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

[Jones Beene]

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.

Basically, Parkhomov's experiment is looking very much like what BLP should
have done 20 years ago using zinc as a vapor-phase catalyst, in a hot
reactor. Zn as the lowest Rydberg level catalyst with lithium and nickel at
the deeper ionization levels makes a lot of sense. 

-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com 

>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 energy at all, because it would all go
with the neutrinos...

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

[mixent]

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 energy at all, because it would all go with the
neutrinos. The first excited state of 64Ni lies at 1346 keV, which exceeds the
decay energy (about 1 MeV), so the decay can only occur directly to the ground
state, implying no gammas, hence the energy is "gone with the wind".
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

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

[Roarty, Francis X]

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 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 breakthrough... or not. The 
isotope in question was depleted by almost half, so it provided most of the 
excess heat. If the 4.4% of mass 64 was due to zinc, then about 8% of the 
starting nickel was zinc contamination which is high but not impossible. Since 
Parkhomov sounds fairly sure, then he may have seen the other zinc isotopes 
which were not mentioned.

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 must accept 
that accelerated beta decay can provide excess heat and possibly avoid 
detection. Other mechanisms are possible but 64Zn has an extremely long 
half-life, yet it is known to beta decay.

The bottom line is that it would be wise to add zinc to a glowstick experiment 
to see if it could really be this simple.

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

[Jones Beene]

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 fact that 64Zn is slightly radioactive means that dense or fractional 
hydrogen could play the major role in a thermal anomaly process, since it is 
present in a metal matrix and positioned to disrupt the electrostatic balance 
of zinc nuclei by getting closer than with a normal hydride. This would be 
“accelerated beta decay” with dense hydrogen approaching the 64Zn nucleus close 
enough to trigger beta decay, which would be far more likely than fusion. 

 

Starting Zinc content would be 8% of the Nickel alloy. However, this is not out 
of the question, since there is a common zinc-nickel electroplating alloy and 
Parkhomov was known to be working on a low budget, so he may have used recycled 
nickel containing this alloy. 

 

This would be good news if true, since zinc is relatively cheap and beta decay 
is easily shielded. 

 

--

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 breakthrough... or not. The 
isotope in question was depleted by almost half, so it provided most of the 
excess heat. If the 4.4% of mass 64 was due to zinc, then about 8% of the 
starting nickel was zinc contamination which is high but not impossible. Since 
Parkhomov sounds fairly sure, then he may have seen the other zinc isotopes 
which were not mentioned.

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 must accept 
that accelerated beta decay can provide excess heat and possibly avoid 
detection. Other mechanisms are possible but 64Zn has an extremely long 
half-life, yet it is known to beta decay.

The bottom line is that it would be wise to add zinc to a glowstick experiment 
to see if it could really be this simple.

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

[Eric Walker]

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 propose.
>

On second thought, there is one possibility I might propose. If there is an
alpha emitter present whose decay is being induced, it may be that alpha
capture is taking the mass 64 peaks to 66 and 68, etc.

Eric

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

[Eric Walker]

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 must
> accept that accelerated beta decay can provide excess heat and possibly
> avoid detection. Other mechanisms are possible but 64Zn has an extremely
> long half-life, yet it is known to beta decay.


This thought occurred to me as well.  The decay I considered was a
double-electron capture to 64Ni.  The difficulty with this and other
weak-interaction decay modes is that the number of nucleons does not
change.  By contrast, what was reported was a decrease in the 64 mass peak
by nearly half.

This observation 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 propose.

Eric

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

[Jones Beene]

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 breakthrough... or not. The 
isotope in question was depleted by almost half, so it provided most of the 
excess heat. If the 4.4% of mass 64 was due to zinc, then about 8% of the 
starting nickel was zinc contamination which is high but not impossible. Since 
Parkhomov sounds fairly sure, then he may have seen the other zinc isotopes 
which were not mentioned.

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 must accept 
that accelerated beta decay can provide excess heat and possibly avoid 
detection. Other mechanisms are possible but 64Zn has an extremely long 
half-life, yet it is known to beta decay.

The bottom line is that it would be wise to add zinc to a glowstick experiment 
to see if it could really be this simple.

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

[Eric Walker]

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 and 68Zn
> extrapolated back to the amount of 64Zn.  I find it hard to believe that a
> competent lab would miss this.
>

I was thinking this, too.  Perhaps the lab reported only mass peaks, and
Parkhomov did the translation of peaks to stable isotopes?

It occurs to me that in this scenario the mass 64 peak would include both
nickel and zinc.

Eric

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

[Bob Higgins]

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.
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 and 68Zn
extrapolated back to the amount of 64Zn.  I find it hard to believe that a
competent lab would miss this.

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Eric Walker  wrote:

>
> > 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 of natural
> zinc, it strikes me as more likely there would have been zinc impurity than
> that there should be a surprisingly high relative fraction of 64Ni. If this
> is what happened, I'm further surprised that Parkhamov didn't catch
> something so obvious (with hindsight and/or skill).
>
> I'm going to further wager that there was a high degree of measurement
> uncertainty, obscuring a change that was minor or not at all in this case.
>
> Eric
>

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

[Jones Beene]

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 or potassium. 

In search of other references to 64Zn in the past, lots of the isotope
turned up in old report from Tom Passel and Russ George as the largest
anomaly in the transmutation products of Pd-D electrodes. Bizarre since in
that case, it is a product of the reaction and apparently not a cause -- but
the weird thing is that the pathways to get it is absurdly improbable since
there was no copper or nickel present... 

Go figure. It just gets curiouser and curiouser, as Alice might opine... 

-Original Message-
From: Eric Walker 

> 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 of natural zinc,
it strikes me as more likely there would have been zinc impurity than that
there should be a surprisingly high relative fraction of 64Ni. If this is
what happened, I'm further surprised that Parkhamov didn't catch something
so obvious (with hindsight and/or skill).

I'm going to further wager that there was a high degree of measurement
uncertainty, obscuring a change that was minor or not at all in this case.

Eric

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

[Eric Walker]

> 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 of natural zinc, it 
strikes me as more likely there would have been zinc impurity than that there 
should be a surprisingly high relative fraction of 64Ni. If this is what 
happened, I'm further surprised that Parkhamov didn't catch something so 
obvious (with hindsight and/or skill).

I'm going to further wager that there was a high degree of measurement 
uncertainty, obscuring a change that was minor or not at all in this case.

Eric

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

[Jones Beene]

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 seen in mass
spectroscopy-  and identified as 64Ni, which should only be found in a
concentration which is 400% lower.

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 ! It has a long half-life but the fact that it is known to be
radioactive could play a role in a process where protons are present in a
metal matrix, and can disrupt the electrostatic balance of nuclei.

Zinc is a common metal in ores with high sulfur and can end up in nickel, if
not carefully refined. The problem is that get 4% 64Zn, there would need to
be 8% of zinc metal in the alloy. However, this could happen. The tester
would see mass-64 and mislabel it as nickel if that is what was expected.

Furthermore, this scenario is not out of the question, if the nickel had
been recycled. There is a common zinc alloy with nickel which is the most
common electroplating alloy used is the electro-galvanization process for
protection of metal surfaces. 

Parkhomov was known to be working on a low budget, and he may have used a
recycled nickel as his fuel. This would actually be good news if true, since
zinc is relatively cheap.

I doubt this is the case, but it should be mentioned as a possibility.

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

[mixent]

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 mean it, i.e. a reaction resulting from the addition
of energy in some form to the nucleus is of course always possible.

Note however that 64Ni has close to maximal binding energy per nucleon, so you
need to add quite a lot to get it to change.

>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 on two counts, although nickel in general
>is high on the list of presumed stability since it has a magic number of
>protons. There is no intrinsic or absolute property of "stability," since it
>is purely observational - and as we know, many nickel isotopes do decay,
>despite the magic - notably 63Ni which is lighter than 64Ni.  
>
>There are many nuclides which are now known to be slightlyradioactive, but
>forty years were called stable because they have extremely long half-lives
>and were not observed to decay. My old Oxford reference book has a number of
>errors, due to recent observation.
>
>Secondly, stimulated decay can be the product of a strong stimulant, so to
>speak, such as a cosmic ray neutrino, muon etc. That was the original
>context.
>
>Of course any sufficiently strong stimulant can give the identical
>appearance of decay, and to quibble about the semantics of whether it is a
>reaction or a decay is of no help- since stability is an observed property.
>
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

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

[Jones Beene]

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 on two counts, although nickel in general
is high on the list of presumed stability since it has a magic number of
protons. There is no intrinsic or absolute property of "stability," since it
is purely observational - and as we know, many nickel isotopes do decay,
despite the magic - notably 63Ni which is lighter than 64Ni.  

There are many nuclides which are now known to be slightlyradioactive, but
forty years were called stable because they have extremely long half-lives
and were not observed to decay. My old Oxford reference book has a number of
errors, due to recent observation.

Secondly, stimulated decay can be the product of a strong stimulant, so to
speak, such as a cosmic ray neutrino, muon etc. That was the original
context.

Of course any sufficiently strong stimulant can give the identical
appearance of decay, and to quibble about the semantics of whether it is a
reaction or a decay is of no help- since stability is an observed property.

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

[mixent]

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 other radioactive isotopes.

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. There are no exothermic decay pathways
available.
However that doesn't rule out fusion/fission pathways, as these add energy to
the nucleus during the fusion step (where neutron absorption is also considered
to be "fusion").
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

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

[Stephen Cooke]

I'm not sure about stimulate decay by Neutron spallation of these very stable 
nuclei as this would require huge energies normally associated with high energy 
particle collisions, (unless those energies can be reached by accumulation or 
resonance somehow). I guess this is your point also.
I do wonder however if Ni63 is present if it would be confused with CU63 in the 
SIM's analysis. Although CU63 is stable and Ni63 is not Ni63 has a long 
half-life of 101 years and low beta emission energy with a very low intensity 
at maximum energy around 66.9keV, an average emission energy of around 17keV 
and a peak intensity at even lower energies. These low energies of beta 
emission makes me think the beta emission from Ni63 might be very difficult to 
detect and easily blocked. 
If Ni63 does occur through some process and it can absorb a proton to form Cu64 
perhaps it leads a way to breed 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 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 has a half life of about 100
> years.
> 
> Harry
> 
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 5:32 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > Iron-nickel meteorites can contain high levels of heavy nickel (64Ni).
> >
> > In space debris analyzed at U of Chicago, an increase of ~500‰ excess in
> > 64Ni has been found in samples. This is about the level of the heavy nickel
> > which Parkhomov used in the Sochi paper. We are trying to find out where his
> > nickel came from since it must have been natural and he was unaware.
> >
> > The main Fe/Ni alloy that makes this natural kind of enrichment happen is
> > called kamacite. The process is called “fractionation” and it requires
> > millions of years in space to happen. Of course, to balance things out,
> > there is another distinct alloy in iron meteorites which often has low
> > levels of heavy nickel, and it is call taenite. The first kamacite was found
> > at Meteor Crater, Arizona and it is common all over the world. There are
> > occasional listings on eBay for kamacite, but the expected level of
> > enrichment is not known.
> >
> > When meteorites are heated and cooled and subjected to magnetic fields as
> > they orbit the sun, heavy nickel migrates from taenite to kamacite. Thus,
> > there is a known way that enrichment in heavy nickel can occur naturally and
> > probably something similar could happen with in an industrial setting with
> > zone refining – should it be shown that 64Ni is the active isotope.
> 
  

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

[Jones Beene]

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 since it
has a half-life of about 100 years.

Harry

I see that another older, possible slant on the identity of the gainful
reaction of 64Ni is still online, which is the Oppenheimer-Phillips effect.
This goes back 6 years! 

http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/06/cold-fusion-and-blacklight-power.html

The OP mechanism gives the effect of neutron absorption in nickel without
the need of free neutrons. Thus, secondary activation is not a problem. The
main problem with the OP hypothesis is that it limits the gainful reaction
to the one nickel isotope (64) in combination with deuterium - so why does
it not happen with the other nickel isotopes? 

Does the 64Ni nucleus possess enough of a shielded positive charge at the
near-field, due to the extra neutrons? That would allow only the heavy
nickel to participate in stripping, but it is a stretch. And here is a
further stretch.

The OP effect depends on deuterium and ostensibly does not involve hydrogen,
and there is simply not enough natural deuterium available - unless.that is.
the OP effect also works with "virtual deuterium" which would be pretty good
description of the UDD molecule. 

But that is adding another miracle into the mix :-)

Hey. why not?... we're getting close to Easter.

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

[Jones Beene]

-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. There are no neutrons 
reported by anyone so far - so we can probably eliminate that channel. If we go 
back to basics and think about what is special about a tightly bound, 
neutron-rich ferromagnetic nucleus with no nuclear spin, and which does not 
emit neutrons, then we probably will want to shift focus to the hydrogen, and 
not the nickel... and possibly revisit Holmlid's finding of muons.

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

[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.
On the other hand if 64Ni decayed to 62Ni by first decaying to 63Ni,
then 63Ni should be detectable since it has a half life of about 100
years.

Harry

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 5:32 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
> Iron-nickel meteorites can contain high levels of heavy nickel (64Ni).
>
> In space debris analyzed at U of Chicago, an increase of ~500‰ excess in
> 64Ni has been found in samples. This is about the level of the heavy nickel
> which Parkhomov used in the Sochi paper. We are trying to find out where his
> nickel came from since it must have been natural and he was unaware.
>
> The main Fe/Ni alloy that makes this natural kind of enrichment happen is
> called kamacite. The process is called “fractionation” and it requires
> millions of years in space to happen. Of course, to balance things out,
> there is another distinct alloy in iron meteorites which often has low
> levels of heavy nickel, and it is call taenite. The first kamacite was found
> at Meteor Crater, Arizona and it is common all over the world. There are
> occasional listings on eBay for kamacite, but the expected level of
> enrichment is not known.
>
> When meteorites are heated and cooled and subjected to magnetic fields as
> they orbit the sun, heavy nickel migrates from taenite to kamacite. Thus,
> there is a known way that enrichment in heavy nickel can occur naturally and
> probably something similar could happen with in an industrial setting with
> zone refining – should it be shown that 64Ni is the active isotope.

[Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

[Jones Beene]

Iron-nickel meteorites can contain high levels of heavy nickel (64Ni). 

In space debris analyzed at U of Chicago, an increase of ~500‰ excess in
64Ni has been found in samples. This is about the level of the heavy nickel
which Parkhomov used in the Sochi paper. We are trying to find out where his
nickel came from since it must have been natural and he was unaware.

The main Fe/Ni alloy that makes this natural kind of enrichment happen is
called kamacite. The process is called “fractionation” and it requires
millions of years in space to happen. Of course, to balance things out,
there is another distinct alloy in iron meteorites which often has low
levels of heavy nickel, and it is call taenite. The first kamacite was found
at Meteor Crater, Arizona and it is common all over the world. There are
occasional listings on eBay for kamacite, but the expected level of
enrichment is not known.

When meteorites are heated and cooled and subjected to magnetic fields as
they orbit the sun, heavy nickel migrates from taenite to kamacite. Thus,
there is a known way that enrichment in heavy nickel can occur naturally and
probably something similar could happen with in an industrial setting with
zone refining – should it be shown that 64Ni is the active isotope.