Do Electrons Ever Enter the Nucleus!?

6 views
Skip to first unread message

Mark Leach

unread,
Sep 7, 2025, 12:53:05 PMSep 7
to PT...@googlegroups.com
Hi All,

A really nice video: Do Electrons Ever Enter the Nucleus!?

Warning, the start is OK, this is followed by a longish advert for generic testing, then some very heavy math. However, things get really interesting again at 13:20 (min) where a much simpler calculation method is introduced.

The video makes the point that for electron capture radioactivity, an electron must enter the nucleus, so it can be captured. 


I am sure there are some members of this list who will be very interested in this video.
 
Mark

Mark Leach
meta-synthesis





Larry T.

unread,
Sep 7, 2025, 5:04:29 PMSep 7
to Mark Leach, PT...@googlegroups.com
Thank you, Mark.
This video at 15:52 mentions electron shielding effect, or charge screening. Basically, the atom can be viewed as a core that includes nucleus and innermost electrons, surrounded by valence electrons which experience weaker attractive force. Heavier atoms can be looked at as a core surrounded by outer electrons, instead of just nucleus and electrons.  Late Henry Bent used that approach to justify the Left Step Periodic table, specifically the position of He over Be. He presented helium as atomic core, that is nucleus in He, with 2 outer electrons. Similarly beryllium that has atomic core consisting of nucleus plus two inner electrons with two outer electrons. He argued that Ne, the most inert of all atoms, has only atomic core, with no outer electrons.

Best Regards,

LT

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Periodic table mailing list" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to PT-L+uns...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PT-L/C85F8FA4-8C8B-4CAD-BCF9-BD50166537EB%40meta-synthesis.com.

Rene

unread,
Sep 8, 2025, 7:58:13 AMSep 8
to Larry T., Mark Leach, PT...@googlegroups.com
On 8 Sep 2025, at 7:04 AM, Larry T. <ora...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Henry Bent used that approach to justify the Left Step Periodic table, specifically the position of He over Be. He presented helium as atomic core, that is nucleus in He, with 2 outer electrons. Similarly beryllium that has atomic core consisting of nucleus plus two inner electrons with two outer electrons. He argued that Ne, the most inert of all atoms, has only atomic core, with no outer electrons.

Dear Larry

I don’t understand Bent’s justification, or at least your explanation of it.

Helium has no inner core (nor does hydrogen).

Beryllium is [He] 2s2, i.e. it has an inner [He] core and two outer 2s electrons. Ionising the first outer electron requires 9.3 eV and the second 18.2 eV. Thereafter, breaking into the core requires 153.9 eV—a clear discontinuity between valence and core.

Neon is [He] 2s2 2p6, i.e. an inner [He] core and eight outer electrons. Removing the first of these electrons takes less energy than removing the first electron from helium. In other words there is nothing core-like about neon’s outer electrons.

However, removing the last one of neon’s eight outer electrons costs ~239 eV, after which the ionisation energy for the ninth electron jumps to 1195 eV.

In other words, at this point, neon has just as much of a “core” as beryllium.

In this light, I don’t see a justification for placing He above Be.

How do you see this?

René

Larry T.

unread,
Sep 8, 2025, 9:34:57 AMSep 8
to Rene, Mark Leach, PT...@googlegroups.com
Rene,

Inner core of He is the bare nucleus, same in hydrogen.

Larry.

ERIC SCERRI

unread,
Sep 8, 2025, 6:11:29 PMSep 8
to Larry T., Rene, Mark Leach, PT...@googlegroups.com
Sci Am superheavies.docx

Rene

unread,
Sep 9, 2025, 3:48:31 AMSep 9
to Larry T., Mark Leach, PT...@googlegroups.com
On 8 Sep 2025, at 11:35 PM, Larry T. <ora...@gmail.com> wrote:

Inner core of He is the bare nucleus, same in hydrogen.

Thank you Larry.

Well yes—as you say, the inner core of He is just the bare nucleus, and the same applies for H.

For Be, the inner core is the nucleus plus the two 1s electrons. Outside that are two 2s electrons in the valence shell. Once these valence electrons are removed, the energy required to ionise into the 1s core rises dramatically.

For Ne, the inner core is likewise the nucleus plus the two 1s electrons. Outside that lies the valence shell of two 2s and six 2p electrons. After those eight are removed, the next step into the 1s core again shows a dramatic jump in ionisation energy.

On what basis, then, does Bent’s argument—as you presented it—hold that Ne “has only atomic core, with no outer electrons”?

René

Larry T.

unread,
Sep 9, 2025, 9:43:05 AMSep 9
to Rene, Mark Leach, PT...@googlegroups.com
Rene, 
You can see Bent's book "New energy..." Figs. 43.

Best Regards,
Larry

Rene

unread,
Sep 10, 2025, 8:31:26 AMSep 10
to Larry T., Mark Leach, PT...@googlegroups.com
On 9 Sep 2025, at 23:42, Larry T. <ora...@gmail.com> wrote:

Rene, 
You can see Bent's book "New energy..." Figs. 43.

Larry

Thanks.

I've attached Fig. 43. It sheds no light on the situation as you referred to it. At the top of the next page Bent adds: "From the standpoint of the overall pattern of the figure, Pauling’s radius for I+7 seems too small, by about 5 pm."

Helium is in Fig 43 but none of the other noble gases are there.

On what basis, then, does Bent’s argument—as you presented it—hold that Ne “has only atomic core, with no outer electrons”?

René
On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 3:48 AM Rene <re...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
On 8 Sep 2025, at 11:35 PM, Larry T. <ora...@gmail.com> wrote:

Inner core of He is the bare nucleus, same in hydrogen.

Thank you Larry.

Well yes—as you say, the inner core of He is just the bare nucleus, and the same applies for H.

For Be, the inner core is the nucleus plus the two 1s electrons. Outside that are two 2s electrons in the valence shell. Once these valence electrons are removed, the energy required to ionise into the 1s core rises dramatically.

For Ne, the inner core is likewise the nucleus plus the two 1s electrons. Outside that lies the valence shell of two 2s and six 2p electrons. After those eight are removed, the next step into the 1s core again shows a dramatic jump in ionisation energy.

On what basis, then, does Bent’s argument—as you presented it—hold that Ne “has only atomic core, with no outer electrons”?

René

On 8 Sep 2025, at 7:04 AM, Larry T. <ora...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Henry Bent used that approach to justify the Left Step Periodic table, specifically the position of He over Be. He presented helium as atomic core, that is nucleus in He, with 2 outer electrons. Similarly beryllium that has atomic core consisting of nucleus plus two inner electrons with two outer electrons. He argued that Ne, the most inert of all atoms, has only atomic core, with no outer electrons.

Dear Larry

I don’t understand Bent’s justification, or at least your explanation of it.

Helium has no inner core (nor does hydrogen).

Beryllium is [He] 2s2, i.e. it has an inner [He] core and two outer 2s electrons. Ionising the first outer electron requires 9.3 eV and the second 18.2 eV. Thereafter, breaking into the core requires 153.9 eV—a clear discontinuity between valence and core.

Neon is [He] 2s2 2p6, i.e. an inner [He] core and eight outer electrons. Removing the first of these electrons takes less energy than removing the first electron from helium. In other words there is nothing core-like about neon’s outer electrons.

However, removing the last one of neon’s eight outer electrons costs ~239 eV, after which the ionisation energy for the ninth electron jumps to 1195 eV.

In other words, at this point, neon has just as much of a “core” as beryllium.

In this light, I don’t see a justification for placing He above Be.

How do you see this?

René

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Periodic table mailing list" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to PT-L+uns...@googlegroups.com.

ERIC SCERRI

unread,
Sep 10, 2025, 2:58:05 PMSep 10
to Rene, Larry T., Mark Leach, PT...@googlegroups.com
I agree with Rene’s question to Larry and was mystified by the original message that led to it.

Eric Scerri



<IMG_3845.JPG>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Periodic table mailing list" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to PT-L+uns...@googlegroups.com.

Rene

unread,
Sep 11, 2025, 2:54:39 AMSep 11
to ERIC SCERRI, Larry T., Mark Leach, PT...@googlegroups.com
On 11 Sep 2025, at 04:57, ERIC SCERRI <sce...@g.ucla.edu> wrote:

I agree with Rene’s question to Larry and was mystified by the original message that led to it.

Eric Scerri

Thank you Eric.

Since Bent’s figure is for ionic radii such as I7+ (what he calls the atomic core), I’ve attached a chart showing the vertical trends in ionic crystalline radii for He and the alkaline earths, and He and the rest of the noble gases. For helium I used a radius of 0, as per Bent. The period numbering is for a conventional periodic table.

From their R2 values, both trendlines are equally smooth i.e. there is no basis to distinguish between either He over Be, or He over Ne.

I had to extrapolate radii for the noble gases, aside from Xe for which this is known. My source was Shannon’s ionic radii http://abulafia.mt.ic.ac.uk/shannon/

It’s puzzling that Bent could’ve included a chart along the lines of what I’ve drawn in his book but, for some reason, chose not to. I guess it would’ve called into question the point of his Fig. 43.

René

ERIC SCERRI

unread,
Sep 13, 2025, 3:46:57 PMSep 13
to Periodic table mailing list

Screenshot 2025-09-13 at 12.43.23 PM.png


In this issue

Editorial 80

Eric Scerri

Open Access.png



Open Access.png


Open Access.png

Open Access.png

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages