OTOH, if the predominant form of Ni, for example is an excited nuclear isomer, then the spectrum will consist of results consistent with that isomer, with the experimenter believing he was beginning with material that was in a "ground"state simply because it is the most abundant state. How could the experimenter know that there was only a small amount of material in the ground state unless he observed enough of the spectrum from that isomeric state to identify a second spectrum?
There is an analog of this in the atomic sense. According to Maly, Vavra, Naudts, Muelenberg, and Mills, etc, the Dirac equation (and Mills' equations) state that what we consider to be the atomic ground state is in fact an excited atomic isomer. Mills claims it is possible to mine energy from the abundant ground state atoms by catalyzing them to a stable lower energy state - a lower energy atomic isomeric state. Maly, Vavra, Naudts, and Muelenberg have identified the much lower energy (perhaps true ground state), but have not necessarily shown how it is possible to transition to these lower levels and mine the energy difference. It must be difficult, in general, to transition to these lower energy atomic isomeric states, or the highest abundance of matter would be in these states. I.E. the "ground state" as we know it may be a very deep energy well for an excited atomic isomeric state. The DDL revelations have opened thought that it may be possible that most of the matter we interact with on a daily basis may not be in its global minimum energy state - neither atomic minimum energy nor nuclear minimum energy. In both cases a clever system could mine additional energy from these atoms/nuclei with no violation of physics. It would basically be mining energy from the original creation of these atoms to be deposited somewhere else. If you take that thought to an extreme, it could well be that atoms themselves are simply a deep local minimum in the energy state of all of its constituent particles. Bob On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:55 AM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: > Interesting thought Bob. It seems that this type of situation would have > revealed itself when the suspected isomer containing element was subjected > to neutron activation experimentation. I would suspect that this sort of > test would have been performed frequently in the past when elements were > being characterized by physicists. They should have seen a different gamma > ray spectrum depending upon the quantity and type of isomers present within > their test samples. > > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Higgins <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Mon, Jan 18, 2016 10:02 am > Subject: [Vo]: Are nuclear isomers ubiquitous? > > Recent discussion of nuclear isomers has stimulated a chain of thought > that clearly points to holes in my understanding of isomers. From reading > in Norman Cook's book, I find that nuclear theory is in a quite primitive > state. It caused me to ask myself, "How are nuclear isomers determined?", > "How are isomers predicted?", and "How are the ultra-stable isomers > formed?". > > It strikes me that nuclear isomers must comprise a local minimum in the > energy state of the nucleus. This may be manifest as a lattice arrangement > of the nucleons having a low energy, but not the lattice arrangement having > the minimum energy. When the heavy elements form in stellar and nova > nucleosynthesis, one would expect all of the nuclear lattice states to be > populated - including all of the isomeric local minima in the lattice state > energy. If the energy difference between the nuclear ground state (lowest > energy lattice arrangement) and the isomeric state is low or the local > minimum is deep, then the isomeric state may have a half-life that is > greater than the age of the universe. This means that that the possibility > exists for large amounts of isomeric nuclei. > > How do we determine that an element's nucleus is an isomer or is in its > ground state? Chemically they would behave the same. We cannot > conveniently distill the atoms and look at the spectra of the total energy > of the nucleus very easily. Let me make a proposition (and please tell me > if this is easily falsifyable): > > - > *Many elements have large fractions of their nuclei in an > isomeric/non-ground state that is highly stable. * > > If this were true, instead of a fusion or transmutation, *could LENR be a > catalyzed transition of nuclei to a lower or ground state from a stable > isomeric state?* Could the introduction of hydrogen in close proximity > to a nucleus provide the dither or the "grease" to permit the transition of > the nucleus? Could transmutations sometimes occur during the transition of > the nucleus from its isomeric state, in proximity with such a hydrogen > catalyst? Could the the primary branch of such an isomeric transition be > low energy gamma that is predominantly absorbed in the apparatus? > > Note that every element having a different atomic mass, I.E a different > number of nucleons (for example each of the different isotopes of Ni) would > have a different set of isomeric states. Some isotopes may have stable > isomeric states while other isotopes may not. For that reason, some > isotopes of Ni may be found to be more energetic in catalyzed decay of > their isomers. > > This would seem to be a completely new avenue for explanation of LENR > without violation of known physics or introduction of exotica. It would > also be still a huge energy opportunity. > > Discussion? > > Bob Higgins >
