<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Strong evidence for 9N and the limits of existence of atomic nuclei · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2309.15180/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2309.15180/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Strong evidence for 9N and the limits of existence of atomic nuclei — mentioned by pvg</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38173690</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2309.15180:38173690</guid><pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2023 05:50:13 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;The arxiv version of the paper says: the decay widths of the low-lying states increase, eventually melting into an unresolvable continuum as their lifetimes become commensurate with typical reaction and single-particle timescales. Here, the very notion of the nuclear state becomes questionable as the timescales are too short to talk about the existence of a nucleus. Indeed as dis- cussed in Ref. [9], if a collection of nucleons survives for less than about 10−22 s, it should not be considered a nucleus. https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.15180&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2309.15180/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>nucl-ex</category></item></channel></rss>
