Talk:Nuclear structure

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Quark Shell Model

I believe the sub-section "Quark Shell Model", listed under "Other Approaches" (actually it's the only text under the "Other Approaches" heading) should be deleted (or significantly revised). The section has a disclaimer that says:

This section is the sole view of a single author, and not a scientifically accepted theory.

If that's the case, then the section should be removed, per NOR. Some additional things that suggest it should be removed:

  • The description is hard to follow, jumping between descriptions of astronomical phenomena, quark types, etc., without properly explaining why this is done.
  • The text refers to terms without defining or linking them. E.g. "refractive meniscus", which is not a term associated with quark models (to my knowledge).
  • The description is frequently informal. E.g. "and a short life to boot".
  • The text reads as an exploratory description rather than a statement of fact. For instance, rather than stating "the model predicts this", the text is worded as a persuasion of the reader.
  • There are some statements that seem erroneous (e.g. the statement about the composition of dark matter is wrong: modern science has placed bounds on the composition of dark matter, but the situation is not resolved).
  • Conversely there are statements that are vague compared to modern understanding. E.g. "It is theorized generally that each baryon is composed of 3 quarks..." I would say that modern theory has established rather exhaustively the quark makeup of baryons.
  • The entire text has no citations, even when making detailed claims. E.g. "By examination, the independent quark would have a mass of at least 400 MeV, probably a lot more..."
  • I am unable to find substantiation for this description on searches (either on Google or scholarly search engines).

Overall, the description is totally confusing and doesn't seem to actually say anything. I think the text should be entirely removed since it doesn't contribute anything. On the other hand, if there is a well-formed theory in the literature, then this section should be rewritten to be easier to follow, and to cite these literature sources. Kebes (talk) 15:17, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


I see that user DenverRedhead has restored the Quark Shell Model section, without any explanation. DenverRedhead, can you provide some more information about this content? Is it original research? Is it based on a consensus view in a sub-domain of science? If so, can you provide a selection of references that describe it? If anyone else has information on this model, please help here. I find the current description confusing; it should be improved. Kebes (talk) 18:20, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


DenverRedhead has provided this reference with respect to the "Quark Shell Model":

Another article by the same author apparently has further details on the theory:

  • G. Musulmanbekov. Semiclassical correlated quarks model of hadron structure and interplay between hard and soft interactions Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. B 71 (1999). doi 10.1016/S0920-5632(98)00331-4

These publications describe a theory where quark interactions lead to crystal-like nuclear states. Although I'm not an expert in this field, it doesn't appear that this is a theory that is being worked on by many physicists at this time. (E.g. the two publications above have not received any external citations from peer-reviewed sources, as measured by ISI's Web of Science system.) My impression is that this is currently a fringe theory. As such, I think the current amount of article text devoted to it is too large; it is, after all, the longest section! (Longer than any of the most thoroughly researched and accepted models.)

So I propose we cut down the "Quark Shell Model" section to one or two paragraphs that summarize the conclusions of the model, and highlight the ways in which this model differs from other models (notably that it predicts solid crystal-like states for the nucleus; exactly the opposite of the liquid drop model). The pictures could be reduced in number to simply provide one representative crystal-like nuclear state. Unless someone objects, I'll go ahead and make those changes soon. Kebes (talk) 22:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

The content has been recreated as its own article, Quark Shell. Can anyone who knows more about it comment on that article's AfD? Thanks, FCSundae (talk) 19:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC) There are other models of the nucleus than the shell model but most of them don't talk about structure. But before you give up on structure, please look at the structure of my models in Talk:Nuclear model. And please dont tell me they cant touch each other.WFPMWFPM (talk) 01:51, 28 May 2008 (UTC)