/sci/ - Science & Math

>It has.....
No high school diploma

5 neutrons and 5 protons. This is like, page one chemistry shit.

Get it together, or this semester is gonna be long.

?waht

Seriously, you could Google this shit. Instead you shitpost and clutter the front page with your infantile chemistry woes, that you could ought to know. Just to make you shut up, the answer is 4 protons, 4 electrons, and 2 neutrons. The weighted average of the number of particles is the answer, and 4+4+2=10. I'm done with this asinine thread, and I hope /sci/ is too.

>>4927182

the weighted average of all isotopes* that is

>>4927182
this guy is right

>>4927180
you couldnt be more wrong

>>4927182
When did electrons start getting included in the mass number? The answer is 5 neutrons and 5 protons. You should be done with /sci/.

I don't remember 8th grade being this difficult...

>>4927188
>When did electrons start getting included in the mass number?
since the beginning of time

get out of my /sci/

Ever since Thompson decided to put a magnet by a cathode ray tube, you uncouth simian.

>>4927188

Ever since Thompson decided to put a magnet by a cathode ray tube, you uncouth simian.

i jus want to know the answer! I though you guys were smart.

>>4927200
the answer is 4 protons, 4 electrons and 2 neutrons

>>4927192
Well since they are roughly 1800 times smaller than the protons and neutrons they are not included in the mass number. Example Carbon-12 has 6 neutrons and 6 protons which gives it the mass number of 12, but it also has 6 electrons which are not included in this.

>>4927200

The answer has already been stated in this thread. Just ask yourself: who SOUNDS the smartest? Follow your intuition from there.

>>4927204
have you ever taken a chemistry course? i mean seriously how dumb can you be?

>>4927204
>Well since they are roughly 1800 times smaller than the protons and neutrons they are not included in the mass number

>2012
>still thinking that size is in proportion to mass number contribution

>>4927204
They know. They're just giving the wrong answer to sabotage a shitty homework thread. As I hope you realized this and are merely arguing for the sake of arguing.

>>4927213
>implying our answer is wrong

>>4927213
>>4927204

>mfw /sci/ can't into basic chemistry

May I suggest something to the pair of you? The product on the left could increase your intellectual development twofold. For the sake of intelligent discussion, I urge you to ask Santa Clause to deliver one to you. Happy learning!

fuck guys..
this is beyond /sci

You guys realize if you just help the guy out he'll leave the the thread and we can be done with this, right?

The answer is 10 protons OP. Disregard the others.

>>4927232
>implying protons have anything to do with mass

Protons only affect the charge of the atom. Neutrons are called neutrons because they affect the mass and remain neutral to the charge.

The answer is 10 neutrons.

>>4927232
>mfw you tell him the real answer

>>4927213
>>4927232

Honestly, I was laughing out loud for some of that, why'd you guys ruin it? Just let the trolls do their work next time.

dont listen to these trolls. the real answer is 5 neutrons and 5 protons

>>4927241

SERIOUSLY THE JOKE ISN'T EVEN FUNNY ANYMORE JUST STOP EVERYONE KNOWS YOU'RE TROLLING

>>4927242

>>4927235

Yeah, okay, conveniently ignore the fact that what you're talking about are quantum atoms and not chemically active atoms which completely ignore the inductive effect.

Lrn2SecondLawOfThermodynamics

It's 10 protons because the atom in OP's post is a chemically active atom.

here is a periodic table.
as you can see this atom doesnt exist because none of these have a mass on 10

>>4927258
therefore, OP has actually trolled us from the very beginning

Jesus Christ!

You've got a world reknowned physcist calling out the name of a non-existent god, that's pretty fucking frustrated.

It's simple chemistry children, Protons are simply positively charged particles, and electrons are the negatively charged counterpart, they have almost no effect on weight, regardless of their size.

Neutrons are the only particles that affect weight, why the fuck, in order to educate kids about science, they named that kids show Jimmy NEUTRON.

NEUTRINOS
Isaac NEWTON

It's 10 neutrons.

ITT:

clever bastard

But it could still be some isotope, so...

trolling: the unwinnable chess of the interwebz

Serious question: Why are there so few atoms with no neutrons?

Neutrons are unstable whilst alone

I actually looked it up while trolling this thread

>pic
>this thread

>>4927279
so what happens if you isolate a neutron?

>>4927286
Beta decay; a bunch of electrons and positrons.

Isn't a Neutron star just a really big atomic nucleus (of sorts)? Why can't there be a smaller version that only consists of 10 neutrons? Why isn't that the answer?

>>4927289
Because gravity is too weak to hold together a measly 10 neutrons.

>implying the strong nuclear force doesn't hold a Neutron Star together

>>4927294
this and what is the deal with gravity anyway? its so weak of a force compared to the other forces that it doesnt even seem to belong to this dimension

>pic unrelated

op here again. IDK which is the right answer. is it 5 newtrons and 5 electrons?

>>4927634
fuck it
yes

>>4929448
gtfo troll

>>4929465
this has gone on for too long

Really /sci/? Just help the kid with his homework. 5 neutrons and 5 protons.

>>4929705
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_number
>The mass number (A), also called atomic mass number or nucleon number, is the total number of protons and neutrons (together known as nucleons) in an atomic nucleus
>is the total number of protons and neutrons
>total number of protons and neutrons
ITT: troll science

>>4929705
/sci/ is not a homework board. it's not that uncommon for people to even come at us during their online tests. fortunately, most of them are too stupid to hide their ID or something similar and hopefully they learn their lesson.