Carbon more than likely will have 6 neutrons as Carbon-12 is the most common isotope, about 99% of all carbon atoms. Carbon-13 (7 neutrons) and Carbon-14 (8 neutrons) are also reasonably common.
2007-01-19 13:21:52
·
answer #1
·
answered by msi_cord 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
6
2007-01-19 21:44:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by futureastronaut1 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
6
2007-01-19 21:22:09
·
answer #3
·
answered by zentoccino 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are many isotopes (atoms of the same element with different numbers of neutrons) of carbon, but the most common is carbon-12, which you can see based on the atomic mass listed for carbon on the periodic table. Protons and neutrons have virtually identical masses, each weighing 1 atomic unit. Thus, to make an atom with 6 protons that weighs 12 atomic units, you need 6 neutrons. Hope that helps.
2007-01-19 21:22:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by bgdddymtty 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
1) ALL carbon atoms have 6 protons in their nuclii. That's what makes them carbon.
2) Nost carbon atoms have 6 neutrons. A small % have 8.
2007-01-19 21:22:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by yupchagee 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Normally 6, but sometimes 8, which produces carbon-14, the radiaoctive decay (back to carbon-12) of which is used to estimate the age of formerly living materials up to 7,000 years old.
To the next poster, that's what I used to see until I looked in a book that said the limit was 7,000 years. After looking it up online though, that book was way off and you are correct. In fact, they can date things that old with an error of not much more than 100 years!
2007-01-19 22:29:24
·
answer #6
·
answered by hznfrst 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
It has been a long time since I last see a periodic table.
If I remember correctly carbon is 12, then there are 6 neutrons ( 6+6=12 ).
2007-01-19 21:22:08
·
answer #7
·
answered by e_kueh 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
well, you could just say 6 neutrons, but if you want the avg, you can just look at the perodic table and take the avg number thingy off of there. because it measures the weight in a 1-1 ratio of protons to nuetrons. because electrons are really small.
2007-01-20 00:59:01
·
answer #8
·
answered by GuitarJammer 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
6...unless its specified to be something like Carbon-14 or 16, etc...in which case there will be more obviously...and to correct the above poster carbon-14 dating works to about 60,000 years...
2007-01-19 23:39:04
·
answer #9
·
answered by Beach_Bum 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
6... could be 8, but less likely
2007-01-19 21:25:23
·
answer #10
·
answered by lordkelvin 7
·
0⤊
0⤋