Axil--

You have stated:

<<<<"IMHO, all fusing nuclei input to the LENR reaction must have zero spin.


<<<<All isotopes of Cu have non zero spins and therefore are non reactive in 
LENR fusion. Cu will produce RF as being NMR active." 


Why do you think non-zero spin isotopes of Ni and Cu are LENR inactive and/or 
fusing nuclei input to the LENR reaction must have zero spin.?

I think that if spin coupling occurs, spin and its angular momentum can be 
swapped among all coupled particles.  However, it must be conserved IMHO.  I 
can imagine that  2 Ni isotopes of Ni could change the sign of their spin in a 
magnetic field and pair up as a Cooper pair, much like electrons and protons 
pair up with spin in opposite directions.  The net spin and angular momentum 
would be zero.  Such a pair may react readily with other paired particles, for 
example, paired  H or D particles.  LENR is not fully understood yet. 

Bob
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Axil Axil 
  To: vortex-l 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 12:07 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi on Ni62


  Ni61 has be found to be LENR inactive due to its non zero nuclear spin.


  On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 3:03 AM, Bob Cook <[email protected]> wrote:

    Eric--

    Whoever wrote the Wikipedia item you reference does not appear to 
understand the difference between spin of 3/2+ and 3/2-.  The statement about 
the spin of Ni-61 is incorrect.


    Bob
      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Eric Walker 
      To: [email protected] 
      Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2014 11:30 PM
      Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi on Ni62


      I wrote:


        About the beta-delayed gamma -- it's not clear that the 63Ni* gamma 
decay is a beta-delayed gamma in this instance (see the decay in [1]).  But as 
you know beta-delayed gammas are a frequent occurrence.  The half-life of the 
beta decay in this case is 100 years, so if there is beta-delayed gamma 
emission, the activity would be significant.


      The excited state after a beta- decay would be in the daughter (63Cu) not 
the parent (63Ni).  I don't see any evidence for a 63Cu* excited state.  You 
are probably right.  Embarrassing rookie error on my part.


      Eric



Reply via email to