1 Hydrogen — from the fundamental atom: The Neutron [ FAMQ ]

SEE ILLUSTRATED FROM EXPERIMENTAL VALUES IN Comparing nuclear AND AtomDiffNuc.

— As above: When there is vocabulary lack of terms in an established corridor, still attempting to handle the different domains, inevitable confusions will most certainly arise: we have to find safe and clear examples in closing out such traps in the descriptions. Compare Examples.

 

 

NUCELAR  mass defect general expression: — WikiWEIZnuclearMass exemplifying by quote

E(MeV)/A = (AmN U –  Zv) × uc02/(A × T6 × e) nuclear

T6 = 106in UH we use the simplification Tt for 10^± ¦ E = UQ = mc2 ¦ U(eVOLT) = mc2/(Q=e) ¦ U(MEGAeVOLT) = mc2/(T6 e)

ATOMIC     mass defect general expression:

E(MeV)/A = (AmN U) × uc02/(A × T6 × e) atomic

 

COMPARING EQUALITIES — provided gravitational masses onlyme electron mass

mNUC  = UZme ¦ related: nucleus gravitating mass + electrons gravitating mass = atom gravitating mass; Rest: 0.

             = AmN – MDaZme ; WikiWeizNuclearMASS

— On a RELATED basis — to Check and say:

There is no way to express this equality OTHER than INCLUDING these factors; Rest: 0:

The mNUC nuclear mass comes first after the mATOM has been assembled. So, it relates to U, not to AmN;

             =  AmN – (MDn – Zv) – Zme

             =  AmN – MDn + ZvZme . No way.

 

 

When n neutrons decay, lying inside of each others nuclear barriers (the nuclear delimiting sphere), and so performs a fast phase of spontaneous fusions, the resulting atom’s binding energy can not bring these original neutrons back on their original masses. These were partly wasted by working mass-energy during the fusion phase, the actual atomic mass defect.

 

Compare: the Planck equivalent mass-energy EXCHANGE term in EXCON: related physics.

See also NUCLEAR REACTION LAW.

 

MDa: ATOMIC MASS DEFECT —

aMAD ¦ CTU  ¦ UnequivocalAmD

CLARIFYING attempt on THE TERMINOLOGY AND ITS RELATED MEANING

MDa = AmN – U

———————————————————————————————

(1)         U = AmN – mDme ¦ simplified —— when we know the meaning of the parameters:

U = atomic mass m per atomic mass unit u = atomic weight — ”relative atomic mass”

mN  fundamental atomic mass quantity QUANTUM — the neutron, enveloping the Hydrogen Atom

A   number of mN that built the A atom also called MASS NUMBER — ”number of protons Z plus neutrons n

mD IN RELATED PHYSICS:  atomic mass defect

the Planck energy E = hf = mcr/t = mc² working energy wasted on building the A atom;

me   electron mass0.000548598 u here in UH, = 0.511 MeV:

    atomic mass is the raw A neutron quanta mass minus the energy building work

Related (1):

Left side of the (1) rank is the (U) atomic mass expressed in Dalton units (u).

Right side of the rank’s first term AmN is the Fundamental Atomic Mass Quantum (FAMQ) the neutron mass (mN = 1.0086652) times the atom’s mass number (A) from which the U atom was built. The second term is the per mass number (A) atomic mass defect mD (Planck work hf-energy E=mc² equivalent) in number of electron mass units, times the electron mass (me, 0.000548598) in Dalton units.

The complete left side U value of the whole atomic mass on the right side is

 

(2)         U = AmN – mDme × AmN

completing the third term also for the whole atomic mass. Hence

the AtomicMassDefectEquation

(3)         U = AmN(1 – mDme), = AmN – MDa .

 

There is no dependency on electric charge in this mutual equality equation.

Through the deduced Neutron Square general elliptic equation

 

mD = 6 + (1/5)√  60² — (60 — [ A–K]²)/E  see NSsolutions

 

mD values are not entirely dependent on the mass number (A).

— The (EllipticEquation) KE factors connect FUSION PATHS (connecting elliptic arcs) defining (VerticalElliptic) the end atom — still no charge (Z) dependency.

Or so automatically integrated with no direct need for a separate analysis.

 

So (conclusion):

 

THE (UnequivocalAmD) ASSUMPTION IN NS SOLUTIONS THAT ISOBARIC ATOMS (same A, different U) IN PHYSICAL PRACTICE WOULD HAVE A MEAN AVERAGE ATOMIC MASS WILL NOT HOLD — except as a simplified violation on the true masses.

 

   Atoms with same mD can have different U from different A.

   Atoms with same mD can have different A.

   Atoms with same A can have different U from different mD.

 

— In NS solutions it is the mD Elliptic equation (KE) that secures also different U from same A, depending on how the end atom product becomes assembled on its A fusion production path. There is still no parametric electric (nuclear) charge dependency in these expressions.

 

See specific comparing isobars between experimental values and NS in

ComparingIsobaric

— there is a suggested (systematic) significant difference.

 

 

ClarifyingTheUequation

 

CosmicMATHrevelation:  25Sep2023 —  Never18 ¦ Geometric

Modern academy teaching system with its merits and general moral and educative standards, a short review:

 

We do NOT intend to be rude — just fair and just. Have your say. EXAMPLE: A student who cannot »keep up» with the competition, commits suicide. Real world situation. Unfortunately, a not very seldom happening inside modern quarters educational institutions history. There are several examples — through several disciplines.

— The AIM of science and knowledge — HumanRight recognition standards; decency, respect, honour — was NOT to kill. It was to teach and educate: to share. As life has evolved with cooperating organs to a single admirable individual. The aim was NOT to profit, not to push or stress — individual care. The natural aim was a respectful cooperation. HumanRight recognition. ”.. every individual and every organ in society ..”. 24/7.

— And how is it, what’s up? Not a word. Not a spell. Not a sound. Modern academic teaching system cannot handle that quest. Most certainly not. It is — appears — a complete abstract to present academic thinking. Not existent. No say.

— 2023: Humanity continues to be brought into the biological dark:

 

 

GUARANTEED PRESERVED BIODIVERSITY —— on a never disturbed natural root fungi — TRDWS: biodiversity suffocates with the kill of alive trees — THE WORLD DEMOCRACY CRISIS PHENOMENA. RespondingNature.

HEALTH.

 

  Människan har skapat matematiken. Därom är alla lärde överens”,

Vetandets Värld 25Mar1988, Sveriges Radio.

English:

”Man has created mathematics. Thereof are all the educated in agreement.”,

SWEDISH RADIO, the weekly Knowledge World radio program 25Mar1988

The Swedish definition of Education: »you are not welcome here». Very high IQ. MustBuyBook.

 

Delar Svenska Vetenskapsakademin ut någon annan behörighet än den som innefattar kalhyggen, förstörd natur? Det ligger ingen medveten illasinnad tanke bakom. Men det är vad ögat ser och hjärtat känner.

Naturfientligt utvecklad teknik. Var finns ett deklarerat bestämt avståndstagande, en erinran om respekterad människorätt? ”.. varje individ och varje organ i samhället ..”.

 

  matematik  Enligt etablerad uppfattning är matematiken läran om tal, om rummet, och de många generaliseringar av dessa begrepp, som skapats av det mänskliga intellejtet,”,

MATEMATIKLEXIKON W&W 1991 s278sp2ö

English:

”mathematics  According to established ideas mathematics is the teaching of numbers, of space, and the many generalizations of these concepts, having been created by the human intellect.”,

Swedish version of  THE CRESCENT DICTIONARY OF MATHEMATICS (1962), W. Karush

— Test  »formulated»  for  »created». Then we can talk.

 

Summing:

 

By a natural DRIFT of ignorance, not deliberately or by any such planning: Modern 1800+ academic ideas of our origin is holding mankind in a mental prison.

— Disclaim that, and we will surrender immediately.

Mankind 1800+ became locked up by [ apparently in many ways on Natural Destructive ] authoritative merits and ideas about moral and educational standards. These still prevent the individual from developing a natural insight: not one word HumanRight recognition. The below stuff is part of the proof: modern academic thinking is intrinsically continuing to present proofs that works against any idea of intelligence other that itself. Again: by Drift. Not plan. Against nature. Not with her. It holds its own present established academic teaching system to be a product of type »absolute intelligence» — on a not seldom favorized foremost example (”nothing lasts forever”, popular academic entropy study): Our universe was created in the past out of nothing, and it will die when the stars run out of fuel, and there is nothing any one can do about that. Cutting out every nerve and tissue out of the human child mind. Very high IQ stuff. MustBuyBook. — ».. but if there is a deep meaning, why don’t we see it?». TEST STOP DENYING IT.

 

 

 

COMPARE THE REAL STEEL WORLD OF NATURE, AS EXPERIENCED:

Man discovers mathematics: The paragons from natural observations give us hints in how to develop a formulating language. Man creates no math at all — except provably faulty statements. The LIST. Say.

— What was never created, timeless, perfectly solid, no exception.

Shorter: perfect flawless joy. Say.

 

— We are not here to weaken Defense. We are here to make it stronger, deeper, more fundamental.

THE GUARD OF CIVILIZATION

 

 

CosmicMATHrevelation ¦ Resurrection11Sep2023 ¦ AtomicMassDefectEquation

 

Geometric:  NeutronSquareSolutions ¦ VerticalELLIPTIC ¦  NeutronSquareFundamentals ¦

CosmicMATHrevelation

neutral to experimental —— U = mATOM/uC12÷12 — traditional Atomic Weight, present as Relative Atomic Mass, u = 1.66033 t27 KG, 1 Dalton — beginning from the neutron Planck ring h = mcr

CONCURRENT ATOMIC MASSES: U = AmN(1–mDme) ¦ mD = 6 ± k(1/5)√ 60²–(60–A)² ¦ Never18

Neutron Square Solutions — atomic nuclear physics — as testified by experimental results — absolute neutral atom preference — NEUTRAL ATOMIC Weights/MASSES

 

 

NuklidTab4B2023.ods Table1 Col.AI+ — The simple amazing astounding coherences that, apparently, nobody can deny — never noticed in modern quarters. No way.

The 7 exemplified Neutron Square paragonic parts below are tabled above in comparing experimentally measured results.

HOP, experimentally measured, NS, NeutronSquare solutions — in this UniverseHistory beginning from 2003+ on a Windows XP machine [with Windows 3.1 Paintbrush] and the HOP table data.

 

 

The experimental coherence NSdeDIA1 is no doubt astounding (EXPERIMENTALconfirmations).

Compare modern academic standard (Entropy Quote), the observed and noted1800+ central instance of denial of the cosmic nature: »nothing lasts forever» — the apparent modern academic 1800+invention or more fairly expressed, a modern academic dictated delusion to keep the timeless truth of nature on a safe distance — with zero physical solidity. Compare the rhetoric response: If you say so, that nothing lasts forever, when does that cease? Wake up to reality.

 

These paragon »matrix formations» apparently have no origin in time: time never began — realize it, read it and weep. As the Pythagorean Theorem, it can be forgotten but never destroyed — and rediscovered, any amount of times — without changing the least or the smallest, not at all. The atomic mass defect values from the geometric neutron square solutions have no physical or experimental foundation — except the Planck constant: the neutron, the fundamental atom: h=mcr. Testing the experimentally found values on the basic Planck ring principle, made the neutron square solutions appear immediately — concurrent in values (2003 in this history).

— There is apparently no way to undo these discovered results — never known, and never asked for, in modern corridors. Shorter:

— Why was the above never presented from the academic aces — What’sUp — why is it unknown in there?

Educate us.

 

Modern academic cosmological idea is so occupied by its own supreme standard, that it has forgotten how it came that it locked humanity into a dark box.

 

 

NuklidTab4A2023TableA: NuklidTab4A2023.ods ¦  EC  ¦  BaseGroupMassNumbersEquation

THE NEUTRON SQUARE ATOMIC MASSES UPP TO A=60 —

from MproblemSolved the original MsWORKS 4.0 that Microsoft suddenly blocked from computer usage 2008 — see

ExcelOpenOfficeCALCULUSprograms, TheMicrosoftLIST.

The precision increases with increasing mass number:

THE TNED DEDUCED ATOMIC MASS DEFECT mD IN ELECTRON MASSES PER ORIGINAL NEUTRON same as total mD divided with mass number BETWEEN EXPERIMENTAL AND TNED CALCULATED TAKES A LARGEST VALUE

ON THE HYDROGEN ATOM WITH —0.057 e-MASSES and a U-ratio 100.00313%. 20Ca42 HAS THE LOWEST DIFFERENCE WITH  —0.0001 e-MASSES, and a U-ratio 100.00021%.

 

NOTE:  19K40 not stable Kalium-40 är betaMinusAktiv

Mass number 40 for the Potassium element 19K40 has in the HOP table no remark suggesting otherwise than a stable nuclide — abundance 0.0001181.

However other contemporary sources Van Nostrand’s Encyclopedia claim beta-activity with a half life of 1.3 billion years. Not included here as a stable atom.

Masstal 40 för Kaliumindividen 19K40(17.27) har i HOP-källan ingen anmärkning i tabellen som antyder annat än att nukliden är stabil. Tre sådana anges.

   I avdelningen Nuclear Physics i HOP, första kapitlet General Principles of Nuclear Structure (s9-7sp2n) påstås emellertid att ”For odd Z there are never more than two stable isotopes”. Man skulle då kunna misstänka att HOP-tabellen längre fram i verket är felaktig på den punkten, eller att författaren är fel ute. Emellertid, kontroll i en annan källa, Van Nostrand´s Scientific Encyclopedia (Ed5 1976 s491-515) anger i en liknande tabell att Kaliumindividen 19K40 är betaaktiv med en livslängd på 1.3 miljarder år.

   Innan denna detalj uppmärksammades togs HOP-tabellens specifikationer för givna varför individen 19K40 också finns medtagen i tabellreferenserna här som en icke instabil markerad isotop. Den är dock inte upptagen i nedanstående gruppredovisning av alla stabila isotoper upp till masstal 60. Om vi tittar efter på masstal 40 ser vi den också, tydligt. Den avviker något från övriga i en liten dipp som därmed avslöjar att ovanstående citerade referens tycks ha visst fog för sig. Vi får därmed frånräkna individen 19K40 för vidare, men låter den stå kvar i tablåerna som ett exempel på precisionen för de stabila nuklidernas del.

Editor2003VII15

 

THE GENERAL COLLECTED NEUTRON SQUARE SOLUTION on elliptic and trigonometric-wave equations — from [2003] the MsWORKS original NuklidTab4.wks ¦ Windows 95, Windows XP, Windows Vista

 

NuklidTab4A2023.ods TableA  From NuklidTab4.wks 2008 — finally solved for OpenOffice and Microsoft EXCEL. Explicitly designed for ZERO interrupts: no errors allowed.

ALL  STABLE ISOTOPES UP TO ATOMIC NUMBER 27 — max mass number 60 — the NeutronSquare horizontal square side scale

 

 

— From A=60 and up the precision — elliptic equations — becomes more demanding. See FusionEllipsesCompleteExplanationInTNED. There is however (CompCALu2023) a simpler »general hyperbolic» solution for all the 60+ atomic masses (TheWaveFunction ¦ WAFO). In TNED from the NeutronSquare it exposes a »still excellent fit» to the experimentally measured values. We can study these for a first rough comparison, and then test the further more precise determined values. Largest-Smallest mD e-mass per A neutron difference for this hyperbolic case is +0.00173 -0.00459 — taken for all the (NuklidTab4A2023.ods) HOP table listed nuclides — including the unstable ones from mass number A=60 to A=257.

 

The details behind the above illustrated content is specified in

BaseGroupMassNumbers.

 

 

Geometric ¦ AtomicMassDefectEquation

 

Resurrection11Sep2023:

 

2003: The NeutronSquarenuclear mass connects definite nuclear size.

With the advent of the atomic mass defect equation in (TNED) related physics and mathematics

 

 

 

mD in number of electron masses me

U atomic weight in Dalton — u = 1.66033 t27 KG — units: 1u = m[6C12]/12

A mass number — number of originally primary neutrons — conventionally »number of neutrons n and protons p»

mN neutron mass in Dalton 1.0086652 

me electron mass in Dalton 0.000548598

mN/me = 1838.623545838670 = 1818 + 18 + 2.623545838670..

conventional atomic weight in UniverseHistory denoted U in u units

 

 

the extensive 1967 available (HANDBOOK OF PHYSICS,McGraw-Hill, ed. 1967) HOP table

NuklidTab4A2023.ods

on experimentally measured atomic masses did expose 

 

TheoryExperiment:

ELLIPTIC EQUATION

 

Uncertainty: ±1 pixel, or ca 1 electron mass (±½) me = 0.000548598u = 0.511 MeV per mass number A ¦ 1 u = 1 Dalton = mC12/12 = 1.66033 t27 KG

 

 

definite regular connections to elliptic equations of the form

 

 

explaining the coherences as exposed:

— In this scale [6 pixel colored dots, MAX 18 electron masses Atomic Mass Defect Equation per mass number A on equation (5) ¦ DiffREF] no direct difference is visible between the HOP table experimentally measured and the TNED atomic mass defect equation wave form (WAFO) and its elliptic equated values

(see TheActualDifferencesHOP/TNED ¦ ExperimentalErrors):

 

WaveElliptic:

Beginning from The Cosmological Fundamental Neutron 0;0 (Planck constant h = mcr):

Left:    The ordered (exothermal, beginning from Dmax) fusion paths for the stable nuclide formation according to the TNED discovered Neutron Square paragonic geometric mathematics. The (dotted) vertical ellipsis arcs point to (exemplified) a corresponding nuclide’s atomic mass defect for a given mass number through the neutron square’s special elliptic functions.

Right:   Uppermost are included the two fundamental mean ellipses along with their modification in the form of a general in explicit connecting and containing also A hyperbolic expression (CompCALu2023) connecting the nuclide chart also to the heavy part of the chart further from mass number 60 Wave Equation (WAFO)

 

TNEDComparingMAC: TheoryExperiment

COMPARING TNED RESULTS WITH WEIZSÄCKER VERSION HOP1967¦FM1975

heavy differences in established corridors

See also the comparing modern academic MAC theory values in Comparing TNED/MAC:

 

 

 

Black dots:    Values from the Weizsäcker equation solution transformed to the TNED mD value form through the general (colored dots) experimental transfer equation 

 

— The U value is the atomic (”molecular”) weight value in Dalton units (1Dalton = 1u = 1.66033 t27 KG) in the different available tables on atomic masses.

— The Weizsäcker solution is the modern academic concept of nuclear physics based on nuclear — not atomic — mass defect. It uses the idea of the atomic nucleus as a uniformly charged liquid drop consisting of discrete neutron n and proton p smaller drops. See the Weizsäcker equation more detailed in THE WEIZSÄCKER EQUATION DETAILS.

Colored dots:    The experimentally measured values. Especially in the first part of the chart, the Weizsäcker values differ vastly — apparently exposing a direct inaccurate chosen idea of the atomic nucleus. The Neutron Square calculated TNED values in this scale have no visual difference from the colored dots.

— In our era of experimental physics, the neutron was first discovered 1932 by James Chadwick (ordinary atomic physics fact book information).

— The above divulging vast Weizsäcker values show no such divulging visibility if viewed in comparing U-values, the graph below. And because the mD solution never was searched for in modern corridors — never represented — also what we know the above mD divulging chart was lost in modern quarters.

 

Uweiz: »the ideal perfect match» — TNEDcomparingMAC

 

 

 

One way of viewing the Weizsäcker theoretical comparing experimental (THE WEIZSÄCKER EQUATION DETAILS). Comparing experimental with theoretical on the Weizsäcker form in U values, no essential difference is seen, the diagram above. Viewed on the established term ”nuclear binding energy” the differences exposes more visibility. See for example TheTakadaDiagram2006. That figure has the following text, recited here:

 

The above figure is not the Takada reference — see the actual Takada figure in TheTakadaDiagram2006:

   As seen in the above figure, the Weizsaecker-Bethe mass formula can reproduce well the experimental data for a wide range of nuclei. We can therefore conclude that the liquid drop model is enough valid in nuclei.”,

Internet Seminar MICROSCOPIC WORLD –3– The World of the Atomic Nucleus, Dr. Kenjiro Takada 2006.

 

The following Takada consenting HOPweizQuote ”good approximation” certifies the educated established scientific community merits:

   A number of fairly good semiempirical binding-energy or mass functions have been constructed which give a good approximation to the true masses over the wide range of both stable and unstable nuclei in terms of relatively few empirical constants.  Perhaps the most simplest such formula is that of Weizsäcker: .. (2.1)”, HOP1967, p.9—8.

 

With no further references — unknown NS solutions — also no objections could be made on the quoted and established sentences. We just had to conceive them as »provably accurate».

   See further contextual in FIBAPO ¦ NScredit: an explaining inclusive overview.

 

mDweiz: EC

Differences in atomic mass defect electron masses per mass number

MODERN ACADEMY IS OUTCLASSED BY TNED — related physics and mathematics

NuklidTab4A2023.ods Table4  Columns KMS ¦ 1.00 e-mass = 0.511MeV

 

The large first 1967¦1975 Weizsäcker differences. The Element isotopes from 1H1 to 4Be9 are left out in the diagram above as the Weizsäcker values anyway lie far beyond the vertical scale. The reason: The idea behind the Weizsäcker solutions — charged liquid drop mathematics — have no corresponding atomic nuclear connection — says TNED on its near and close contact to the experimentally measured values, directly from the neutron and up. Only when the atom grows larger and heavier, that difference decreases. See further definite proofs [Jun2023] in THE ATOMIC NUCLEUS.

The Weizsäcker value equative calculations are accounted for in the separate spread sheet HOPweizXP.ods Table1. Its equative details are exposed as quoted in The Weizsäcker details.

 

 

 

Resurrection11Sep2023 ¦ AtomicMassDefectEquation

 

AtomicMassDefect: Equation

 

   mD               = (1 — U/AmN)/me

   U                  = AmN(1 — mDme)

THE ATOMIC MASS DEFECT

Related physics and mathematics: not represented in the modern academic teaching system.

 

And it can never be.

No way.

— IF the reader believes that this production is some kind of ATTEMPT  to be welcomed into modern quarters, the reader has perfectly lost control of the reading capability. It will never happen. We could equally hope to have an aquarium at home with gold fishes in it, on the level of all the Pacific Ocean’s water. It will guaranteed never happen.

 

— So what is your aim?

— Live and see. Don’t die.

— That’s easy for you to say, not living in the middle of an ongoing war; ”don’t die”.

— I hear you. But I’m not talking to the body, only the mind: it can never die. No way.

 

 

TNED — related physics

The atomic mass defect ..

   Each atom is built of — weighed (U) on — a (mass) number of A neutrons, each with mass mN = 1.0086652 ¦ u: 1u = 1.66033 t27 KG, the atomic mass unit;

 

 

 

The TNED related A-Z chart. White: all stable atoms.

See related deduction from DeducingTheAZ.

 

 

   The atomic weight (U=m/u) of an atom will always be smaller than AmN = A · mN, because

   building an atom from lighter units needs work = energy, and

   it is the atom self that must offer some of its mass for a (an exothermal, giving out) mass-energy emission during the work.

   This energy work for building a physical atom never exceeds or even touches 18 electron masses (Never18);

   It is (see further below in The 18e capital) the mN/me structure

mN/me= 1818(»Central Massif») + 18(»Work Capital»: TheNeutronSquare that (2003) revealed the whole story) + (mN/me — 1836 = 2.624 =»lubricant») electron masses which is responsible for that mathematics;

 

See further on

DeducingTheAZ chart.

 

 

AtomicMassDefect

 

AtomicMassDefectEquation: Explaining the U equation

 mD ¦ AtomicMassUnit

Deduction:

THE IMPORTANCE OF relating the mass defect quantity to the fundamental ATOMIC MASS QUANTITY (FAMQ)

The Neutron mass mN:

Atomic mass defect is the Planck energy E=hf=mcr/t=mc2 mass-energy Waste Work needed to build the atom from its number A mass number neutron masses — as related. MDa = (m[WASTE]=E/c2)/u in Dalton units: 1u=1Dalton = m(6C12)/12, = 1.66033 t27 KG

 

MDa=mD(u)   = AmN — U, atomic mass defect in U Dalton units, 1u = m(6C12)/12 = 1.66033 t27 KG

mD(AmN)        = (AmN — U)/AmN, atomic mass defect 

per mass number A neutron masses mN

mD(me)           = [(AmN — U)/AmN]/me, atomic mass defect 

in electron mass units me per mass number A neutron [ fundamental atomic mass quantum ] mass mN

                          = AmN[(1 — U/AmN)/meAmN]

mD                   = (1 — U/AmN)/me, atomic mass defect

in electron mass units me per mass number A neutron masses mN; 1 me = 0.511 MeV = me·c²/[e=1.602 t19C · T6]

mDATOMIC       = (1 — U/AmN)/Ame, atomic mass defect PER MASS NUMBER ¦ sometimes used in UH for comparison

 

 

Neutron Square solutions

EXAMPLE:

 

 

mD(u¦6C12)    = 12·1.0086652 — 12.0000000 = 12(1.0086652 — 1 = 0.0086652)

mD(AmN)        = (0.0086652)/(AmN) = 0.008590759

mD(me)           = (0.0086652)/(meAmN)

mD                   = (0.0086652)/(0,000548598·1·1,0086652)

                          = 15.659479896establishedNominal¦experimentalHOP

NOTE THAT DIFFERENT PRECISION VALUES ON THE DIFFERENT CONSTANTS GIVE DIFFERENT END QUANTITIES. AS THERE YET IS NO COMMON HIGH PRECISION DEFINITION OF NUCLEAR MASSES PER KILO GRAM — STANDARD UNIT KG — WE ARE STILL FIGHTING A PRECISION BATTLE LOOKING FOR »BETTER CONFIRMATIONS».

                          = (1 — U/AmN)/me

   mD               = (1 — U/AmN)/me

   U                  = AmN(1 — mDme)

The NeutronSquare gives (directly trigonometric)

15.6

 

The NeutronSquare general[‡] elliptic-Wave (from NuklidTab4A2023.ods TableA) gives 

15.739439592 (NuklidTab4A2023.ods Table5 A6): NeutronSquare average

(15.739439592 + 15.6)/2 =

15.669719796.

As an average:

That is a good precision average original neutron mass defect score for the 6C12 atomic mass relative the experimental

15.659479896

The rounded difference in electron masses: 0.01.

The mD average gives a corresponding comparing experimental

U = AmN(1 — mDme) =

11.999932005.

 

Highest score

The atom with the highest building atomic mass defect work score is represented by Iron (experimentally) 26Fe58 with mD = 17.759142302 electron masses

(1me = 0.000548598u = 9.1085 t31 KG = 0.511 MeV);

18me → max 9.198 MeV.

 

 

Atomic and nuclear mass defect concept — what modern academy missed: onsetting the deduction to the periodic system:  the (deduction) cube analogy, with further ..

WHEREAS the neutron in any case is a compressed or »sequestered» version of the hydrogen atom, so containing the proton, the hydrogen nucleus, one can relate any atom on a sum of neutrons alone. That the atom — then — consists of a nucleus detailing electron masses to the surrounding cover makes nothing to the point in the internal charge distribution. It is the same. The only difference consists of the mass defect (beta transfers) associated with the atomic rebuild on its fitness to the actual atomic harmony. It was precisely this detail (here in UH) which showed up its importance for the (TNED) discovery of (the hidden and forgotten) electron resonances in (the astoundingly simple) deduction of the elements periodic system via the Kepler momentum. See THE KEPLER RESONANCES.

 

 

Reason for choice of e-mass units — atomic mass defect mathematics — related physics

ATOM DYNAMICS — matter in general (The ATOMIC CHEMISTRY RANK) — entirely is built on the electron resonances in the Periodic System. It is the related, deduced and described resonant areas 2-8-18-32-50- .. -2n² with the related resolution 2-6-10-14-18-… that are the featuring Commander DoIt. When the atom switches building, these resonant conditions must be preserved, if we are talking stable tables. That preservation apparently involves that the resonances — also, in deep — must be related to the basic fundamental atomic nucleus. That is: The neutron — which contains the proton-hydrogen atom — as the most elementary UNSTABLE nuclide — with a mass defect zero. Shorter:

— The resonant conditions (basic nuclear STRUCTURE) must be — also dynamically beginning from the neutron — related to the hydrogen atom with its atomic mass defect (mD) when the neutron decays and becomes stable (THE NUCLEAR CHARGE BASICS 2).

— If hence the mass defect is uniformly expressed in e-masses of the neutron mass, one receives directly a quantified measure on ”distance to resonant stability” with the neutron-proton-hydrogen atom as a foundational basic reference. The higher mass defect, the more stable building, analogously more work to build the construct and thereby harder to break it up. Consequence, related physics (HIGHESTmD):

— Iron 26Fe56 ¦ U = 55.9349363 ¦ mD =17.759142 has the highest mass defect score in the max18 scale related physics atomic masses.

— Compare the different modern academic related highest score elements in (Swedish original) TWO DIFFERENT MASS DEFECT REFERENCES: And more related, here in English from HIGHESTmD.

— There is no correspondence between the two different domains. The academic highest (nuclear mass defect) is 28Ni62 with 17.176463 — with the 26Fe56 in a third place on 17.168214. The term atomic mass defect has no representation in the academic society.

 

 

Capital18e:

Decay, fusion and fission — in preserved resonant orders: basic related nuclear surface n-p-structure.

 

 

The top spinning atomic nucleus’ inherent spin cannot be removed or stopped. No way.

Any attempt to do so will promptly result in either a complete ±e structural annihilation. Or a corresponding (water splash) split on lighter nuclide elements, of shorter or longer lifetimes.

— But (intelligent) experimentation can divulge (such impossible) inner structural properties (Collisions between spin polarized protons 1979 ¦ 1987), helping us to pinpoint the essentials. This story has exactly that type of credit to thank for.

 

Preserved electron resonances — demands a defined characteristic nuclear n-structure and a characteristic defined p-structure: nuclear structure:

nuclear surface charge electric displacement — decays, fusions and fissions

ON BUILDING ATOMS in preserving the electron resonances for all the elements nuclides, in accordance with the ordered deduction of the elements periodic system, the nucleus always must preserve a definite basic configuration related to the neutron-proton basic aggregate. Such a condition guarantees that the nucleus always is exacting distributions of separate n-p-individuals in their preserved properties. As this, primary through the neutron decay, basic configuration is determined by the resonant numbers in the corresponding integer electron area numbers (2-8-18-32-50- .. -2n²), with groups and sub-groups, there is apparently a definite whole number order by which THE NUCLEAR DYNAMICS adjusts in all possible decays, fusions and fissions.

 

The 18e capital ..

The MAXmD = 18e capital — basic np-structure

mN/me = 1.0086652/0,000548598 = 1838.623545838670 = 1818 + 18 + 2.623545838670..

THE EIGHTEEN BODIES  ——   3 × 606 + 3 × 6 +  k = 3 × »±303» + 3 × »±3» +  k = 3 × 3 × »± 101» + 3 × 3 × »± 1» +  k ¦  prime numbers

WHOLE NUMBER PRESERVED RESONANT SOLUTIONS

mK = 1818, MAXmD = 18 ¦ MPcKärnteorin.doc 28Jun2003 Author’s reference

 

Mass is taken from the atom for rebuilding energy

The atom’s performance in the rebuilding work (m→γ) of producing other atoms needs an available marginal working mass-energy expendable waste capital (MAXmD). That capital secures that no causing havoc happens on the central preserved and protected nuclear massif (mK) on its inherent status of maintaining a stable nuclear and atomic dynamic function. The expendable (MAXmD) mass must have the capability in preserving the basic neutron deduced Planck ring (h=mcr) structural symmetry. That symmetry optimizes a greatest possible symmetric deadlock, a safe guard, on the entire ring structure of ±β-charges, certifying the structure does not collapse (PRIME).

— WHEREAS this deduced Planck ring structure in TNED is founded on a ±β pairwise (fractal hollow ring) symmetry (NuclearStructure ¦ NuclearMassprinciple ¦ TheFractal TNEDPlanck RingStructure), it is obvious that the fix nuclear mass (mK, total mass m minus MAXmD) must be whole number based (PeriodicSYSTEM) with respect to this pairwise symmetry — if a guaranteed exact balance is to be certified.

— The expendable mass must be based on an INTEGER nuclear ring symmetry.

— By further divisible consequence the integer part in the fix nuclear mass (mK, so) must be based on an odd integer — a prime number. A prime number blocks any further split. The prime number thereby determines the limit for the nuclear symmetry (type 1818 ÷ 18 = 101, prime number; can only divide by itself for a resulting integer — nuclear divisions, fragmentation).

   The expendable MAXmD mass thereby becomes a function of the named pairwise ±β electric charge symmetry on the topmost rings structure’s 3- number (HOW3), so that one receives MAXmD = x(2[±β]×3)=6x: 6 · N=3 = 18: there never was not much to chose on.

   See also THE simple BASIC NEUTRON MASS PROVISION MATHEMATICS.

 

npSTRUCTURE: CAPITAL18e

Basic related nuclear physics n-p surface charge structure

the neutron and its decay

 

———————————————

TNED NUCLEAR CHARGE BASICS ¦ TNEDbacisPlanckRingStructure ¦ TNED nuclear charge basics 2

 

The neutron has by consequence a certain negative nuclear surface prominent electric displacement (The Neutron Decay) which by consequential known theory through the nuclear top spin gives the neutron a corresponding known negative magnetic moment. When the neutron undergoes decay the displacement is changed, ending on the proton characteristic positive electric displacement with a positive magnetic moment. These moments are well empirical documented, and mark one of the TNED nuclear toroid morphology’s most important confirmations (Toroid Nuclear Electromechanical Dynamics, TNED).

 

See more related nuclear structure details in

Deducing the AZ chart.

 

 

AtomicMassDefectEquation

 

DeducingTheAZ:

TNED RELATED NUCLEAR ATOMIC PROPERTIES

npSTRUCTURE

NuclearSTRUCTURE ¦

If a p-nucleus ( ¦ ) grows optional with enclosing n-masses ( | ) on each p-ring, ideally a Zn-p-Zn nuclide (a »JumboNeutron» .. |  |  |  ¦ |  |  | ..), we can directly see why the resulting edifice sooner or later must lose its characteristic original p nuclear type charge property: The neutron masses forces the edifice to withdraw (»bury») the (±e structural) positive β-displacement.

   The same (with slower destructive force) would hold for a »JumboProton» (Z=[A=»n+p+n»]/3) of the form type Zn-Zp-Zn = .. |  ¦ | |  ¦ | |  ¦ | |  ¦ |  .. = Z(n-p-n): the p-type gradually loses impact over the n-type, and the nuclear structural balance is again compromised — IF we are talking »overall uniformly distributed charge». If not, this alternative would apparently suit the best fit in preserving a given Zp (on still larger nuclei), type nX-Zp-nX.

   If the p-nucleus on the other hand grows evenly with a minimum of enclosing n-mass type (»A=Z»),

n¦..1111111111..¦n .. ideally a n-Zp-n nuclide (a »JumboProton»), we see equally easy that the nuclear surface charge — n-p-p-p..p-n = n-Zp-n — is forced to grow in magnitude with the integer number Z>1; The original p-nucleus also here loses its original hydrogen atom harmonics.

   An ideal (Z=[A=»n+p»]/2) p-type nucleus Zn-Zp = Z(n-p) = .. |  ¦  |  ¦ |  ¦  | ..  would be the theoretically preferred natural choice on building heavier atoms from lighter atoms for a preserved exact balance — provided the nuclear ring structure did have a »uniformly distributed electric displacement» all over the nuclear surface.

It hasn’t.

 

NScredit:

 

 

— For the most low atomic nuclear charge atomic number Z-values, the ideal Z(n-p) type »is The Man». In the empirical table values, it holds practically up to the stable Calcium 20Ca40. After that, further on the stable Calcium isotopes, the Z(n-p) type is definitely done; On the following nearest stable Scandium atom 21Sc45, the threshold has already been passed: more n:s than p:s. And so the more n:s than p: s continues to grow with still heavier atoms — remember we talk Structure here. A balanced growth on heavier atoms apparently (in some way) favors the named  type nX-Zp-nX.

 

NuclideStaticAverage:

The NUCLIDE MAP (AZ) IN TNED

 

 

 

Nuclide static average value line A=12Z/5 crosses with good approximation the nuclide field (white in the AZ-map below). In that region we find the natural element’s stable atoms. While the n-p structure demands certain structural padding with growing atomic number Z, some of the atomic elements will expose isotopes. That is, atoms with same Z (same chemical properties) but different masses (different n-p structural paddings on their mass number A).

   Atoms with same mass number (A) but different atomic numbers (Z) are called isobars.

 

TheNEUTRON ¦ TheNeutron  

Beta decay emission mechanism

The term beta  relates to both polarities of the electron mass — the normal negative electron mass and its positive spouse, the positive electron: the positron

 

Jumboneutrons at right and Jumboprotons at left. The Jumboneutron is to heavy for its atomic number Z. It strives to get rid of one or several electron in order to switch down to a more stable position further down in the chart via a higher Z padding. The Jumboproton is to light for its Z. By burning off +β rings, or alternatively pull in one (or several) electron, it can reduce its Z and there by emigrate further up for a more correct balance. The AZ-chart also includes limits for atoms of a hard (nuclear) instability (their mass number A changes during the decays — in general from 83Bismut209). The description of the hard unstable atoms are (what we know) more demanding and will apart from the short description below on Radioactive mathematical physics not be mentioned further in this presentation (it needs a whole document, not to say several — see article links Swedish edition in Radioactive Decay’s Physics).

 

Atoms classified apart from the stable atoms are unstable atoms. These are either soft or hand unstable. The soft unstable are classified as beta (Greek b, β) unstable atoms. They become stable by electron transactions, give or take: their mass number (A) is preserved. The hard unstable are classified as the alpha unstable atoms (often emitting a Helium-4 nucleus — and more). They become stable by nuclear decay, nuclear emission or nuclear split. In the AZ map below only the beta unstable atoms are addressed.

 

AZchart: NuclideStaticAverage ¦ DeducingTheAZ

 

 

 

THE related RADIOACTIVITY MATHEMATICAL PHYSICS IN TNED

Short description

 

According to TNED all unstable atoms change towards a stable and balanced state and condition is described by the two type ranks below:

(K) – Ehf18         = K = (K1 + K2 – (m→γ) + β0γm ) – Ehf18 ................    beta decay, beta unstable atoms, beta nuclides

(K) – Ehf1818      = K = (K1 + K2 – (m→γ) + T0γm ) – Ehf1818 .............    nuclear decay, nuclear unstable atoms, radio nuclides

the cryptic are explained further through the link Radioactive Decay’s Physics — these factors explain necessary energy-mass transactions

Is the Ehf1818 neutrino regulated radio component removed out of the nuclear reaction law, one receives only the expression of a stable nuclide, which not is the radio case. By that reason we safely know that the neutrino influences play an important role for the decay of the radio nuclides. But the related TNED theory — it is extensive — is not found in modern quarters: TNED is not welcome there. No way (npStructure).

— Each radionuclide has its own specific neutrino spectrum. And different radio types therefore does not interfere in their specific decays. Beta decays on the contrary have mutual influences because the neutrino emissions are of the same electron-positron type for all beta decaying atoms. Their corresponding energies can therefore also be generated by electron oscillations. In the radio nuclide case on the contrary, the neutrino levels are isolated from electron generating effects (Planck’s structural constant).

 

NuclearStructure:

 

Understanding the world we live in: We get credit for trying.

 

 

DEDUCING THE ATOMIC A-Z NUCLEAR CHART

A    = n + p A = mass number — number of original fundamental  neutron = whole fundamental atomic masses

       = n + Z

n     = A – Z the actual practically atomic physical case in any way — Z = the nuclear charge = the atomic electron charge

 

 

With the three named nuclear compositions as delimited by the Jumbo Proton n-Zp-n ¦ »A=Z» nuclide, the ideal Z(n-p) ¦ Z=A/2 nuclide, and the Jumbo Neutron Z(n-p-n) ¦ Z=A/3 nuclide, the theoretical region for all possible nuclides is identified by its absolute limits and borders — with respect to the discussed ring structure in the TNED toroid nuclear complex:

 

 

Theoretical limits of atomic nuclide spectra as related by nuclear n-p-structure

 

The theoretical limits for all possible atomic nuclei in a general A-Z nuclide chart, related physics (Deducing the AZ).

The diagram summarizes the extreme limits for the Jumbo Proton (n-Zp-n) left bottom and the Jumbo Neutron Z(n-p-n) right limit in the theoretical nuclide spectrum, as related. Z denotes atomic number or nuclear charge, A denotes mass number, n denotes neutron nuclear surface structure type and p denotes proton nuclear surface structure type, as explained in related nuclear physics (TNED — see Nuclear STRUCTURE).

 

 

DEDUCING THE A-Z CHART

 

 

The connection for the Nuclide static average value line A=12Z/5 is the average mean of the coefficients for the ideal Z(n-p) nuclides via k=1/2 with Z=A/2, and the Jumboneutron’s Z(n-p-n) nuclides via k=1/3 with Z=A/3. The average mean becomes [(1/2)+(1/3)]/2=5/12 with Z=5A/12, or A=12Z/5.

 

 

 

Author’sRef: MPcKärnMatIIIa.doc ¦ MPcKärnMat.doc ¦ MPcKärnMatII.doc

 

 

And that is also the stretch where we find the stable atoms and their surrounding unstable.

 

LighterToHeavier:

TNED BASIC RELATED ATOMIC NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND ITS MATHEMATICS

THE PLANCK STRUCTURE CONSTANT, THE ATOMIC MASSES, CAP and CWON

 

 

 

Building heavier from lighter —

basic related atomic nuclear principles (Neutrino Spectrum ¦ The Plateaus)

 

Because electron spectrum is the same for all atoms (beta decays) but not the neutrino radiation (the high frequency radiation associated with the building up of the atomic nuclear structures by fusions from lighter to heavier, our Sun the nearest source) mass equivalent electron energies CAN decompose all atomic nuclei according to the qualitative connection

 

E = hf = (m→γ)c2 = (m←γ)c2

 

The same quantitatively decomposing energies namely

 

E = hf = (m→γ)c2 ≠ (m←γ)c2

gravitation, the atomic nucleus, is not a particleBackGROUND ¦ Atomkärnan ¦ CompareQm

gravitation cannot be compressed, it is already standing on a zero

gravitation is not lightENERGY related physics LAW

light is not a particle, but its matter generated induction quanta makes it convenient to express as »traveling photons»:

MAX PLANCK WAS RIGHT, ALBERT EINSTEIN with associated WAS WRONG

mass is not lightEXPERIMENTAL CONFIRMATIONS

mass cannot be created, only destructed, and has hence quality light energy equivalents

ENERGY EXCHANGE — NO MASS CREATION. See also The Particle Proof , Swedish edition.

 

formed by the fusions guarantee that the released (exothermal) energies in building heavier from lighter does not break or destroy the already built lighter atomic nuclei structures. The neutrino energies connecting the atomic nuclei buildings, so constrainedly form different fractal (Planck structural constant) levels (see from Planck Ring 1). These so safely built levels become inwardly secured in that the highest neutrino frequencies belong to the lightest atomic nuclei, attesting that these in no way are compromised on credit of the heavier built structures.

— So in deducing the atomic masses, we must properly find the different exothermal fusion paths to each single individual atom and its nucleus, its actual atomic mass defect, and do the end experimental testing theory mass calculations from there, for any further heavier building: the Neutron Square, Neutron Squatre solutions as noted, is our only reference.

 

   The only possible spontaneously exothermally energetic way for the basic fundamental atomic nucleus the neutron to build heavier atoms, unequivocally must begin from a maximum closed packed neutron nuclei state, a Dmax (certifying the nuclei lie inside each others nuclear barriers, leading to direct fusion): A compact high gravitating neutron mass spherical body. Thereby a process begins of a gravitational (light’s gravitational dependency) managing concentric atomic production (CAP). The gravitational potential is the least in the center, analogously the local divergence c the highest, and thereby the fastest decaying neutrons: the atomic building process begins at the centre, ends on the surface (CWON). It is fast and releases humongous amounts of exothermal energy (Element formation’s two basic nuclide groups).

 

See a basic complementary basic description in

The Plateaus.

 

 

DeducingTheAZ

 

WAFO: Neutron Square solutions ¦ BaseGroupMassNumbers 

 

Neutron Square solutions

THE MEAN ELLIPTIC WAVE FUNCTION

TNED NEUTRON SQUARE SOLUTIONS ATOMIC AND NUCLEAR RELATED MATHEMATICAL PHYSICS

Excerpts from the original Swedish edition (2003 — Toroid Nuclear Electromechanical Dynamics)

———————————————

Atomic Weights ¦ THE NEUTRON SQUARE PARAGONIC BODY ¦ Mean Ellipsis for Even and Odd ¦ THE WAVE FUNCTION ¦ The wave function’s explanation ¦ WaveFunction Description

 

Explain:

The (EE) neutron square horizontal elliptic basic equation

 

y            = 0.2[5x(120 + 5x)]½

 

has a simple (PREFIXxSIN) associated damped cosine wave functional form:

 

y            = cos 0.2[5x(120 + 5x)]½

 

A = 5x accounts for the graphical scale adoption.

 

This PREFIXxSIN neutron square elliptic associated damped cosine wave functional form has the followingt close general first provisional connection to the experimentally measued atomic masses:

—————————————————————————————————————

mATOM = Uu ¦ atomic weight U = mATOM/u, u atomic mass unit m(6C12)/12 named 1 Dalton (1.66033 t27 KG)

—————————————————————————————————————

 

The plateaus: THE ORIGIN OF THE GENERAL NEUTRON SQUARE WAVE EQUATION 2003

WAFO ¦ PREFIXxSIN

 

The open rings apart from the curved elliptic wave line follow (VerticalElliptic) specific fusion paths by vertical elliptic arcs with specific mass defect equations. See further (Sw., ed original) in Wave function’s Explanation.

 

 

The Plateaus:

DeducisngTheAZ ¦ PLATÅERNA — The plateaus¦ NuclearSTRUCTURE ¦ IronTOP ¦ HIGESTmD

Transdlated 22Oct2023 from the original 2003:

 

Helium plateau to Carbon plateau

From the Helium Reference the nucleus captivates a stable state (ideal nuclear). We then conceive the nucleus on (the previously described) nuclear line for the Z(n-p) type — the nuclide chart’s angled space, right below the static mean value line (12/5-line). As the nucleus grows with n-p pair nuclear structures, it however approaches the Jumbo Proton — which gives instability. Already at the Carbon plateau, a phase shift appears where stable nuclides can form with the addition of one neutron. Then nuclear fusions can proceed toward stable nuclides with growing mass defect — more atomic binding energy — in a slower phase where the additional neutron gives a certain margin ahead.

 

 

Neon plateau to Silicon plateau

When further neutrons must be added to fend off the divergence toward a Jumbo Proton condition, the nucleus enters into the state phase three, the Neon plateau. From this point — the n-Z(n-p)-n nuclide type — the mass defects growth can occupy an even larger interval before the nucleus enters stage phase four, the Silicon-Sulfur plateau. From that point more nuclear neutron structure addition is demanded to bring (Planck) ring stability to the nucleus

— the 2n-Z(n-p)-2n type nuclides. And as earlier, this fill promotes an even longer stage and with even lower mass defect increase before the nucleus enters the final Calcium plateau.

 

 

Calcium plateau

From here the nucleus receives a further neutron dilutive fill in guaranteeing a stable nuclide. We now see the 3n-Z(n-p)-3n nuclide type appear mixed with the 2n-Z(n-p)-2n type from the previous plateau, and with certain neutron additions. This phase then continues finally up to the iron top where the 18 limit is reached by the nuclide individual 26Fe56 (HIGESTmD) — composition 15n-26p-15n, analogously 2n-26(n-p)-2n. That finalizes the basic nuclear synthesis.

 

HeavyGroup:

The heavy nuclide group’s Certification

The heavy nuclide group

Continuing the atomic production — exothermal (heat and light emission of the work mass-energy waste in building heavier from lighter) — from the basic ideal top mass number 60 highest atomic mass defect point, demands a presence of specifically neutron rich low mass beta active nuclides, type:

 2He6, 3Li8 and 6C16.

Such exothermal provisions are only possible in a — TNED deduced (CAP) — situation where atomic production begins from a maximum dense celestial body of neutrons. With their decay — fastest where the gravitational potential is the lowest, that is in the body center — close an tight fusion rings are asserted to bring out heavier atoms from the lighter. Beginning from a celestial core with a such iron end atomic produced center (no significant net neutron quote in the center), heavier atoms beginning from neutron decay need a farther distance (slower decay) from the center, securing a higher rate of neutron quote — and thereby a much more diverse possible set of also the most heavy atomic products. However, the fusions agents into the heavier nuclides (A>60) depend on momentarily produced beta active atoms of the above suggested type: neutron structure rich nuclei who can complete the near fusion processes in building the most heavy possible atoms.

 

 

 

 

This is readily physically energetically impossible unless all those atoms — during the very short moment of time in the celestial body’s fusion phase — far less than a second — are collected in one and the same massive (primary neutron) body. Sharing the (enormous) massive energy release during the (short) collective fusion phase, guarantees that the momentarily (normally fast) decaying beta active nuclides will WAIT on their decays — momentarily FED by the environmental exothermally fusion emitting mass-energy equivalents. This high surge energy throughput delay will provides the necessary standard relatable energy calculable support in building the heavier atoms. The fusion processes as such, are guaranteed as long as the involved fusion ring agents are situated inside each others nuclear potential barriers (meaning: inside each others circumscribed spheres) — where the close nuclear ±e structure sucks and takes care of the spontaneous fusions.

 

See further from

Lighter to Heavier.

 

WAFO

 

BaseGroupMassNumbers: EllipticWaveEquation: — up to mass number 60 — WAFO

 

NeutronSquareSolutions

THE GENERALIZED WAVE-ELLIPTIC FORMULA

 

The originally 2003 compiled Elliptic-Wave equation for the light atomic nuclide chart up to mass number 60 — see NuklidTab4A2023.ods TabellA

THE BASE GROUP MASS NUMBERS NEUTRAL ATOMIC MASS DEFECTS

— from the original works in MsWorks ¦ which Microsoft suddenly and abruptly denied computer access to after a rude Microsoft update on a Windows Vista computer (Aug2008) — supported by bought jurisdiction.

” .. the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world”. World Jurisdiction Enterprise. Mississippi 1820.

Unless there are other here unknown candidates:

ONLY WAY TO DEDUCE EXPERIMENTALLY CONCORDANT ATOMIC MASS VALUES IS TO TRACE THE ATOM’S ACTUAL FUSION TRACK FROM ITS SET OF ORIGINAL NEUTRONS and the two different nuclear structural types of ±e electric displacement:

the neutron nuclear structural n type and the proton nuclear structural p type

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  ..       | ¦ | ¦ | ¦ | ¦ | ¦ | ¦ | ¦ | ¦ | ¦ | ¦ | ¦  .. 

with all their possibly relatable combinations, see Nuclear STRUCTURE in related physics

— its trace of atomic mass defects, forming the foundation in building heavier from lighter

Mintrusion2008: Base

With the Microsoft 2008 intrusion into the pending work, also followed a blockade of a possible transfer code to other spread sheet programs (Microsoft EXCEL and its imitating OpenOfficeCalc). The Microsoft MsWORKS inhibited corresponding mod/REST operators had been compromised: Microsoft EXCEL has other routines. See describing example in EOOK — and some additional ”Microsoft EXCEL features” in the following text and cell code examples. Through these ”Microsoft modification” the MsWORKS original was blocked. Until the recent attempts (Aug2023) to find a solution, the work made no progress. This is the solution.

 

THE LIGHT atomic NUCLIDES

FROM A=1 TO A=60¦64

G0—isoA0 — BaseGroupMassNumbers — from Z

Basic Group — the group base mass number A for the given atomic number Z — valid up to Z=30, light nuclide chart only (Amax=64):

The role of Z here is only of an organizing manner, according to the basic observations on the Elliptic and wave coherences on the HOP experimental values

 

             A          = [2Z+Zmod2 + (Zdiv[17+ 5(1Zmod2)])(round[(Z8+Zmod2 )/ 2(6Zmod2)])]=A

                          + (1ζ6)(1)Zmod2(AZ)mod3 [1(Zmod3)div2]

ζ 6         = INT[1(abs[Z0/61] [Z0/61])/2]  ...................................  Zζ = .. ,111,101,91,81,71,60,50,40,30,20,10,00,–1–1,–2–1,–3–1, ..

OPEN OFFICE CALC SwedishVersion:

= HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/6-1)-(Z/6-1))/2)

 

A OPEN OFFICE CALC SwedishVersion = R3:

= 2*Z + REST(Z;2) + (HELTAL(Z/(17 + 5*(1-REST(Z;2)))))*(2*AVRUNDA((Z-8+REST(Z;2))/(2*(6-REST(Z;2)))))

+(1-HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/6-1)-(Z/6-1))/2))(1)^(REST(R2;2))*(REST(R3 - R2;3) * (1 - HELTAL(REST(R2;3)/2) ))

 

ALL IN ONE CELL ONLY:

= 2*Z+REST(Z;2)+(HELTAL(Z/(17+5*(1-REST(Z;2)))))*(2*AVRUNDA((Z-8+REST(Z;2))/(2*(6-REST(Z;2)))))

+((1-HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/7-1)-(Z/7-1))/2)))*(-1)^(REST(Z;2))*(REST((2*Z + REST(Z;2)+(HELTAL(Z/(17+5*

(1-REST(Z;2)))))*(2*AVRUNDA((Z-8+REST(Z;2))/(2*(6-REST(Z;2))))))-Z;3)*(1-HELTAL(REST(Z;3)/2)))

Proof:

NuklidTab4A2023.ods  Table4 —— verified ¦ Author’sREF: MPcKärnMatIIIa.doc 9Aug2003 —— algorithm: just the atomic number Z plus »integer selector algebra»

 

APART FROM THE BASE GROUP, THERE ARE FIVE MORE ISOTOPIC GROUPS:

 

 

NuklidTab4A2023.ods  TableA

 

 

How it did develop —

all based on and from the (2003) sudden discovery of the Neutron Square apparently universal paragon geometrical mathematics

on comparing atomic masses from known tables: elliptic equations, simple wave form adoptions — whole numbers selector algebra

 

(Swedish original ..)

Analysen visar att bestämningen av en nuklids massdefekt helt och hållet betingas av dess underliggande sammansättning, dess fusionsväg. Känner man denna och kan återföra nukliden på mera elementära grundnuklider får man en specifik massdefektsekvation.

..

Det innebär att hela nuklidkartan byggs upp som en händelse (som en organism som breder ut sig): varje nytt steg beror av sammansättningarna i föregående och kan beräknas om man känner nämnda. Av den anledningen, speciellt med tanke på grundnukliderna upp till Helium (första fasen) finns inte den typ av ”kärnekvation” som den moderna akademin försöker uppställa.

..

Man måste dela in nukliderna i olika grupper, en huvudgrupp med underliggande isotopgrupper som följer händelsevägen via växande massdefekt upp till Järntoppen. Därefter, från Järntoppen mot nuklidkartans slut, följer en annan typ av analys med avtagande massdefekt. Man måste emellertid också känna samtliga instabila (betaaktiva) nukliders massdefekter och hur de bildas innan en fullständig beskrivning kan ges. De betaaktiva nukliderna spelar nämligen en (delvis) stor roll i bildningen av de tyngre nukliderna.

   Men ingen sådan övergripande (betaaktiv) analys har ännu utförts i UniversumsHistoria (Okt2023).

   Hela nuklidkartan blir (alltså) en karta över hela den kosmiska händelsehistorien.

..

 

Mass number A generally for all basic nuclides (from the Helium reference) up to the Iron group (part of the original draft):

 

A           = A0  

+ AEvenFromCarboOddFromNitro

+ AcorrectionBelowCarboNitroPreference

 

             A          = [2Z+Zmod2

+ (Zdiv[17+ 5(1Zmod2)])(round[(Z8+Zmod2 )/ 2(6Zmod2)])]=A

                          + (1z 6)(1)Zmod2(AZ)mod3 [1(Zmod3)div2]

 

Author’sRef: MPcKärnMatIIIa.doc ¦ MPcKärnMat.doc ¦ MPcKärnMatII.doc

 

 

isoGROUP 1

G1— isoA

The actual isoA¦1-5 cell equations are written out as follows.

— What we know (related physics, NS solutions):

— There is no ”overload version” possibly defining the isotope mass numbers in a given atom — before, prior, that specific atom base nucleus has been made/specified.

   So, when the math to this analyze was first projected (from 2003), it had to be on »all the tabled stable isotopes together», in order for the author to have any the smallest chance in »luring out the hidden matrix». That is: all based on already existent atomic mass tables. Below is an illustrating extract of the actual providing data needed (the neutron square content) in order to succeed on the exercising quest.

 

isoGROUP 1

G1— isoA

 

A           = isoAJ

             + isoAU

             + isoAneon

:

AisoA1               = isoJ1

             + isoU1

             + isoAneon

 

isoJ1                 = (A+2)g10(1Z0mod2)

isoU1                = A(Zmod2) b[round([(Z7)/2]mod8/8)1]

isoAneon           = ζ1(1γ10)(Φ[(1+λ)Z + λ(1Amod2)] + (1λ))

b                        = (Zmod2)nollarViaJämna(round[(nHe+1)/4] 1)mod2 (INT[(nHemod7)/7+7/8])

nHE                  = (Z – 6 – Z0mod2)/2

Φ                      = INT[1(|a21| [a21])/2]  .........................................................       A|Φ=   11,41,61,90,101,121,151,161,190

a2                      = (Amod9)(Zmod9)  .........................................................................      A|a2=   11,48,618,90,105,1218,1542,1656,190

λ                        = INT[1(abs[Z0/031] [Z0/031])/2]  ........................................      Zλ = .. ,51,41,31,20,10,00,–10,–20, ..

ζ1                      = INT[1(abs[Z0/011] [Z0/011])/2]  ........................................      Zζ = .. ,51,41,31,21,11,00,–10,–20, ..

γ10                     = INT[1(abs[Z0/101] [Z0/101])/2]  .........................................     Zγ = .. ,111,101,90,80, .. ,20,10,00, ..

OpenOfficeCalc:

isoJ1                 = (A+2)*Gma10*(1-REST(Z0;2))

isoU1                = (A*REST(Z0;2)-AVRUNDA(REST(((REST(Z0;2)*(N24+0*REST((AVRUNDA((nHe+1)/4;0)-1);2))*HELTAL(OM(nHe<0;nHe;REST(nHe;7))/7+7/8))*(Z0-7)/2);8)/8;0)-1)*(REST(Z0;2)*(N24+0*REST((AVRUNDA((nHe+1)/4;0)-1);2))*HELTAL(OM(nHe<0;nHe;REST(nHe;7))/7+7/8))

 

N24              = OM(N25<0;N25; REST(N25;2)) ¦ the tricky MicrosoftEXCEL-OpenOffice cell code removal of the original MsMORKS mod operator consequence

N25              = (AVRUNDA((nHe+1)/4;0)-1)

                   = (AVRUNDA((((Z0-6-REST(Z0;2))/2)+1)/4;0)-1)

 

IT MEANS THAT VERY WELL IN MsWORKS 4.0 — BLOCKED FOR FURTHER WINDOWS USE BY MICROSOFT 2008 IN WINDOWS VISTA — WE CAN CALCULATE THE G1 A-VALUES from the Z inputs IF WE STILL HAVE A TYPE WINDOWS XP COMPUTER ALIVE accepting MsWORKS. — BUT HOWEVER NO SO DIRECTLY in Microsoft Excel and OpenOffice — »the Excel imitator». To do so also in these latter programs, we need to add the above N25 and N24 in two demanding separate cell rows. See the complete — but very lengthy — solution in last rank 5 below. See NuklidTab4A2023.ods Table4, Rows 2 and 3.

 

isoAneon           = Theta1*(1-Gma10)*(L10*((1+Lda)*Z0+Lda*(1-REST(A;2)))+1-Lda)

L10              = HELTAL(1-(ABS(K10-1)-(K10-1))/2)

K10              = REST(A;9)*REST(Z0;9)

isoAneon           = Theta1*(1-Gma10)*(HELTAL(1-(ABS(REST(A;9)*REST(Z0;9)-1)-(REST(A;9)*REST(Z0;9)-1))/2)*((1+Lda)*Z0+Lda*(1-REST(A;2)))+1-Lda)

                   = (HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/01-1)-(Z/01-1))/2))*(1-(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/10-1)-(Z/10-1))/2)))*(HELTAL(1-(ABS(REST(A;9)*REST(Z0;9)-1)-(REST(A;9)*REST(Z0;9)-1))/2)*((1+(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z0/3-1)-(Z0/3-1))/2)))*Z0+(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z0/3-1)-(Z0/3-1))/2))*(1-REST(A;2)))+1-(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z0/3-1)-(Z0/3-1))/2)))

b                        = 6-A

nHE              = (Z0-6-REST(Z0;2))/2

ΦFi              = HELTAL(1-(ABS((REST(A;9)*REST(Z0;9))-1)-((REST(A;9)*REST(Z0;9))-1))/2)

λLda             = HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z0/3-1)-(Z0/3-1))/2)

ζ1                      = HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/01-1)-(Z/01-1))/2) ¦ Theta1, i.e., Tzeta (ϑ not explicitly available 2003 in this production)

 

γ10                     = HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/10-1)-(Z/10-1))/2) ¦ Gma10

OpenOfficeCalc ¦ Tabell4 G1:

G1.1:

(A+2)*Gma10*(1-REST(Z0;2))+

(A*REST(Z0;2)-AVRUNDA(REST(((REST(Z0;2)*(N24)*HELTAL(OM(nHe<0;nHe;REST(nHe;7))/7+7/8))*(Z0-7)/2);8)/8;0)-1)*(REST(Z0;2)*(N24)*HELTAL(OM(nHe<0;nHe;REST(nHe;7))/7+7/8))+

Theta1*(1-Gma10)*(HELTAL(1-(ABS(REST(A;9)*REST(Z0;9)-1)-(REST(A;9)*REST(Z0;9)-1))/2)*((1+Lda)*Z0+Lda*(1-REST(A;2)))+1-Lda)

 

G1.2:

(A+2)*(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/10-1)-(Z/10-1))/2))*(1-REST(Z0;2))+

(A*REST(Z0;2)-AVRUNDA(REST(((REST(Z0;2)*(N24)*HELTAL(OM(((Z0-6-REST(Z0;2))/2)<0;((Z0-6-REST(Z0;2))/2);REST(((Z0-6-REST(Z0;2))/2);7))/7+7/8))*(Z0-7)/2);8)/8;0)-1)*(REST(Z0;2)*(N24)*HELTAL(OM(((Z0-6-REST(Z0;2))/2)<0;((Z0-6-REST(Z0;2))/2);REST(((Z0-6-REST(Z0;2))/2);7))/7+7/8))+

(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/01-1)-(Z/01-1))/2))*(1-(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/10-1)-(Z/10-1))/2)))*(HELTAL(1-(ABS(REST(A;9)*REST(Z0;9)-1)-(REST(A;9)*REST(Z0;9)-1))/2)*((1+(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z0/3-1)-(Z0/3-1))/2)))*Z0+(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z0/3-1)-(Z0/3-1))/2))*(1-REST(A;2)))+1-(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z0/3-1)-(Z0/3-1))/2)))

 

G1.3:

(A+2)*(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/10-1)-(Z/10-1))/2))*(1-REST(Z;2))+

(A*REST(Z;2)-AVRUNDA(REST(((REST(Z;2)*(N24)*HELTAL(OM(((Z-6-REST(Z;2))/2)<0;((Z-6-REST(Z;2))/2);REST(((Z-6-REST(Z;2))/2);7))/7+7/8))*(Z-7)/2);8)/8;0)-1)*(REST(Z;2)*(N24)*HELTAL(OM(((Z-6-REST(Z;2))/2)<0;((Z-6-REST(Z;2))/2);REST(((Z-6-REST(Z;2))/2);7))/7+7/8))+

(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/01-1)-(Z/01-1))/2))*(1-(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/10-1)-(Z/10-1))/2)))*(HELTAL(1-(ABS(REST(A;9)*REST(Z;9)-1)-(REST(A;9)*REST(Z;9)-1))/2)*((1+(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/3-1)-(Z/3-1))/2)))*Z+(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/3-1)-(Z/3-1))/2))*(1-REST(A;2)))+1-(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/3-1)-(Z/3-1))/2)))

 

G1.4:

(A+2)*(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/10-1)-(B5/10-1))/2))*(1-REST(B5;2))+

(A*REST(B5;2)-AVRUNDA(REST(((REST(B5;2)*(N24)*HELTAL(OM(((B5-6-REST(B5;2))/2)<0;((B5-6-REST(B5;2))/2);REST(((B5-6-REST(B5;2))/2);7))/7+7/8))*(B5-7)/2);8)/8;0)-1)*(REST(B5;2)*(N24)*HELTAL(OM(((B5-6-REST(B5;2))/2)<0;((B5-6-REST(B5;2))/2);REST(((B5-6-REST(B5;2))/2);7))/7+7/8))+

(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/01-1)-(B5/01-1))/2))*(1-(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/10-1)-(B5/10-1))/2)))*(HELTAL(1-(ABS(REST(A;9)*REST(B5;9)-1)-(REST(A;9)*REST(B5;9)-1))/2)*((1+(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/3-1)-(B5/3-1))/2)))*B5+(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/3-1)-(B5/3-1))/2))*(1-REST(A;2)))+1-(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/3-1)-(B5/3-1))/2)))

 

G1.5: only variables: B5=Z and B2

(B4+2)*(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/10-1)-(B5/10-1))/2))*(1-REST(B5;2))+

(B4*REST(B5;2)-AVRUNDA(REST(((REST(B5;2)*(B2)*HELTAL(OM(((B5-6-REST(B5;2))/2)<0;((B5-6-REST(B5;2))/2);REST(((B5-6-REST(B5;2))/2);7))/7+7/8))*(B5-7)/2);8)/8;0)-1)*(REST(B5;2)*(B2)*HELTAL(OM(((B5-6-REST(B5;2))/2)<0;((B5-6-REST(B5;2))/2);REST(((B5-6-REST(B5;2))/2);7))/7+7/8))+

(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/01-1)-(B5/01-1))/2))*(1-(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/10-1)-(B5/10-1))/2)))*(HELTAL(1-(ABS(REST(B4;9)*REST(B5;9)-1)-(REST(B4;9)*REST(B5;9)-1))/2)*((1+(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/3-1)-(B5/3-1))/2)))*B5+(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/3-1)-(B5/3-1))/2))*(1-REST(B4;2)))+1-(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/3-1)-(B5/3-1))/2)))

It works.

ALL THE ABOVE IN THE FIRST ATOMIC NUMBER CELL. THEN COPIED FOR EACH NEW CELL WITH EXTENDING COLUMN PREFERENCE UP TO Z=28, MASS NUMBER 60.

— It is amazing that OpenOffice can handle this — because OpenOffice in other tracks is sometimes readily horrible. .. cannot write in capitals .. program insists on converting to literals, or vice versa, in forming constant names .. suggests .. cannot leave the user alone STOP SURVEILLING SPYING AND MAKING CHANGES TO MY WRIT ..  shut the fuck up .. .. we are trembling on the brink .. cannot select last color .. cannot read bookmarks backwards .. looses text caret position in text documents .. why was I born .. COPYING an OpenOfficeCalc to a new document it is IMPOSSIBLE to get rid of the Original’s 178 Constants by erasing That Table, these must be erased manually, one by one, through repeated several button clickings .. why not let us die directly ..  and when pressing Ctrl+F3 in finding out what Constants are there, no key shortcut exists to get into the actual Box: must Click to get there .. no single keyboard operations, no sir .. but the Design is OK .. don’t touch me .. so in time we learn how to escape the OpenOffice Orcs .. taking care not to be too creative ..

— On the other hand:

THE OpenOffice FREEWARE AT PRESENT 2023 IS APPARENTLY THE BEST HUMANITY CAN OFFER.

Yes, we CAN get things done .. but OpenOfficeProgram Man .. you’ve got to fix the engine .. jises ..

   The other 4 groups are somewhat simpler.

The70: BGMN

70 stable isotopes

 

NuklidTab4A2023.ods  Table4 —— verified  mapping ¦ the five atomic group finalized with their corresponding atomic and mass numbers

 

OPEN OFFICE HAS NO HERE KNOWN FUNCTION BY WHICH TO LEAVE A CELL BLANK IF ITS RESULT IS IRRELEVANT to the author: OPEN OFFICE DEMANDS A VALUE 0. SO TO SHOW THE RESULTS IN ONLY VALID POSITIONS, NO OTHER WRITS, WE MUST MAKE A NEW TABLE USING THE CELL CODE FOR EACH POSITION: if B2 = 0 then ShowNothing: Sw.: Om(B2=0;””).

AND THE MOST STRANGE OF ALL IN OPEN OFFICE: IF ANOTHER OPEN OFFICE DOCUMENTS IS OPENED with the first showing its cell code in the inbox THAT TEXT DISAPPEARS ON OPENING THE NEW OPEN OFFICE DOCUMENT.

It just proves on the many examples in OpenOffice, that IT is a more or less MicrosoftOffice2000 Imitation — with SOMETIMES extremely careless and left out functionality. Microsoft Office (2000) has no such.

— The OpenOffice case: Most likely poor partial functionality because the programming personnel cannot solve the programming functions: If they could, there would be no problems. Meaning: it is the programming language — or the programming person not understanding what a computer is for: the functionality is anyway incomplete. Say I’m wrong.

— But the design is OK.

 

A           = isoJ1

             + isoU1

             + isoAneon

AisoA1               = (A+2)γ10(1Z0mod2)

             + A(Zmod2) b[round([(Z7)/2]mod8/8)1]

             + ζ1(1γ10)(F[(1+λ)Z + λ(1Amod2)] + (1λ)) ¦ A = mass number in group isoA0, the base group — the structure extends from there:

 

NuklidTab4A2023.ods  TableA

 

 

 

isoGROUP 2

G2— isoA2

A           = isoJ2

             + isoU2

             + isoN2

 

— IT LOOKS LIKE A RAIL YARD WITH SETS, CARTS, SWITCHES, longer or shorter trails, SIMPLE WHOLE NUMBER ORGANIZATIONS ..

 

isoJ2                 = γ16(1 – γ27)(1 Z0mod2)(2Z0 + round[(2Z0 + 1)/10]abs(1 – 2Z0mod32) + [1 – 2Z0mod32])

isoU2                = Z0(18/88(1 – ζ9)

isoN2                = ζ10(1 – ζ15)(1 – Z0mod2)(2Z0 + 1)

γ16                     = INT[1(abs[Z0/161] [Z0/161])/2]  ...................................           Zζ = .. ,191,181,171,161,150,140, .. ,20,10,00, ..

γ27                     INT[1(abs[Z0/271] [Z0/271])/2]  ...................................           Zζ = .. ,291,281,271,260,250,240, .. ,20,10,00, ..

ζ 8                      = INT[1(abs[Z0/081] [Z0/081])/2]  ...................................           Zζ = .. ,111,101,91,81,70,60,50,40,30,20,10,00, ..

ζ 9                      = INT[1(abs[Z0/091] [Z0/091])/2]  ...................................           Zζ = .. ,111,101,91,80,70,60,50,40,30,20,10,00, ..

ζ 10                    = INT[1(abs[Z0/101] [Z0/101])/2]  ...................................           Zζ = .. ,111,101,90,80,70,60,50,40,30,20,10,00, ..

ζ 15                    = INT[1(abs[Z0/151] [Z0/151])/2]  ...................................           Zζ = .. ,171,161,151,140,130,120, .. ,20,10,00, ..

OpenOfficeCalc:

isoJ2                 = Gma16*(1-Gma27)*(1-REST(Z;2))*(2*Z + AVRUNDA((2*Z+1)/10;0)-(ABS(1-REST(2*Z;32))+(1-REST(2*Z;32))))

isoU2                = Z0*(18/8)*(Theta8*(1-Theta9))

isoN2                = Theta10*(1-Theta15)*(1-REST(Z;2))*(2*Z+1)

γ16                     = HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/16-1)-(Z/16-1))/2)

 

γ27                     = HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/27-1)-(Z/27-1))/2)

 

ζ8                 = HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/08-1)-(Z/08-1))/2) ¦ Theta8, i.e., Tzeta (ϑ not explicitly available 2003 in this production)

 

ζ9                 = HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/09-1)-(Z/09-1))/2)

 

ζ10                = HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/10-1)-(Z/10-1))/2)

 

ζ15                = HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/15-1)-(Z/15-1))/2)

OpenOfficeCalc ¦ Tabell4 G2:

(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/16-1)-(B5/16-1))/2))*(1-(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/27-1)-(B5/27-1))/2)))*(1-REST(B5;2))*(2*B5 + AVRUNDA((2*B5+1)/10;0)-(ABS(1-REST(2*B5;32))+(1-REST(2*B5;32))))+B5*(18/8)*((HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/8-1)-(B5/8-1))/2))*(1-(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/9-1)-(B5/9-1))/2))))+(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/10-1)-(B5/10-1))/2))*(1-(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/15-1)-(B5/15-1))/2)))*(1-REST(B5;2))*(2*B5+1)

 

 

isoGROUP 3

G3— isoA3

A           = isoJ3

 

isoJ3                 = g16(1 – g27)(round([Z0mod2]/4)(2Z0 + abs[round(2Z0/10) – 7])(1 – Z0mod2)

γ16                     = INT[1(abs[Z0/161] [Z0/161])/2]  .............................     Zγ =      ,191,181,171,161,150, .. ,50,40,30,20,10,00 ..

γ27                     = INT[1(abs[Z0/271] [Z0/271])/2]  .............................     Zγ =      ,291,281,271,260,250, .. ,50,40,30,20,10,00 ..

OpenOfficeCalc:

isoJ3                 = Gma16*(1-Gma27)*(AVRUNDA(REST(Z;6)/4;0)*(2*Z+ABS(AVRUNDA(2*Z/10;0)-7)))*(1-REST(Z;2))

γ16                     = HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/16-1)-(Z/16-1))/2)

 

γ27                     = HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/27-1)-(Z/27-1))/2)

OpenOfficeCalc ¦ Tabell4 G3:

(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/16-1)-(B5/16-1))/2))*(1-(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/27-1)-(B5/27-1)/2)))*(AVRUNDA(REST(B5;6)/4;0)*(2*B5+ABS(AVRUNDA(2*B5/10;0)-7)))*(1-REST(B5;2))

 

 

isoGROUP 4

G4— isoA4

A           = isoJ4

 

isoJ4                 = g20(1 – g25)(1 – Z0/2mod2)(2Z0 + 6)(1 – Z0mod2)

γ20                     = INT[1(abs[Z0/201] [Z0/201])/2]  ...................................           Zζ = .. ,231,221,211,201,190,180, .. ,20,10,00, ..

γ25                     = INT[1(abs[Z0/251] [Z0/251])/2]  ...................................           Zζ = .. ,281,271,261,251,240,230, .. ,20,10,00, ..

OpenOfficeCalc:

isoJ4             = Gma20*(1-Gma25)*((1-REST(Z/2;2))*(2*Z+6))*(1-REST(Z;2))

γ20                     = HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/20-1)-(Z/20-1))/2)

 

γ25                     = HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/25-1)-(Z/25-1))/2)

 

OpenOfficeCalc ¦ Tabell4 G4:

(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/20-1)-(Z/20-1))/2))*(1-(HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/25-1)-(Z/25-1))/2)))*((1-REST(Z/2;2))*(2*Z+6))*(1-REST(Z;2))

 

 

isoGROUP 5

G5— isoA5

A           = isoJ5

 

isoJ5                 = g20(1 – g29)round(INT[(Z0mod12)/4]/2)(2B50 + 2[1 + abs(HELTAL[2Z0/7] – 8)])(1 – Z0mod2)

γ20                     = INT[1(abs[Z0/201] [Z0/201])/2]  ...................................           Zζ = .. ,231,221,211,201,190,180, .. ,20,10,00, ..

γ29                     = INT[1(abs[Z0/291] [Z0/291])/2]  ...................................           Zζ = .. ,321,311,301,291,280,270, .. ,20,10,00, ..

OpenOfficeCalc:

isoJ5                 = Gma20*(1-Gma29)*AVRUNDA(HELTAL(REST(Z;12)/4)/2;0)*(2*Z + (2*(1+ABS(HELTAL(2*Z/7)-8))))*(1-REST(Z;2))

γ20                     = HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/20-1)-(Z/20-1))/2)

 

γ29                     = HELTAL(1-(ABS(Z/29-1)-(Z/29-1))/2)

OpenOfficeCalc ¦ Tabell4 G5:

(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/20-1)-(B5/20-1))/2))*(1-(HELTAL(1-(ABS(B5/29-1)-(B5/29-1))/2)))*AVRUNDA(HELTAL(REST(B5;12)/4)/2;0)*(2*B5 + (2*(1+ABS(HELTAL(2*B5/7)-8))))*(1-REST(B5;2))

 

MintrusionArt:

THE MICROSOFT INTRUSION (Aug2008) led to so much (sad and weary) trouble. And it was such a release when (at last Aug2023) the light came through,. The solution here deserves all thorough attention on that dramatic history’s compressed content:

 

»Fuck you Microsoft2008», the galactic leading prohibiter of a perfectly functioning MsWorks spread sheet program Aug2008 on Windows Vista: Microsoft2008, destroyer of MsWORKS mod operator, vandalized in Microsoft EXCEL and so apparently imitated equally by the free OpenOfficeCalc.

— As it so seems, the aim was and is to promote a deeper insight into the world business inducement of appearing to be the best of the best in the world of computer programming science:

 

REST(-A;B) ¦ -A mod B

MsWORKS ¦ Division algorithm ¦ Windows Calculator latest W7 ¦ Borland’s Pascal:

–A

Microsoft (prohibiting further Windows use of MsWORKS from 2008)EXCEL¦OpenOfficeCalc:

+A

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

HELTAL(-0.99)

MsWORKS ¦ Division algorithm ¦ Windows Calculator latest W7 ¦ Borland’s Pascal

0

Microsoft (prohibiting further Windows use of MsWORKS from 2008)EXCEL¦OpenOfficeCalc:

–1

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

 

Microsoft Enterprise:

 

— If you cannot handle mathematics on the computer level:

— What can you handle?

”Restart your computer or we will do it for you”.

  Where is world jurisdiction

— allowing such raging human right intrusion partying and feasting?

Not one word human right recognition.

 

TNED.

 

WE, the customers, bough the Windows HUMANITY DEVELOPING products during a period of several decades, BROUGHT the company UP, buying merchandise for tens of thousands of dollars PER PERSON. How were we met? A spit in the face, a foot in the back, vandalized text, dictating, overriding, private computer settings, a controlling and demanding authority of We-Own-You attitudes — and We have the Deciding power over your computer.

”Pick a time”.

”Fuck you asshole”.

Muzzled. Handcuffed. Bandaged.

”Let’s kick off ..”.

”Was this helpful?”.

”Like us”.

Toying humanity. Openly. Freely.

Muzzled. Handcuffed. Bandaged.

Tagged Cattle.

— Why, and how, in the world do humans take such shit?

— Or.. They don’t. But no one is allowed — deeply afraid — to say it.

 

.. the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world

 

— Where is world jurisdiction — other than bought bitches to serve Microsoft Enterprise human right intrusions?

Not one word human right recognition.

 

Talk about lawlessness and anarchy. It is gushing.

 

Microsoft:

 

— Offer fully freeware Microsoft OFFICE fully detailed to every single born human being on Earth, from here to eternity, at no cost,

to be used freely as Pen, Rubber and Paper. Remove the brakes, and let humanity DEVELOP on humanity’s provisions and conditions, not Microsoft’s.

Stop killing humanity.

Stop Human Trafficking.

 

IT IS NOT ALLOWED TO USE HUMANITY FOR PROFITING PURPOSES, NOT BY BODY, NOT BY MIND, INTENTIONALLY OR NOT, NOT AT ALL. ALL FORMS AND TYPES OF SLAVERY SHALL BE FORBIDDEN.

 

Where is world jurisdiction? Where is United Nations?

United Nations explicit formulation in UDHR10Dec1948 — and present Trafficking.

 

Slavery (Swedish classic encyclopedic) definition, five words:

— A state of personal noFree.

(Sw., ett tillstånd av personlig ofrihet).

 

 

Human right recognition. Microsoft. GOOGLE. Police. Prosecutor. Court. World Business Enterprise. Not one word. Not a sound. Not a hint.

Where not heard: violence is gushing.

 

.. the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world

 

 

BaseGroupMassNumbers

 

modREST2008: 10Sep2023

 

Regaining the mod and Rest operators in Microsoft’s New EXCEL and — the imitating — Open Office Calc

— NOTE: MICROSOFT Windows Calculator still existed on Windows 7 y2015, same as the old MsWORKS mathematical division algorithm mod operator:

— Not in Windows 10 — several reports on failed calculator in W10 — many cookies blocking web sites inhibits further free information on the W10 calculator subject: Still not one word human right recognition. No mentioning. Not a sound. Not a hint. Just interrupting. Blocking. Demanding cookies consent.

AFTER THE 2008 MICROSOFT REMOVAL/banning OF FURTHER WINDOWS COMPUTER USE OF MsWORKS

CRUSHING THE CONTINUED COMPILATION WORKS ON THE NEUTRON SQUARE SOLUTIONS RESULTS IN ATOMIC MASSES DETERMINATION

 

 

2003—10Sep2023 REVISITING THE NEUTRON SQUARE MATHEMATICS  

The deuced mathematics to the Light Nuclide Group — up to mass number 60

——————————————————————————————————————

This following was the simple spread sheet calculus code we failed (TNEDa0EOOK) to create a corresponding transfer expression for in OpenOfficeCalc (and MicrosoftEXCEL):

 

 

The original (2008) in MsWORKS NuklidTab4.wps:

 

Rest(A;B)

BORLAND’S DELPHI PASCAL: A mod B

 

for the case of A less than zero (nHe)

 

Rest(-1;2)

 

IN MsWORKS (blocked 2008+ by Microsoft Windows Vista from further computer use)

— AND IN BORLAND’S PASCAL DELPHI CODE, the mod operator 

as derived in basic mathematics from the DIVISION ALGORITHM

it reads

 

= -1

 

In OPEN OFFICE and MICROSOFT EXCEL  it presents the result:

 

= 1

 

— Why?. Because in Microsoft’s standard Windows Calculator — latest Windows 7 — the mod operator has the same status as the above mentioned MsWORKS, Borland Pascal, General Mathematics, basic deduced division algorithm.

 

AND WE SHOULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS OPPORTUNITY TO ALSO UNDERLINE FURTHER IN OPEN OFFICE Swedish Version Here THE STRANGEST OF ALL mathematics CALCULUS PROGRAMMING FEATURE:

 

 

OPEN OFFICE ¦ MICROSOFT EXCEL:

Heltal( 0.99)   ¦ =  0                          INT( 0.99) =    0 ¦ correct

Heltal(-0.99)   ¦ = -1                          INT(-0.99)  = -1 ¦ incorrect

 

 

ONLY PERSONNEL THAT  is occupied by  DO NOT CARE MUCH ABOUT ELSE THAN PROFIT CAN DO THAT. Say. Do correct. No serious scientific. Intelligence is still OK. Problem is: low on moral.

— » Please Refill. Follow Instructions .. ».

 

No PHYSICS — AND MATHEMATICS — DEVELOPS ON SUCH PROGRAMMING SKILLS- RESULTS.

(It smells rotting brains all over the place ..).

 

The reason why Microsoft — apparently after MsWORKS ¦ after Windows 95 — did lose its nerve and fell into other inducements, is not known here, except for the apparent possibility of leaving the company to less educated.

 

correctly related mathematics — for developing physics purposes in explicit:

 

Heltal(±0.99) ¦ =  0                                     INT(±0.99)  =    0

 

The INT integer operator takes the integer part of the argument

— an: makes no operation or modification on the argument,

   independent of sign = direction.

IN 2008 MICROSOFT EXCLUDED ALL USE OF MsWORKS — WINDOWS VISTA — AFTER AN UNANNOUNCED UPDATE, WHICH THE COMPANY REFUSED TO HELP REMOVE SO THAT WE COULD CONTINUE TO USE MsWORKS SPREAD SHEET PROGRAM.

Microsoft blocked further use. An abrupt interference in and a direct attack on our work.

— See also The Microsoft LIST. The great interest 2008+ from Microsoft to educate humanity.

 

 

NuklidTab4A2023.ods TableA From NuklidTab4.wks 2008 — finally solved for OpenOffice and Microsoft EXCEL

 

So .. what has all this to do with presenting details in nuclear physics? Explain.

 

THIS WAS THE BOTTLENECK WE COULD NOT SOLVE BEFORE — in translating the excellent MsWORKS NuklidTab4.wks to a corresponding OpenOffice — and Microsoft Excel — spread sheet code:

 

The MsWORKScalc original — during the actual work around 2008:

 

SwedishVersion

REST((AVRUNDA((nHe+1)/4;0)-1);2)

English:

REST((ROUND     ((nHe+1)/4;0)-1);2)

 

Namely for the case where nHe becomes = –2;

See BaseGroupMassNumbers:

— if not properly handled according to the deduced mathematics

the division algorithm —1mod2 = —1 which Microsoft removed from use 2008 and replaced as exemplified above with a +1, then also apparently adopted by other (OpenOffice) impressed programmers —

the overall result crashes (like the ”Error41” in the movie PayCheck, Ben Affleck 2003: perfect machine — blocked from use).

 

The solution .. finally:

SOLUTION IN OPEN OFFICE (English) — as tested and verified:

 

IF(nHe<0 ; nHe ; Rest(nHe;2))

.. a separate context breaching type of explaing atomic physics language ..

 

Explain ..

PART OF the WHOLE INTENTION BEHIND THE DEDUCED NUCLEAR/ATOMIC PHYSICS WAS TO USE ONLY WHOLE NUMBERS — PROVING THAT ATOMIC MASSES THROUGH THE NEUTRON SQUARE INDEED CAN BE DEDUCED LIKE A RAIL YARD WITH POINTS AND SWITCHES DELIMITING NUMBERS OF ALLOWED CARTS, VACANCIES, WHEN AND HOW TO SWITCH FROM ONE PART TO ANOTHER, BASED ON THE ADVISED NEUTRON SQUARE BASIC GEOMETRY AND ITS INHERITED ELLIPTIC/wave EQUATIONS.

Now detailed in BaseGroupMassNumbers.

 

Type (the Division Algorithm deduced mod operator: A mod B = subtract B from A until rest is <B:

if A<0 and B>0 the operation is locked on rest = A<0)

 

Rest(-A;2) = -A

-A  mod  2 = -A

 

THE APPENDING WINDOWS 7 OPERATING SYSTEM CALCULATOR HAS A mod OPERATOR:

   it works perfectly the same as the concordant division algorithm,

   but not in Microsoft EXCEL —

   and not its imitating OpenOfficeCalc.

 

 

a STRICT NUMERICAL solution in OpenOfficeCalc looks like this (detailed ex: MproblemSolved):

 

 

INT(√1+nHe/|nHe|) → +nHe = 0 ¦ –nHe = 1

THE SQUARE ROOT OPERATOR ALWAYS TAKES THE SQUARE DIAGONAL,

AND THE INTEGER OF THE SQUARE DIAGONAL IS ALWAYS THE SQUARE SIDE 1

INTEGER(ROOT(1+nHe/ABS(nHe))

      [HELTAL   (ROT  (1+nHe/ABS(nHe))]     → +nHe = 0 ¦ –nHe = 1

(1 – [HELTAL   (ROT  (1+nHe/ABS(nHe))])  → +nHe = 1 ¦ –nHe = 0

MsWORKS — Borland’sDelphi

Rest(nHe;2)

=

continue ..

 

 

SWrSep2023:

SWEDISH REFLECTED — steady growing interest in preserving biodiversity and caring for universal animal rights: It is such a joy;

Tala om att stänga vägen för mänsklighetens naturliga naturvetenskapliga utveckling:

   För ändamålet och tillfället: Att få bedriva affärer — som tillvarons allra högsta enda mål

   av DRIFT. Inte plan. Inte avsiktligt.

— Enbart genom ett girighetsfall. Egobegär. Dess euforiska domäner leder sinnet in på vägar som täcker för allt annat.

Mänskligheten får inte tillgång till Resurserna — copyrightägda juridiskt köpta kärringar skyddar hela verksamheten: lag. Den mänskliga historiens i särklass värsta huggsexa.

— H. Ugga:

— Vad har du för utbildning?

The foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.

 

— DE BLIR SKITFÖRBANNADE. NÄR DERAS VÄRDERINGSLUSTA AVTÄCKS FÖR DEN SKITIGA AVGRUND DEN ÄR, UPPRESER SIG PÖBELN OCH KRÄVER KORSFÄSTELSE.

— I sinnlig bemärkelse. Inte ett enda vettigt ord. Inget människorättsligt igenkännande. Inte ett pip. Tvärt om. Hugg och slag, lydnad och bestraffning. Ingen utbildning.

— OCH MAN UNDRAR: VILKEN SKITAKTIGHET ÄR DET EGENTLIGEN SOM STÅR ALLRA HÖGST?

— Är det att avliva  en obekväm, rent fysiskt? Eller är det att häva ur sig sådana elakheter mot offret, rent verbalt, att offret begår självmord —— enbart för att slippa vidare se utseendet på kräket?

 

 

Inte ett ord MänniskoRätt. Inte ett pip. ”.. varje individ och varje organ i samhället ..”. Befolkningen undanhålls kunskaperna.

Det är inget fel på intelligensen. Problemet: låg moralisk nivå: Lydnad och bestraffning. Ingen utbildning. Ingen undervisning.

Urlåg ordning — allt avgörs genom flest gillapoäng. Ingen resonerande, relaterande, beskrivande och förklarande förmåga. Lydnad och bestraffning.

 

 

 

continued;

 

[HELTAL(ROT  (1+nHe/ABS(nHe))] *nHe + (1 – [HELTAL(ROT  (1+nHe/ABS(nHe))])*Rest(nHe;2)

MicrosoftEXCEL — OpenOfficeCALC.

IF(nHe<0 ; nHe ; Rest(nHe;2))

MicrosoftEXCEL — OpenOfficeCALC.

— Microsoft — after MsWORKS 2008 — is definitely not mathematically educated. No way. But, please: do disclaim: show examples.

— Breaking, Hacking, Chopping.

— ”Restart your computer, or we will do it for you”. Free open jurisdictional certified experimentation enterprise on humanity mind manipulation and decision.

 

NuklidTab4A2023.ods TableA From NuklidTab4.wks 2008 — finally solved for OpenOffice and Microsoft EXCEL

BaseGroupMassNumbers

ALL STABLE ISOTOPES UP TO ATOMIC NUMBER 27 — max mass number 60 — the NeutronSquare horizontal square side scale

 

 

The population is stranded on a culture where it is only allowed to use 1% of the brains capacity ..

Microsoft Enterprise alternative (C++) HighIQ solutions?

Who in this universe would understand a STRUCTURE of

 

IF A>B AND C .. while K AND not D in .. where IF L=E AND ..

 

instead of THE MUCH MORE VIEWABLE AND GRASPABLE TYPE

 

λ                        = INT[1(abs[Z0/031] [Z0/031])/2]  ........................................      Zλ = .. ,51,41,31,20,10,00,–10,–20, ..

ζ1                      = INT[1(abs[Z0/011] [Z0/011])/2]  ........................................      Zζ = .. ,51,41,31,21,11,00,–10,–20, ..

γ10                     = INT[1(abs[Z0/101] [Z0/101])/2]  .........................................     Zγ = .. ,111,101,90,80, .. ,20,10,00, ..

 

Meaning:

— A regular rail-yard system with (many trains, ranks, of) whole numbers and defined flipping and flopping relays has (supreme) a more explaining overviewing power than any other (here) known method.

 

See all the details in

BaseGroupMassNumbers.

 

 

modREST2008

 

HIGHESTmD:

 

Related physics meets established physics on atomic nuclear presentations

HIGHEST SCORED MASS DEFECT CONTEST

THE PREFERENCES ARE SWITCHED true 1432 against untrue 3241 unless a more thorough explanation exists:

— What we know: atomic mass and its properties cannot be described solely from the point of view of nuclear properties. The electron mass must be included.

 

 

HIGHEST SCORED MASS DEFECT — COMPARING ATOMIC WITH NUCLEAR: ATOMIC IS THE CLEAR WINNER

— The Table1 exerpt below compares mass defect values in electron masses (1me = 0.511 MeV) between

atomic mass defect mD(atomic)  = (1 – U/Amn)/me and

nuclear mass defect mD(nuclear) = (AmnZv – U)/me ¦ FM1975 s124sp2ö ”ΔM = ZMp + NMn – Mnuc” where

U = m(ATOMexperimentallyMeasured)/u(m[6C12/12]=1.66033 t27 KG) ¦ HOP1967 ¦ BerkeleyNational 2003 ¦ Nist/Codata 2005

A mass number

Z atomic number — nuclear charge, atom’s electron mass charge

mn = 1.0086652000u

me = 0.0005485982u

v = mnm(1H1=1.007825200u) = 0.00084000000000u

 

mD(atomic)  = (1 – U/Amn)/me

apparently COMPARING NUCLEAR completely unknown in modern corridors

Never18: HIGHESTmD

Captial18e

Never @18

Highest mass defect atoms — COMPARING ESTABLISHED AND RELATED ATOMIC AND NUCLEAR PHYSICS

18Sep2023 — enhanced and more detailed version from Nov2007 — exact values depends on chosen constants

 

NuklidTab4B2023.ods Table1

The difference: Nuclear mass defect  (AmnZv – U)/me uses A Z U. Atomic mass defect (1 – U/Amn)/me uses only A U.

THE ATOMIC MASS DEFECT SOLUTION IN NEUTRON SQUARE HAS ONLY ONE BASIC EllipticTrigonometricHyperbolic form: mD = 6 + (1/5)√  60² — (60 — [ A–K]²)/E  see NSsolutions

Compare The rZ results from Atomic Nucleus in related physics:

   atomic/nuclear mass and nuclear radius have no space metric connection to nuclear charge —

neutron basics: the neutron decays to an atom; the neutron has no (significant) nuclear charge.

   mass — gravitation — and charge — heat and light, electricity and magnetism — does not connect.

COMPARE The Related Physics Deduction of The Electric Charge Q —— no direct mass connection: Q² = (m/R)(A/dT); Q²/m = A/RdT; m = Q²RdT/A = mA/RdT × RdT/A = m. No light E=hf connection.

   light does not connect kinetics [Light’s Liberty Clause].

See explaining details in Proton Radius and Atomic Nucleus.

U = m(atom — from mass spectroscopic experimental measures)/u —

older (1960+) ”atomic weight”, present (2023) ”relative atomic mass”.

In UniverseHistory: just U you [ = Real Weighable Mass/u].

u = 1.66033 t27 KG (the Dalton unit), = m(6C12)/12 — different sources in different epochs have different u.

 

COMPARE WIKIPEDIA, (Atomic mass):

 

  At the peak of binding energy, nickel-62 is the most tightly bound nucleus (per nucleon), followed by iron-58 and iron-56.[19]”,

WIKIPEDIA Nuclear binding energy curve (19Sep2023)

 

 

 

The present science community is not aware of any other preference than the already present established:

— ”Atomic mass defect” is not a scientific community established term — no such article in Wikipedia.

 

———————————————

ORIGINAL Nov2007:  IronTOP ¦ ComparingMAC ¦ Formula ¦ Atomic Nucleus — Jul2023¦ ProtonRADIUS 

 

CompHmD: HIGHESTmD

Further comparing examples and sections

COMPARE again THE CONCEPTUAL DESCRIPTION on atomic mass defect, the table above:

 

IRON 26Fe5617.759 is the strongest built atom that needed the highest working energy waste to build, correspondingly the hardest most energetically demanding atom to restore on its original bricks, followed by Nickel 28Ni6217.748, 28Ni6017.744 and again Iron 26Fe5817.738.

 

The population is apparently a related victim of a too meager developed terminology in atomic and nuclear physics. We find the exact same order of business in comparing from the more regular equations

 

atomic  (AmN – U)/A

nuclear (AmN – U – Zv)/A

 

 

NuklidTab4C2023.ods TabellB A1+

 

Introducing ”Z” transfers values to nuclear mass defects — A LOWER ORDER OF STRONGEST most wasted mass energy work on its building BINDING ATOMIC ENERGY.

 

Iron it is.

 

See also (Sw) the Odd and Even Nuclide Groups — ending on IRON (from zero neutron quote, related), the (CAP) reason why all primary celestial bodies develop an iron core center.

 

See also further in

FAMQ ¦ FIBAPO ¦ DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ATOMIC AND NUCLEAR ¦ Clarifying the U equation

unless already familiar — related.

:

Introducing ”Z” in the calculations only decreases the maximum atomic strength.

— »Well .. I give a shit about atomic. I’m just interested in nuclear».

 

Further exemplifying the different concepts

THE COMPARING NUCLEARDIFFERENCE BETWEEN ATOMIC AND NUCLEAR

The comparing nuclear diagrams examples (internally calculated comparing values from experimentally measured atomic masses) further underlines the hazard and adventure in — generalizing and favoring — the idea and concept of ”nuclear binding energy”:

 

(FIBAPO): Unaware of the Neutron Square solutions, it was impossible to foresee any a coming conflict. Humanity was so involved in the industrial progress from the technical revolution. And it just evolved and grew. The wealth of the world ..

 

As developed during the 1900s, present (2023) academic quarters still uses a concept of type ”binding energy potential to the number of nucleons” (HOPweizQuote1967 below) as connected to our complex describing ”a good approximation to the true masses”.

 

’good approximation to true masses’

 

 

 

   HOPweizQuote1967

 

That is the whole story point in this presentation: the accurateness in presenting the (2003) discovered NS natural neutral atomic mass quantities. And the tools, the theories and their difficulties (compared) involved to reach a related explanation.

 

The present scientific community

The ’binding energy per nucleon’ concept relates to the classic modern academic idea of the atomic nucleus as enveloping freely inner (spinning) existent neutrons and protons. As commonly termed nucleons, these relates to a The present established explanation of the atomic nucleus and its physics.

 

The terminology ”Binding energy per nucleon” (Wikipedia, Atomic mass¦Nuclear binding energy¦Nuclear binding energy curve, Sep2023) is also the present (2023) only apparent (freely available) concept in our highly beloved Earth science community when discussing and presenting associated atomic mass subjects on a theoretical (calculable) basis.

 

In the atomic mass defect preference, table above HIGHESTmD,

 

  At the peak of binding energy, nickel-62 is the most tightly bound nucleus (per nucleon), followed by iron-58 and iron-56.[19]”,

WIKIPEDIA Nuclear binding energy curve (19Sep2023)

 

— The present science community is not aware of any other preference than the already present established.

— You know, the one type »We know everything»-standard. MustBuyBook.

 

”.. most tightly bound nucleus ..”

— »When we have removed all the Zv electrons from the atom, the most tight bound atomic nucleus is ..».

— There is no atomic nuclear physics understandable relatable reason in the statement.

 

Never18 IN RELATED ATOMIC NUCLEAR PHYSICS:

the leading maximum atomic tight binding energy top is reserved for iron-56 followed by nickel-62 and nickel-60: In concern of a general presentation of an Atomic species and its property, other preferences than an Atomic one will cause confusion. Nuclear binding energy always exposes a lower quantitative value.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ATOMIC AND NUCLEAR ¦ Clarifying the U equation

— THE »Take» in modern corridors is understandable — other top rated atomic individuals — WHERE academic theory lacks terminology:

 

 

NotRepresented:

  The page ”Atomic mass defect” does not exist”.

Wikipedia 9Oct2023.

A search on ”mass defect” on the other hand is redirected in Wikipedia to the article on

Nuclear binding energy.

nuclear mass defect

atomic mass  defect     MDa = AmN – U ¦ U = mATOM/u ¦ u = m(6C12)/6 = 1 Dalton

nuclear mass defect     MDn = AmN – U Zv ¦ v = nino = mN – (mP + me) = mN – m1H1 (= 0.00084u)

MDn Zv = MDa        MDn = MDa +  Zv.

v: the work mass energy waste that built the first atom — 1H1 Hydrogen — from the fundamental atom: The Neutron [ FAMQ ]

 

 

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ATOMIC AND NUCLEAR (binding energy, mass defect) can apparently not be clearly explained and related without understanding the concept of atomic mass defect (Clarifying the U equation):

 

The choice of »explaining everything by nuclear preferences» is the only one available in established corridors. With the introduction of the Neutron Square paragon solutions (NSsolutions) in related physics (TNED), the present scientific idea is (partly, or perhaps completely) overrun: no direct comparing is possible (other than: two different property domains).

———————————————

HIGHESTmD ¦ Comp ¦ ComparingNuclear

 

 

HIGHESTmD

 

ComparingNuclear: Comp — Compiled 9Oct2023 ¦ Difference between atomic and nuclear — illustrated on experimentally measured values

 

 

In modern standard academic quarters — atomic and nuclear physics — there is only one single basic preference: experimentation.

 

Neutron Square Solutions has no such. It is a PLATE: neutral atomic mass defect values for comparison. No electric or magnetic experimentation details or other involved — other than the computer (Windows 3.1, Paintbrush) on which the discovery was made (2003) in studying the (HOP1967) atomic mass tables. The reader might himself lure out the rest, as also this author is an equal standard tourist on the page.

 

 

PURPOSE (NSsolutions):

COMPARING ATOMIC MASS DETERMINATION

Main Weizäcker liquid drop model equation — nuclear mass defect type

B(Z,N ¦ MeV) = 15.75A – 0.711000Z2A–1/3 – 17.8A2/3 – 23.7(A  – 2Z)2/A  ±¦0: 11.18A–1/2 + Zv    ¦ WeizCalifornia 2023 NSdeDIA13

B(Z,N ¦ MeV) = 14.00A – 0.61Z(Z–1)A–1/3 – 14.0A2/3 – 84.2(A/2 – Z)2/A  ±¦0: 34.0A–3/4 adjust.    ¦ HOP1967 NSdeDIA10

 

General attitude:

ANY COMPARING CONTEST

between nuclear mass defect and atomic mass defect on any quest of precise ATOMIC masses

WILL BE OUT OF THE QUESTION

Statement:

On observation of established claims connecting atomic mass to nuclear binding energy

———————————————————————————————————

There is no available cosmic way, path, or other known universal opening to calculate a precision atomic mass from nuclear mass defect — No way.

Oct2023:                                                            

But it seems like the scientific community is claiming exactly that, unless we here in UH are victims of even worse misunderstandings.

— This author would be happy if that also had been explained from the beginning.

— Well then, NeutronSquare Solutions suggests — in clarifying the issue:

   Let us compare: Weiz1:1967¦1975 — Weiz2: WeizCalifornia2023 — Weiz3 u=m(6C12)/12 ¦ CONOR.

 

NSdeDIA5: CoNu ¦ DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ATOMIC AND NUCLEAR

 

INTERNAL EXPERIMENTAL MEASURED VALUES WITH DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ATOMIC AND NUCLEAR

 

NuklidTab4C2023.ods Tabell1 Col. V W X BM

 

Proof:

WEIZSÄCKER EQUATION DETAILS AND PARAMETRIC CONSTANTS SOURCES:

HOP 1967    HANDBOOK OF PHYSICS, E. U. Condon, McGraw-Hill 1967, section 9, p.9—8    HOPweizQuote

The Swedish FOCUS MATERIEN 1975 s125sp2n

GENERAL ATOMIC MASSES DATA — concurrent [ except marginal on last decimals on later measures ]

HOP1967 BerkeleyNATIONAL2003 NIST/CoDATA2005+

 

NSdeDIA8: — THE  1967 ¦ 1975 COMPARING WEIZSÄCKER VERSION — NSde5

— See the present Wikipedia ¦ California University Weizsäcker versions in WeCALu

 

Revisting

FIRST (2003+) OBSERVED DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EXPERIMENTAL AND TNED-ACADEMIC(MAC)

 

HOPweizXP.ods Tabell1 Col. F G O

———————————————

Neutron Square Solutions — NSsolutions ¦ The Atomic Nucleus ¦ THE DIAGRAM DIFFERENCES — NSdeDIA9 ¦ THE here used WEIZÄCKER EQUATION PROGRAM  — WeizPRO 

 

 

1.   The precision aspect (N) is already occupied by Neutron Square solutions — directly beginning from the neutron (Neutron Square FundamentalsBasicCHART ¦ FIBAPO).

 

2.   The established claims connecting atomic mass with nuclear binding energy uses the (foremost) so called semi-empirical mass formula (WIKIPEDIA, 15Oct2023 — WikiWEIZ) — most known as the Weizsäcker liquid drop model atomic nuclear equation. As so recognized (WikiWEIZ quote):

 

B(Z,N ¦ MeV) = 14A0.61Z(Z–1)A–1/314A2/384.2(A/2 – Z)2/A  ±¦0: 34.0A–3/4 ¦ HOP1967 example

 

  The semi-empirical mass formula therefore provides a good fit to heavier nuclei, and a poor fit to very light nuclei, especially 4He.”,

WIKIPEDIA, Semi-empirical mass formula (as quoted 15Oct2023).

 

The poor part is visually obvious as further clarified below in NSdeDIA9. But the ”good fit” part — where is it except on the intersecting regions @6Carbon12 and @10Neon20¦21¦22? Wikipedia (15Oct2023) gives no quantitative example.

However further ahead here, we will come back to that.

 

 

NSdeDIA9: The NSdeDIA8 comparing DIFFERENCES: — THE  1967 ¦ 1975 COMPARING WEIZSÄCKER VERSION

 

HOPweizXP.ods Tabell1 Col. AO AP AQ

 

A possible lead (» .. they don’t know it ..»):

 

See Wikipedia quote in Not representedClarifying the U equation.

 

— They the general scientific community apparently don’t know It.

Say it: THAT IS COMPLETELY WRONG — Further [» .. they don’t know it .. »] Clarifying Examples will follow.

 

 

NSdeDIA10: The Weizäcker PROGRAM — THE  1967 ¦ 1975 COMPARING WEIZSÄCKER VERSION

the parameters — different sources — vary depending on application — and epoch —

here assumed [ as proven ] not really deviating much from the presented:

NSdeDIA9

 

B(Z,N ¦ MeV) = Zv+ 14A0.61Z(Z–1)A–1/314A2/384.2(A/2 – Z)2/A  ±¦0: 34.0A–3/4 ¦ HOP1967

 

HOPweizXP.ods Tabell1 Col.O

B(Z,N ¦ MeV) = 14A0.61Z(Z–1)A–1/314A2/384.2(A/2 – Z)2/A  ±¦0: 34.0A–3/4 ¦ HOP1967

B(Z,N ¦ MeV) = 14A – 0.61Z(Z–1)A–1/3 – 14A2/3 – 84.2(A  – 2Z)2/A  ±¦0: 33.5A–3/4 ¦ FM  1975 ¦ N–Z=A–Z–Z=A–2Z

MeV → m(ATOM): e(MeV)T6/c02 ;

MeV → U = mATOM/u(Dalton):

MeV → U: e(MeV)T6/c02u ¦ U = mATOM/u ¦ 1u = m(6C12)/12 = 1.66033 t27 KG

———————————————

HOPweizQuote1967 ¦ WeizsäckerCALC ¦ WeizsäckerEquationDETAILS ¦ WeizäckerEVENoddCriteria — the Q15 solution

 

WhatZv: Zv

What’sUp?

— The thing is this:

 

atomic mass  defect     MDa = AmN – U ¦ U = mATOM/u ¦ u = m(6C12)/6 = 1 Dalton

nuclear mass defect     MDn = AmN – U Zv ¦ v = nino = mN – (mP + me) = mN – m1H1 (= 0.00084u)

 

 

The (HOP1967) Weizsäcker »nuclear binding enery»

binding energy potential to the number of nucleons” equation

B(Z,N ¦ MeV) = 14A0.61Z(Z–1)A–1/314A2/384.2(A/2 – Z)2/A  ±¦0: 34.0A–3/4 ¦ HOP1967

is apparently — related — of the type nuclear mass defect (nuclear binding energy).

   But NSdeDIA10 lower right of the illustration

   the Weizsäcker equation formula as such has no inside referring »–Zv»

 

HOPweizXP.ods Tabell1 Col.O — Weizsäcker ATOMIC-mD HasA+Nino=Zv ¦ Col. AN  — Weizsäcker NUCLEAR-mD HasNoNino=Zv

 

 

so that the end station exhibits this building:

 

the experimental nuclear matches the Weizsäcker atomic on its + 1Zv

or/and

the experimental atomic matches the Weizsäcker atomic on its  + 2Zv

 

right below:

 

   The HOP1967 ¦ FM1975 Weizsäcker equation formula as such has no inside referring term »–Zv I am A Nuclear concept» or factor:explicitly declaring it is a nuclear mass defect expression.: it lies below the experimental nuclear MDa = AmN – U.

For it to reach the experimental nuclear for comparison, an extra additional +Zv must be added:

 

NSdeDIA11: NSdeDIA10

 Comparing results on THE  1967 ¦ 1975 COMPARING WEIZSÄCKER VERSION

HOPweizXP.ods Tabell1

 

B(Z,N ¦ MeV) = 14A – 0.61Z(Z–1)A–1/3 – 14A2/3 – 84.2(A/2 – Z)2/A  ±¦0: 34.0A–3/4 + 1Zv   ¦ nuclear-atomic HOP1967

 

So: In »fixing a most close match» between the two agents, the Weizsäcker form must either add one Zv to its original to reach the experimental NUCLEAR level — right part above:

— »ExperimentalNuclearMatchesWeizsäckerAtomic»;

Or add one extra Zv, in all 2Zv, to reach the fairly good matching experimental ATOMIC level:

— »ExperimentalAtomicMatchesWeizsäckerDoubleNuclear», right below:

 

NSdeDIA12: NSdeDIA11

 

 Comparing results on THE  1967 ¦ 1975 COMPARING WEIZSÄCKER VERSION

HOPweizXP.ods Tabell1

 

B(Z,N ¦ MeV) = 14A – 0.61Z(Z–1)A–1/3 – 14A2/3 – 84.2(A/2 – Z)2/A  ±¦0: 34.0A–3/4 + 2Zv   ¦ atomic-DoubleNuclear

 

Besides these minor points:

   The Weizsäcker general solution is a horrible nightmare for the first light atoms — always outside the vertical scale.

   The basic idea (charged liquid drop model) apparently does not apply at all to the atomic nucleus as a corresponding fair model. Not even close to (FIBAPO).

 

Or as already stated (ComparingNuclear — proof continued):

 

There is no available cosmic way, path, or other known universal opening to calculate precision atomic mass from nuclear mass defect — No way.