In reply to Eric Walker's message of Mon, 22 Sep 2014 21:08:59 -0700: Hi Eric, [snip] >On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 8:01 PM, <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote: > >I would still be inclined to consider reactions that produce heavy charged >> particles. The heavier and slower, the better. E.g. fusion/fission >> reactions. > > >The reactions I've been looking at recently have charged particles as >daughters as well. But the daughters are generally protons in the 5-10 MeV >range. The way I propose that gammas from excited nuclei are avoided is to >suggest that the reactions occur at the surface and that the daughters fly >out from the surface:
...but wouldn't you expect 1/2 to fly away from the surface, and half to fly into it? > >+++++++++ d > >+++++++ p p p > >+++ p p p d p p >++ p ---> p d p >+++ p p d p p p > >+++++++ p p p > >+++++++++ p > > >Here the (+)'s are nickel lattice sites. The p results from an Ni(d,p)Ni >reaction. The arrow represents the momentum. Although the p is born with >~ 5-10 MeV of energy, it burrows into the other p's at the surface, quickly >thermalizing to a much lower energy. Occasionally there is a d that is >broken apart through spallation. This wouldn't happen very often with a >normal hydrogen mix, because there are only ~ 1/6000 parts deuterium, and >only a fraction of these would be encountered (and only a fraction of the >neutrons resulting from such spallations would exit the system). > >I think the secondary gammas from heavily charged slow moving daughter >> nuclei >> might have been shielded. >> > >By this I take it you mean gammas from lattice sites excited through >inelastic collisions? Yes, that's what I meant. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html