Bob,
OK let's also mention the main objection to this hypothesis. (Ni62 + HDH
-> Ni63)
The objection would be the extended half-life of about 3 months for
Ni-63. This is a problematic since the nickel powder should be
radioactive after a run for many months, due to Ni-63 activation - and
this has not been reported in the literature.
OTOH - the scenario which is being proposed is absorption of a virtual
neutron (dense hydrogen) instead of a real neutron. The decay pathway
would no doubt be different.
Is the beta decay of this alternative version of Ni-63 immediate when
UDH has been the activator?
If not, then the scenario is wrong.
bobcook39...@gmail.com wrote:
An advantage of Ni-63 is that it does not collect in the body like
Sr-90 does and thus does not pose a large biological hazard, although
to much can cause a problem. In addition it is not as mobile in water
as Sr-90 is.
Bob Cook
