Any way you axe the question, this particular magic Ox is unquestionably
no "babe"... closer to a flash of lightning, perhaps...
There are so-called magic numbers of protons and neutrons in nuclei.
Elements in the periodic table which fit this criterion are particularly
stable: The numbers are:
2,8,20,28,50,82 and 126
Atomic nuclei consisting of such magic number of nucleons, either of
protons or neutrons or the combination of the two -- have a higher
average binding energy per nucleon than one would expect based upon
predictions from any of the semi-empirical mass-formula stability
calculations, and they are significantly more stable against nuclear
decay - by at least an order of magnitude (timewise) in most cases than
are similar non-magic species. Pythagoras was right - there is magic in
numbers.
There is no element which can satisfy "triple stability" which would be
that the neutrons, protons, and the combination were all three magic.
There are a few doubly stable elements: helium, oxygen, calcium.
From a purely theoretical standpoint, then, one is led to wonder why
element 28, which is Nickel, does not have a stable isotope: 56Ni or why
nickel is not as common as iron (element 26), or why 54Fe is not the
most common isotope of iron. It should be - on paper, since the 28
neutrons would be a favored magic number within the range of
excess-neutrons that this particular 'slot' on the periodic table should
have.
In some asteroids, BTW, there is lots of nickel, occasionally more
nickel than iron. And in some the isotope ratio is highly warped over
what is found on earth. In fact all of these curiosities have an
inter-related underlying rationale, leading to an eventual understanding
of the role of Pythagorean-type 'magic'.
In fact, in cosmology and in the supernova - 56 Ni is an important
species - but not on earth. And one reason that there is so much iron
wrt to nickel here goes back to that cosmic furnace situation, where
56Ni decays to iron -- since the nickel 'slot' requires a greater number
of neutrons than protons for threshold stability. Do not confuse all of
this nickel-slot talk with a nickelodeon <g> even if it is only wastes 3
minutes of your time. The magic part is overhwhelmed, so to speak, by
threshold slot parameters of the periodic table
OK - Once it comes out of a strong gravity field, then - the 56Ni decays
to iron (or cobalt) making iron the most abundant metal around. In the
laboratory, 56Ni decays via electron capture with a 6-day half-life.
Even so, this is a factor of 18 times longer life than a similar
situation without the 'magic', such as 52Fe, for instance, which has a
half-life in hours.
All of this rambling is offered as a preamble to another speculation
regarding oxygen, when in an intense arc, such that the result is a
temporary "quark soup" situation, so to speak. This might help explain
why lightning seems to be part of an energy anomaly, in some cases.
... or not. The following has just been dreampt up in the last few
minutes, and you can now have the opportunity to vet it.
Back to that point about no element which can satisfy "triple stability"
which would be that the neutrons, protons, and the combination were all
three magic. There is only one possibility, in the entire panoply of
elements which even comes close to potential short-term triple stability
(even with inherent overall impossibility due to the 'slot' limitations)
and which would be extremely transitory even if it were real (which is
just a guess). And this scenario would be coming out of an intense arc
discharge, like lightning (or the supernova).
8 protons, 20 neutrons and 28 nucleons works on paper. The 20 neutral
particles, which are neutron-like, presents the situation which might
include hydrinos, IF there is such a particle) giving a total nucleus of
28. Triple temporary stability even if the neutron imbalance is
impossible to sustain.
That is the proposed temporary species. This would be a (highly
speculative) transitory nucleus which would surely have a lifetime of
much less than one second, but being in the category where triple
stability might be found in certain situations (i.e. an intense gravity
field) this albeit short lifetime - could nevertheless be far longer
than expected, and the resultant decay more intense than expected.
...or not ;-)
Jones
