Dear scientists,

I have just completed a new paper (unpublished, 10 pages) entitled :

"Is Mass Spectrometry Accurate?"

The pdf file of the paper is may be downloaded at my website.

Although mass spectrometry has very high precision, the technique to weigh atoms has not been verified to be accurate. The physics underlying the technique, the Lorentz force law itself has not been verified to be strictly correct in its mathematical form. The current accepted atomic masses of nuclides differ very slightly from the whole number of the mass number. It is not outrages to believe mass conservation may hold in the subatomic world. It may be that if we were to be able to weigh atoms using our `verified' precision beam balances, the atomic mass of a nuclide could just be a whole number, its atomic mass being nothing but its mass number in atomic mass unit! Sodium fluoride holds the key to the answer. If a precise chemical analysis of NaF is done today to determine the relative atomic mass of Na/F, then a value of 1.210089 ± 0.000012 would mean mass spectrometry is verified to be accurate; otherwise if the value is 1.210526 ± 0.000012, it would mean a confirmation of the law of mass conservation.

Best regards,

Chan Rasjid Kah Chew,

Singapore,

http://www.emc2fails.com

ABSTRACT . Mass spectrometry currently measures atomic masses giving precision in the order of 10¯¹⁰ , but this accuracy has not been established experimentally to be correct - precision and accuracy are two independent aspects. The Lorentz force law itself - the formula underlying mass spectrometry - has not been verified. In the 1920’s, the atomic masses of some elements measured through the early mass spectrometers showed some discrepancies from the ‘whole-number-rule’ of atomic weights. The physics community accepted the discrepancies from whole numbers to be correct; they proposed the concept of ‘mass defects’. This, together with the mass energy equivalence of E = mc 2 allowed Arthur Eddington to propose a new ‘sub-atomic’ energy to account for the source of the energy of the sun to be in line with the 15 billion age of the sun in their theory. They never entertained the other simpler option - that their mass spectrometers were only approximately good. If the atomic masses of nuclides were to be just whole numbers equal to the mass number in atomic mass unit, it would be a confirmation of the law of mass conservation in the atomic and subatomic world. The key to decide the fate of nuclear physics is in sodium fluoride NaF. Sodium and fluorine occur in nature only as single stable isotopes. A chemical analysis of NaF with the current analytical balance to determine the relative atomic mass of Na/F would decide conclusively if mass spectrometry is accurate. The current relative atomic mass of Na/F is : 22.989769/18.998403 or 1.210089; the ratio of the mass number of Na/F is : 23/19 or 1.210526. The accuracy of mass spectrometry would be confirmed if the value is 1.210089 ± 0.000012. Otherwise, if the value is 1.210526 ± 0.000012, it would mean a confirmation of the law of conservation of mass. The implications of such a scenario is beyond imagination - the whole world of nuclear physics would collapse.