My views on Cosmology and Physics
SAM and QCD
Section 9 of the book The Nature of the Atom describes mass defect in SAM.
I am concerned there will be consequences from the assumptions here with Quatum Chromodynamics or QCD.
The simple definition of mass defect is the difference between the measured atomic mass and the sum of the atom's particles which are a number of electrons and protons.
Since the elements in the periodic table have their mass measured in atomic mass units, amu, the mass defect value is usually in amu.
The current Standard Model explanation of mass defect invokes quantum chromodynamics (QCD) which assumes a conversion of the difference is mass into a new form of energy, called nuclear binding energy. SAM seems to accept this explanation by QCD with frequent rreferences to binding energy. I am concerned SAM assumes Quatum Chromodynamics (QCD) is a valid explanation of mass defect and the QCD binding energy.
QCD assumes the nucleus is a soup of all the quarks, gluons and other quasi-particles, so protons and electrons have been disolved. QCD also states relativity has a role, which is consistent with quantum mechanics.
QCD directly conflicts with SAM which keeps the electrons and protons intact in the structured atomic nucleus.
My alternative, which is based on classical physics, not relativity, explains mass defect as a behavior of the individual nucleons, where the nucleus consists of protons and electrons, and where the neutrons are the combination of the 2, All are held together by the electrostatic force between adjacent charged particles.
My conclusion is the mass defect occurs when a proton or neutron is compressed into a nucleus by fusion or transmutation. zThe CREX project measured the size of a number of atomic nuclei.
Ca-48 nucleus was just slightly smaller than Ca-40, despite 8 more neutrons.
A likely explanation is fusing particles into a nucleus results in a slight particle compression, reducng both its size and measured mass.
From my analysis of consecutive isotopes, where the difference is only 1 neutron. I can show the mass defect occurs at the nucleon level. The change is in measured mass and there is no need or evidence for the new nuclear binding energy defined by QCD. I believe invoking QCD is wrong for SAM.
The sporeadsheet has about 850 isotopes with most being consecutive. The chart shows a break at each element, seen as a zero value in the chart, because the first isotope of an element has no predecessor.
There is never a deviation between consecutive istopes of exactly zero.
Here is a chart showing a summary of the mass defect analysis:
The change per nucleon is small. As elements increase their atomic number and nucleon count, the total mass defect accumulates. This is shown in the book's figure 7.6 but not in amu.
Here is my alternative to the QCD version of mass defect:
Atomic Mass Defect Alternative
The pdf has references so its spreadsheet is available.
I wish to help SAM avoid a trap in QCD.