Talk:Nucleon

message: Looking for an expert to:
* Check "equality" figures in Antinucleon section
* Put them in a consistent form (e.g. x in 10n)
* Correct or remove the magnetic moment equality figure (currently in comments)
Please feel free to replace the template on the main page if there is a better one. Twilsonb (talk) 08:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Antinucleon Section Cleanup 

message: Seeing as how virtually everything in the Universe is made of atoms and atoms have nuclei and nuclei have nucleons, virtually everything in the Universe is tangentially related to nucleons, including strange matter. However, the See Also section should be a short list of things very closely related to nucleons. I still vote to clip it. -- Xerxes 23:15, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  On Strange Matter 

message: Should this article really link to hedgehog (the animal)?  Looks odd to me.  Maybe it should be Hedgehog space?  John Darrow (talk) 04:57, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hedgehog? 

message: Please give input at Talk:Hadron#Hadron overhaul. Thanks. Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 01:56, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hadron overhaul 

message: The statement "The proton and neutron are both baryons and both fermions." does not seem right. Protons and neutrons are composed of fermions but they are not themselves fermions. ShelbyBell (talk) 13:38, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: According to Fermion, protons and neutrons can be both (a) fermions and (b) be composed of fermions. The definition is given as: "A fermion (named after Enrico Fermi) is any particle which obeys the Fermi–Dirac statistics (and follows the Pauli exclusion principle). Fermions contrast with bosons which obey Bose–Einstein statistics."--TraceyR (talk) 15:57, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fermions 

message: The rest mass in MeV/c² of the antineutron in the table seems suspicious, since the text suggests that it should be the same as the neutron's rest mass and the rest mass in u is the same.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.62.236.144 (talk) 09:51, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strange values in table for rest mass 

message: "...a nucleon is one of the particles that make up the atomic nucleus." This is oddly phrased, as it implies there are other partices that make up the atomic nucleus besides nucleons. --Ivi104 (talk) 09:12, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro 

message: The caption for the first figure is mistaken.  Nucleons do not "dissociate into quarks" inside nuclei.  Who on earth wrote that?
Also, the table of properties lists "Rest Mass" of particles.   There is no mass but rest mass in modern physics understanding.  OK, there is also "invariant mass" if you consider systems of particles.   In any case, calling something a "rest mass" implies that there is another type.   There is not.  
I plan to adjust these details soon. Qwerty123uiop (talk) 22:57, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Figure and table headings 

message: I have beefed up the paragraph on the nucleon magnetic moments, partly to reflect the new merged article nucleon magnetic moment.  As a former particle physics student, I have marveled at how little attention these magnetic moments have received, historically (at least in my aged education).  I surmise that particle physics wore blinders about that topic, because of the decades that went by where these odd magnetic moments defied explanation.  Witness the kamikaze runs that those such as S. Drell took at the issue attempting explanations by meson physics in the 1960s (see the aforementioned article).  Its a curious history, IMO.  Anyways, I emphasize the nucleon magnetic moments. Bdushaw (talk) 08:05, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  nucleon magnetic moments