Talk:Nuclear physics

Clarification?
About gamma decay; "The element is not changed in the process." Gamma decay happens only to product element of previous decay that has changed element? --anon 62.134.199.5 (talk) 13:49, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

This is an article about nuclear physics, not about the uses of nuclear energy
There is too little physics in this article! --Philipum 08:56, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I have removed the contents which I believe do not belong here. The History part was moved to radioactivity and rewritten. --Philipum 12:21, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Avoid reproducing copyrighted text
When I wrote the history part of the article, I took parts of the sentences from the book (see reference), but the text is copyrighted by Wiley&Sons. I think the contents are appropriate for this article, but we would need to "disguise" it in some way, i.e., rewrite the same thing using slightly different words or expressions. However, I am not an expert in literal english, so I don't dare touch it by fear it will become awkward. --Philipum 08:20, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

This has been remedied now by David R. Ingham. Thanks! --Philipum 15:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Contents to be swapped with that of Atomic nucleus?
Suggesting to swap contents between Nuclear physics and Atomic nucleus. See Talk:Atomic nucleus.

Lars Ruoff (talk) 20:47, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Problem noted above, now addressed
In absense of rabid comment, I have been WP:BOLD and done a lot of the swapping suggested above. I moved a lot of stuff on the structure and composition of atomic nuclei to the atomic nucleus article, while moving a lot of stuff about nuclear physics that was in the atomic nucleus article, to the nuclear physics article. I also removed some "personal physics theory" personal research POV-pushing (which had also been noted by another author) from the nuclear physics article. A nuclear physicist really needs to go through this stuff. The job is not done, but most of the big chunks are now where they belong, I think. S B Harris 18:34, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Removed text
I removed the following:


 * It must not be confused with atomic physics, that studies the combined system of the nucleus and its arrangement of electrons, even if both terms are sometimes used synonymously in standard English.

I can see the need for a redirect to this page from the atomic physics article, but surely the confusion is only one-way? Djr32 (talk) 20:13, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

The Lost Prestige of Nuclear Physics
Read an article somewhat related to nuclear physics (more of the social aspects/view of nuclear physics on society) and thought I post it here for anyone that wants to utilize somewhere in the article (as appropriate). Cheers!Calaka (talk) 06:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Wrong link, don't know how to fix it
The Herbert L. Becker link links to some random clown that did not observe the proton as far as I know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.240.234.67 (talk) 15:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Herbert L. Becker link
This looks like vandalism to me. I am guessing the link should be to Henri Becquerel. Pelkabo (talk) 19:11, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Atomic Physics as of 1907
To read a discussion of the concepts of Atomic Physics, circa 1900, read "The evolution of Matter" (English translation), by Dr. Gustave Le Bon, by Charles Scribner & Sons (1907). Which talks about the variation of mass with velocity, and other matters at the same time as did Einstein et al.WFPM (talk) 01:24, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Explanations of Actions
i removed from the template the names of Robert Oppenheimer and Edward Teller because in my understanding their contribuitions do not fit with the meaning of Science but Technology plus they are not being mentioned in the section history. Feel free to edit if you want, but do not revert my editions , they took hard work.(Thepalerider2012 (talk) 01:40, 11 May 2013 (UTC))

"TMS (nuclear physics)" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect TMS (nuclear physics). The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 16 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 08:05, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

what is the role of nuclear physics in manufacturing of weapons.
Please give me answer in detail of the question which I asked to you. 2402:E000:649:C187:0:0:0:1 (talk) 17:28, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Nuclear physics
all on this topic 154.160.0.249 (talk) 19:01, 23 May 2024 (UTC)