Dear Mr AWK;
I was not able to detect during writing my posting (Replay #8), that you edited your Replay #7 in the same moment in such a significant way, that my answer is not really fitting your posting anymore.
In case we really imply that the descriptions must mean the identical as the “Simple Cubic Packing” we have to end in, conform to Sev (Posting #3), that VA consumes the same Volume as VU and that must result in:
VU = (2rA)3 ---> rA = ½ * VU1/3 = 0.5 * (1.632247 * 10-23)1/3 = 126.835 pm
- with the final conclusion that the result of the textbook is not congruent to the calculation parameters of the same book!
So the only thing that can solve this dilemma, at least in my opinion, is that the parameters for the “Cubic Close Packing” must be used, what results in rA = 142.365 pm.
From my very little knowledge about crystallography this is not a real antagonism.
It seems that we finally have to accept the one or the other, as I don’t see any other solution.