From the posts "Sticky Particles Too...Many" dated 24 Jun 2016, etc,
\(ln(cosh(\cfrac { G }{ \sqrt { 2{ mc^{ 2 } } } }a_{\psi\,c}))=\cfrac{1}{4}\)
\(\cfrac { G }{ \sqrt { 2{ mc^{ 2 } } } }a_{\psi\,c}=0.7369\)
When \(n=77\),
\(\theta_{\psi}=\cfrac{G}{\sqrt{2mc^2}}a_{\psi\,\pi}\lt\pi\)
The pinch force in the post "Big Particle Exists" dated 28 Jun 2016 holds the particles with \(a_{\psi}=a_{\psi\,77}\) with greater magnitude when they are slightly displaced further apart center to center.
When \(n=76\), this pinch force is even higher as the particles are displaced slightly, as \(F_{\rho}\) increases monotonously with radial distance \(r\).
Does this contribute to a macroscopic view that when the number of nucleons is \(2\), \(8\), \(20\) or \(28\) the nucleus is strongly bounded?
Not directly. There is no reason why \(2\) nucleons in composite would make the constituent basic particles prefer a group of \(n=77\). But, \(n=77\) would make all number of nucleons of this number of constituent basic particles more strongly bounded. Furthermore, \(n=77\) being less than \(n=78\) would make such isotopes lighter in all magnitudes of charge, \(q|_{a_\psi}\), (gravitational mass, electric charge and temperature).
Do the quantum fractions, \(\cfrac{1}{77}\) and \(\cfrac{1}{78}\) exist? For that matter, \(\cfrac{1}{38}\) and \(\cfrac{1}{39}\) when we consider the interaction of only the exposed number of the constituent basic particles in each direction on half the surface of the big particle, \(a_{\psi\,\pi}\) together with the matter of attractive or repulsive interactions.
And kicked off the bang wagon I was.
Note: The least repulsive force and the maximum attractive force that result from the constituent basic particle redistributing or the big particle \(a_{\psi\,\pi}\) rotating away from a repulsive force and rotating towards an attractive force, do not result in an integer effective number of \(n=39\), or \(n=38\) either.
These numbers are guides not absolute truth.
