In reply to Jones Beene's message of Mon, 23 Dec 2013 10:59:05 -0800: Hi, [snip] >Stefan, > > > >Although you are talking about something different with Kim, your comment >brought to mind the possibility - that if one buys into a more general >version of neutron exchange, accepting the argument that nickel may be a >prime donor- and at the same time, there was good evidence that Ni-H gets >its gain from protons going to deuterium, then the neutron exchange >mechanism provides an alternate way to accomplish this, with less screening. > > > >Hmm. sounds somewhat like a version of the Oppenheimer-Phillips effect where >the neutron is not stripped from the donor - so much as transferred via >tunneling to the approaching proton - thus eliminating the possibility of >free neutrons. (which are known to be absent). Spin could be a problem.
It takes 6-8 MeV to remove a neutron from Ni, and one only gains 2.2 MeV by converting P into D. However if you are looking at neutron exchange reactions, then you may also want to consider concurrent exchange of 2 neutrons:- 58Ni+62Ni => 60Ni + 60Ni + 1.970 MeV or 58Ni+64Ni => 61Ni + 61Ni + 1.115 MeV 58Ni+64Ni => 62Ni + 60Ni + 3.891 MeV The energy would likely end up as kinetic energy of the nuclei, which being heavy would also be slow, so no gamma or X-rays are likely. Although these don't occur under normal circumstances, they might occur under the circumstances that Axil posits. Of course that then leads one to wonder why Hydrogen is needed at all? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
