On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 7:14 AM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe < [email protected]> wrote:
The end result is that you get a 6 digit match between calculated and > meassured ionisation energy for Hydrogene and similar accuracy for the one > electron ions. > I assume this a claim that goes back to the BLP promotional literature. Have you had a chance to verify the calculation? Another followup question: since the electrons inhabit concentric orbitspheres of infinitesimal thickness about the nuclear volume, does this imply that they never spend time in the nuclear volume? If so, how is one to understand internal conversion? As you know, internal conversion is a process that competes with gamma emission. In some transitions, there is a high likelihood that an orbital electron will be ejected from the atom with a characteristic decay energy that will in other cases be imparted to a gamma photon. In some cases gamma emission is "forbidden" by the change in angular momentum from the parent to the daughter daughter nucleus, as happens in a 0+ to 0+ transition. In this case less than 1 unit of angular momentum is available, which is needed for a photon, and so instead the energy is imparted to an inner shell electron in the atom, which is then kicked out. (Once the electron is ejected, a characteristic x-rays is emitted as the orbital is refilled.) The understanding is that this happens because, due to the three-dimensional nature of the electron orbitals, going back to the spherical harmonics, electrons spend part of their time in the nuclear volume and "sample" it. How does this description change once we've received Mills's teachings? Eric
