Jones, I have a copy of the paper.
The reasons for the isotopic distributions are conjectured to be due to mobilities of different isotopes, but the authors conclusions are quite tentative. Having perused it, I am confused by some of their data. For example, Table-1 (on page-B) appears to show too much missing Hg for "Lamp G" after 3600 hours for all isotopes - unless there was an unusual gain in 198Hg (ratios for other isotopes are wrt 198Hg) - if I am reading the results correctly. I think the experiment should be repeated under lab conditions, rather than with CFLs. I like Robin's suggestion to add H or H2O. -- Lou Pagnucco Jones Beene wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > > An anomalous isotopic profile of mercury is found in CFL light bulbs > that have been running for many hours - probably due to differential > absorption into the bulb glass. > > > This is most interesting - and there may be other interpretations of the > data, particularly if one subscribes to the notion of neutron tunneling > between isotopes at a distance. (I do not, but it is worth a mention since > differential absorption is equally problematic). > > There is a graph (in the abstract) which seems to indicate that one > isotope > is the main source of the anomaly, and two others participate. > > http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es303940p?source=cen > > The largest apparent anomaly is Hg-196 which in nature is only 2 parts per > thousand of all mercury. By comparison there is 50 times more of the 199 > isotope. A smaller anomaly is seen in Hg-201. Both the 199 and 201 > isotopes > have nuclear spin and high magnetic susceptibility (for those who > subscribe > to a magnon-based LENR theory). Plus the magnetic moments of 199 and 201 > are > balanced plus and minus. This could be coincidental of course, and since > neutron tunneling at a distance is not well-appreciated and requires a bit > more energy than the CFL receives, it is no surprise that this QM > connection > was not mentioned in the original paper. > > The low isotopic percentage of Hg-196 in nature, and its mass variation > from > the more common isotopes, may mean latent primordial instability - yet > there > is a relative increase in CFL bulbs, not a decrease. Thus we may opine > that > this anomaly is probably not related to anomalous decay, and the results > are > also a poor fit with mass fractionalization. But if we renormalize > everything into a flat fit - then we can possibly explain both the > increase > in 196, the larger decrease in 199 and the relative lower decrease in 201 > via some kind of QM neutron tunneling which takes place over many hundreds > of hours of constant exposure to electrical current. With this > explanation, > all spikes would flatten and eliminate the mass variation seen in the > graph. > > The major little problem with this explanation can be called of "musical > neutrons" but we are talking about very long exposures to electrical > current, and any QM rationalization could suffice - such that Hg-199 would > be seen transfer neutrons to 201, thus transmuting to 196, while at the > same > time 201 gains mass in relative proportion to everything but 196. IOW the > isotopic mass shifts disappear to a flat line when one proposes that the > two > mercury spin isotopes transfer mass in the form of neutrons from the > higher > spin state to lower spin state of the two NMR isotopes. What seems like a > larger increase in 196 is merely due to its low starting percentage > compared > to the other two. Thus the variation will be flattened - to the extent one > accepts QM neutron tunneling. > > It's quite a stretch of course ... >
