RE: [Vo]: Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

Robin, After tossing around all the possibilities of the Sochi results, beta decay appears not to fit the data very well. The isotope anomaly at mass 64 is possibly not significant other than to show that a few percent zinc was a contaminant. Zinc could be involved in a role as a Mills catalyst.

Re: [Vo]: Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

In reply to Jones Beene's message of Mon, 28 Mar 2016 19:45:28 -0700: Hi, [snip] >This would be good news if true, since zinc is relatively cheap and beta decay >is easily shielded. I suspect that it in fact decays via double electron capture directly to 64Ni. If so, you might not get any

RE: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]: Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

Time dilation sounding plausible yet? :_) Fran From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 10:11 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]: Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel Bob Greenyer got this answer back from Parkhomov

RE: [Vo]: Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

Now that we are learning the 64Zn could be an active isotope for thermal gain in the glow-tube (assuming no measurement errors) it should be noted that this is the most common isotope of zinc but is slightly radioactive with an extremely long half-life. It does not need to be enriched. The

Re: [Vo]: Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

I wrote: This observation [of a change in the number of nucleons] is what lead to an > earlier comment of mine that there might be a large experimental > uncertainty. Or there's something changing the number of nucleons for 64Zn > and/or 64Ni, in which case I personally have no conjecture to

Re: [Vo]: Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 9:10 PM, Jones Beene wrote: Obviously, the next questions are something like this: was the depletion of > the zinc-64 (compared to the starting level) due to its slight inherent > radioactivity, and was the decay vastly accelerated? If so, then we

RE: [Vo]: Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

Bob Greenyer got this answer back from Parkhomov on the "64Ni" question (Sochi results). "About high content of 64Ni. We assume that in fact an impurity 64Zn was registered. Mass spectrometer cannot distinguish between these two isotopes." That could be big news… This could be a major

Re: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 9:14 PM, Bob Higgins wrote: > HOWEVER, if the Zn were present, you would also see peaks for stable 66Zn > and 68Zn for which there would be no corresponding peaks of Ni. The amount > of total Zn would be inferred from the amounts of the 66Zn

Re: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

This is an interesting prospect. 64Ni and 64Zn are not separable by even high resolution ICP-MS. HR-ICP-MS can have resolving powers up to about 10k, but separating 64Ni and 64Zn would require a resolving power of about 55k. It is also relatively difficult to separate Ni and Zn chemically.

RE: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

Eric - Yes, this is situation is very puzzling, especially that it went un-noticed in Russia. One detail worth adding into the mix is that zinc is a Mills catalyst, and one of the few with a lowest value (27.2 eV) Rydberg fit... meaning that it is more accessible at low temperatures than nickel

Re: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

> On Mar 25, 2016, at 8:33, "Jones Beene" wrote: > > However ... it should be noted that there is one other possibility to > consider. Zinc-64 is the most common isotope of zinc, and it is slightly > radioactive ! I like this suggestion a lot. As 64Zn comprises nearly half

RE: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

The reason this thread was started was to try to explain Parkhomov's data of 4+% enrichment of 64Ni, which was depleted during the run, and consequently - this isotope is the most likely candidate to provide the excess energy which he sees. The precise situation is that an element of 64 amu was

Re: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 24 Mar 2016 16:38:02 -0700: Hi Jones, Perhaps I should have been more explicit. By stimulate I really meant "catalyze". In short some form of stimulus where no external energy is actually added, but which speeds up a reaction. Stimulus as you apparently

RE: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

Original Message- From: mix...@bigpond.com > Stimulated "decay" is not a possibility. You can't "stimulate" a reaction that's isn't going to happen all by itself anyway over a long enough period, and 64Ni doesn't decay. It's quite stable. Hi, Robin No, that's technically not correct

Re: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

In reply to Jones Beene's message of Tue, 22 Mar 2016 15:17:19 -0700: Hi, [snip] >-Original Message- >From: H LV > >> The stimulated decay of 64Ni should be accompanied by neutrons and/or >> radioactivity. If it decayed directly to 62Ni this would generate detectable >> neutrons and

RE: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

Ni64 via Cu64 decay via ec or beta+ emission. > Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 18:00:39 -0400 > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel > From: hveeder...@gmail.com > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > > The stimulated decay of 64Ni should be accom

Re: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

HLV: "The stimulated decay of 64Ni should be accompanied by neutrons and/or radioactivity. If it decayed directly to 62Ni this would generate detectable neutrons and other radioactive isotopes. On the other hand if 64Ni decayed to 62Ni by first decaying to 63Ni, then 63Ni should be detectable

RE: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

-Original Message- From: H LV > The stimulated decay of 64Ni should be accompanied by neutrons and/or > radioactivity. If it decayed directly to 62Ni this would generate detectable > neutrons and other radioactive isotopes. Stimulated decay is one possibility but not the only one.

Re: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

The stimulated decay of 64Ni should be accompanied by neutrons and/or radioactivity. If it decayed directly to 62Ni this would generate detectable neutrons and other radioactive isotopes. On the other hand if 64Ni decayed to 62Ni by first decaying to 63Ni, then 63Ni should be detectable since it