Since an atom is held together by this force, could it be radiating ,  like a magnetic field?  This would mean it would affect anything else made of atoms.  Is it plausable that that binding effect could be blocked or shielded between objects?
201241
The atomic binding force you refer to is called strong nuclear force.  The particle that mediates this force is called a gluon.  It is bound to the subatomic quarks that make up matter, and has no strength outside of the nucleus. While the strength of its force inside a nucleon (72 tons per gluon, minimum of three) is massive, its force declines at nucleus level where it can be overcome by weak nuclear force.  Since it is entirely dependant on quarks for its existence, and will only interact with quarks and other gluons, it has no ablility to affect matter at the atomic level.  The effect of gravity on such a small scale, due to the low mass of matter involved, is negligable
101817
its the same as why does gravity not apply in the subatomic...when we know the answer a new dawning in science will amaze the world...
4866
The strong force holds quarks together in combinations that make protons and neutrons.  It also holds the protons and neutrons together, but in a more subtle way, because protons and neutrons are color neutral.  This means that protons and neutrons don't have excess color charge (which determines the strength of the strong interaction), and by this logic shouldnt be attracted to each other.  The quarks are not in a point-like configuration, though, so each nucleon has a "dipole" and higher order moments. If you've never heard of this kind of thing, it's the same idea as the electric force holding electrically neutral atoms together to make chemical compounds.\n\nThe differences in mass between atoms and the sum of their particles is a consequence of the strong force... the strong force is not caused by the mass difference.  In fact, atoms above iron have a mass which is larger than the sum of their nucleons, while atoms below iron have mass that is smaller than the the sum of their nucleons.  That's why you can only break large atoms for energetic nuclear fission.
173683
the weak force is what holds atoms together, the strong force is what hold protons and neutrons (particles) together.\n\nGravity is cumulative and in a black hole overwhelms all other forces. Perhaps you could pull something out of the edge of the event horizon, but not the black hole itself.
169555
atoms are in everything we see.  How the atoms are bonded determines how we see things such as color.  \n\nthey are not "alive" per say since they do not need to consume energy to exist.\n\nThey are electrical.  The forces that bind electrons to the nucleus are electrical bonds.  In fact, the binding energy for atoms to bond is also electrical.\n\nhope that helps
592416
Magnets don't glow unless they're really hot, in which case anything glows.\n\nEdit: I just saw your extra details. That's actually a completely different thing than was implied by your original question. I don't completely understand it, but it has to do with the Earth's magnetic field being screwed around with by solar winds. Whatever the effect is, it's strongest at the poles, and it interacts with the atmosphere somehow.
327992
Every atom has gravitational forces, also known as the "VanderWaal force". This force is linearly related to the mass of the particle. As the mass grows (a cluster of particles, an object, a planet) the gravitational force gets larger, being the sum of all individual gravitational forces. The gravitational force only influences objects that have a mass of there own. So a ball is attracted by the Earth and the ball attracts the Earth.
5714
Interesting scenario first of all i would like to comment. Well actually the bond is due to electronic forces. Hence mass has litle effect on the bond strength. Thus i thikn the effect of mass change should be a small one!! unless you change the charge of proton too!!
192240
The electric field will be repellent between protons, attractive between a proton and an electron.\n\nThere is, of course, the nuclear force--which is exerted only at extremely close range, and is an attractive force.\n\nThere is also the gravitational force between them, also attractive, but it's pretty trivial with such microscopic masses, unless you get unthinkably close.\n\nGravity, of course, would be there between the proton and the electron, but it's a whale of a lot more feeble between that pair than between a pair of protons...
119616
If Anti- Gravity means repulsions between two gravitational masses;then the answer to this excellent question exists.\nFirst if we look how gravity affects atomic elementary particle we could understand anti-gravity.\nThere is a point lets say where the gravity field between the electron and proton intersects in such a way that a repulsion occurs.This shows that no two particle can actually come togheter and stick to each other.So particle integrity is maintained.The phenomena of anti gravity is real.This is in full agreement with experiments in qunatum mechanics, which have shown repulsion between particles.
529240
Ancient Greek Mathematicians worked for years on trying to figure out how to square the circle.  It has been proved that the premise of the question was false (in Euclidean geometry); you can not square the circle (find the two integers whose ratio is pi).\n\nThe bottom line is that by asking an "impossible" question, you may spend quite a lot of time and energy searching for a non-existant answer.  So, define "isolated", define "very non-reactive" and define "hover".\nSo, let me rephrase your question: Can an atom of an element which interacts strongly with itself (to form the metallic state) be  isolated?  Answer:  it depends on what you mean by "isolated".\nWe certainly can separate it (using electrical or mechanical forces) from other atoms of its own kind. Q2: but will it interact with other atoms?A2 yes.Q3: hover? A3 "Hover"?  Doesn't that presume that the body you're talking about is 1) denser than air and 2) exerting a force to combat gravity??! A3a Or having a force exerted on it? Q3b yes, yes, the air molecules hit it around to keep it aloft!  Right? A3b So it DOES interact with the air molecules?  But forms no (by your assumptions) covalent bonds even though it was ripped out of a metallic bonding "home"...  I guess with a very inert gas atmosphere (helium), its possible.  But when it hits the wall of whatever its in it will probably stick, and being so much heavier than Helium it will most likely find its way to the bottom surface.  The problem is assuming that something that bonds (metallically) won't have a strong tendency to bond covalently.\nMercury, Hg, a toxic liquid metal at RT, has a very high vapor pressure (using special fluorescent lights you can "see" the mercury vaporizing from the surface of the liquid) and is fairly inert, but doesn't come off of a metal lattice so doesn't quite fit the bill.  Anyway, it will bounce around for quite a while before it reacts forming an amalgam or possibly being absorbed into your bloodstream and doing some neurological damage.  In general, metals are very reactive with oxygen, and I'm not sure there are any which won't (eventually) react with it unless the atoms find another way to stabilize themselves (say by forming a metal lattice).  Also, I'm not sure that Mercury vapor exists as isolated atoms, I seem to recall a paper on this recently...  Single atoms react to form a Octet in their valence shell, so outside of the nobel gasses, (not metals at normal pressures and temperatures) single atoms are not stable.  But for a while, an atom can and will bounce around.  Question:  If Xenon is heavier than air (check it!)  why isn't there more of it in the troposphere?\n\nKeep on asking the impossible questions!
478695
a)\nThe unshared electrons on oxygen repel against the hydrogens bonded to the oxygen to cause them to be pushed as far away from the electrons as possible.  If the hydrogens were to repel any further than bent from the unshared electrons, they would touch each other.  They don't because the hydrogens also repel each other.
115540
The concepts that we cling to suggest that protons and electrons are particles that occupy a finite POINT in space. The truth is that this is a good picture to use to fit the kind of world we see outside the atom. But in fact we only know that the effects of electrons appear to come from one location, and that location (of the effects) seems to change with time. Therefore we say the particle (electron) moved.\n\n Regarding the nucleus and the protons and neutrons, it is difficult to picture stationary objects packed so closely together, particularly since the protons are repulsive to each other and since strange events periodically erupt from within most of them - sort of analogous to groups of people from opposing schools required to mingle at a party, but never allowed to group together with their friends. Occasionally a fight breaks out and someboby is pitched out the side door or window. Again at the site we identify with the particle, all we know is that there are electric and magnetic field characteristics emanating from the "site" where we say the particle resides. If the essence of the fields move, we say the particle moved.\n\nSo what is an electron? All we know is that there is an electric and magnetic field disturbance together with a phenomenon we call mass (gravitational emanations), that changes in location with time. That there is a central location for the emanations allows us to specify a spatial position for the particle.
676770
When you say intense, How intense? I worked on superconductor magnet before and I don't think there is any effect to human...and i believe that that is the strongest magnet that we can made in our technology today. But I am thinking of a magnet which is stronger like the magnetic field of a neutron star.\nI would guess that in some degree, the magnet will cause physical problem since there are irons in our blood or other minute amount of minerals in our body.\n\nIf the magnetic field is targeted in a single point in space?\nIf that is possible, Nothing will happen because it is known that the force of magnetism is short distance.\n\nYou cannot concentrate the magnetic field like laser, the area of force will be related to its strength. The stronger, the larger area of force due to more magnetic lines.\n\nMagnetism is a kind of force and it will not turn to visible light. Light is made of wave particle duality and is totally different from magnetic lines of force.
226272
There are four fundamental forces. Weak, strong, electromagnetic, and gravitational. They are seperate at low energies (all energies we experience around us). Gravity is definitely not just magnetism. Gravity acts on mass and energy (so everything), whereas electromagnetism only acts on electrically charged particles. They are definitely not the same thing.\n\nInteresting though: at extremely high energies the electromagnetic and the weak force combine into the electroweak force (done in high energy particle accelerators). The theory is that the strong force could also be combined into the electroweak force at insanely high energies...but we aren't really close to those kinds of energies in particle accelerators yet. From this reasoning it is possible that gravity could also be combined into the gravitational-strong-electroweak force haha. This would be at energies that are impossible to recreate though. Theories are that there was one grand energy working in the universe in the first fractions of a second of its existence after the Big Bang (since energies were increeedibly high). Then the gravitational force "departed" from it, then the strong, then the weak force, creating the four I mentioned before.\n\nThere definitely is a gravitational force though. It really is just masses attracting each other. General Relativity has a nice accurate description of gravity as well (without which a lot of our technology would not be possible, GPS for example).
643525
OK.  There was a discrepancy in the atomic mass of elements.  We have electrons, which have insignificant mass, and an equal number of protons (to make the atom neutral), but the atomic mass exceeds the sum of the masses of the protons + electrons.  So we hypothesize that there is another particle in the atom which has atomic mass roughly the same as a proton but no charge.\nIt makes sense that this particle is in the nucleus.\nBUT, we can't use magnetic properties to isolate this particle.  And an atom is pretty much indivisible.  So we must actually strip off the electrons AND the protons to isolate neutrons.  That's not easy.
621870
All normal matter is composed of particles such as protons, neutrons and electrons, and all of these have the fundamental property of quantum mechanical spin. Spin gives each one of these particles an associated magnetic field. Because of this, and the fact that the average microscopic piece of matter contains huge numbers of these particles, it would be expected that all matter would be magnetic. Even antimatter would have magnetic characteristics. However, everyday experience shows that this is not the case.\n\nWithin each atom and molecule, the spin of each of these particles is highly ordered as a result of the Pauli Exclusion Principle. However, there is no long range ordering of these spins between atoms and molecules. Without long range ordering, there is no net magnetic field because the magnetic moment of each one of the particles is cancelled by the magnetic moment of other particles.\n\nPermanent magnets are special in that long range ordering does exist. The highest degree of ordering exists within magnetic domains. These domains can be likened to microscopic neighbourhoods in which there is a strong reinforcing interaction between particles, and as a result, a great deal of order. The greater the degree of ordering within and between domains, the greater the resulting field will be.\n\nLong range ordering (and the resulting strong net magnetic field) is one of the hallmarks of a ferromagnetic material.