From: Eric Walker
* This elegant possibility of a gainful reaction in which stable nickel
converts to stable nickel, giving up energy, is why my prediction for the
Mizuno presentation in November is to suggest that they will see a relative
decrease in Ni58 and a relative increase in Ni60.
* The nickel to nickel idea seems very promising. I doubt there is deuteron
capture, because if there is deuteron capture, there is probably proton capture
as well, along with all of the nasty gammas. This is what is leading me to
deuterium stripping -- e.g., 60Ni(d,p)61Ni. Here the neutron is stripped off
of the deuteron and added to the nickel, and the proton flies in the other
direction, rather than there being a full capture.
Eric
Deuteron capture seems to be far and away the more likely scenario – at least
more than proton capture for three reasons.
First the deuteron is a boson, as is the nickel nucleus. This is not invoking a
condensate state or even a pseudo BEC, it relates to simple QM probability/
nuclear tunneling probability.
Note that stripping is closer to brute force thermodynamics, and unlikely to
happen in condensed matter.
Secondly, and most importantly - the neutron of the deuteron offers Coulomb
shielding.
This is related to isospin… I will allow Axil to elaborate on isospin since he
first introduced it into the mix.
Thirdly – the theory must reflect actual results. The main point of the
previous post was to show that in the nuclear physics of Ni <-> Cu, there is
apparently only one possibility which fits into the observation of
1) no radioactive debris and
2) no obvious transmutation product.
3) no gamma
Jones
