What is wrong about this statement?:"The whole idea of the atomic nucleus is pretty ridiculous. If...?

Question

...an oxygen nucleus consists of eight protons and eight neutrons, the charge on the nucleus is positive. Since even I learned that like charges repel, such a nucleus would find itself repulsive and quickly fall apart"

Answer 1

The atomic stability isn't determined by the proton/neutron ratio...
Its stability is maintained through the proton/electron ratio.

Answer 2

While the atom itself is electrically neutral (8 protons & 8 electrons) you are correct in wondering why the nucleus, which is a very small part of the atom, doesn't fly apart with all those positive charges tightly packed together. The answer is that the neutrons provide some separation of the protons, but more importantly there is a strong nuclear force, operating only at a very short range, that overcomes the electrical repulsive force and holds the nucleus together.

Answer 3

The only thing wrong about this statement is that it is wrong: oxygen nuclei with 8 protons and 8 neutrons do exist and they do not fly apart.

Otherwise, the statement is logical and does represent the level of knowledge at some time in the past (almost a century).

Then gluons were discovered: they are exchange particles that bind protons and neutrons together (part of the strong force). One way to look at it is that in a fraction of a second (an extremely tiny fraction of a second), the proton becomes a neutron and the neutron becomes a proton as they exchange gluons.

This is not exactly what happens but it is a helpful analogy at the start.

Answer 4

There are more forces at work in the nucleus of an atom than just the electromagnetic force (that is the force that causes like charges to repel each other).

In the small confines of an atomic nucleus, the nuclear force is more powerful, and that is the force that holds neutrons and protons together.
The nuclear force (sometimes called the strong nuclear force) holding the protons and neutrons together is stronger than the electromagnetic force trying to repel the protons from each other.

Answer 5

Nuclei are held together by the strong nuclear force, which is mediated by [I think] pi mesons. At short ranges it is hugely stronger than electrostatic repulsion.

Absent the strong nuclear force there would be no nuclei. But it does exist, so saying "The whole idea of the atomic nucleus is pretty ridiculous" is itself ridiculous.
A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.

I did see, in a hilarious creationist tract ["Big Daddy"] exactly this argument advanced, and it quoted the bible about Jesus holding everything together. I never realized the strong nuclear force is carried by Christons....

Answer 6

Well they don't quickly fall apart so ... thats good for us. :)

Protons and Positive, but Neutrons are neutral, and the Eletrons and negative and attracted to the nucleus.

Answer 7

there isn't something ridiculous. the belief or faith/God exchange into created so people does not do issues that reason suffering for the duration of this worldwide. in case you do not have faith in God, solid for you yet don't be obsessed approximately it. It in basic terms shows which you're insecure approximately some thing. on the tip, are you pertaining to marriage? i think of you have some subject concerns in case you think of of marriage that way. in case you're able to have a solid existence and not reason harm to others, then there isn't something incorrect with not believing in God. yet once you have faith in God and nevertheless reason hardship, then you are the real wrongdoer.

Answer 8

A good question. lindajune has the correct answer.

Answer 9

The statement forgets about the 8 electrons orbiting the atom to neutralize it.