Re: Isotope decay chains

From: Angelo (patrik56_at_libero.it)
Date: 01/31/05 

Date: 31 Jan 2005 13:39:00 -0800

Y.Porat wrote:
> so thank you Angelo
> yet your posibility of 197Pt to me somehow more abundant in that or
> other stage
> of history is ... could we say vey faint and speculative??

Well, I don't know for sure: someone far more expert
than me in this field may help with your question.
Another source for 197Au may be 197Hg, through
Electron Capture. Although I can't easily see other
(further) decay chains that can lead to 197Au, I can't
be sure about their non-existence.

> so if we go with the strighforward avalable data
> 197 Pt is not the mother of the *main body of Gold'
> if yet
> do you realise what a goo dhelp[ you were to me ???!!

As I told you, I substantially don't know your model,
so I'm unaware whether I helped (and how much,
in this case), or not.

> because if that is the case you helpe dme to start veryfy one of my
> *unprecenented predictions' !!
> anyone whyo have my book can realise that this is not just an
> 'out of the blue' prediction' it is obvious there that the basic
> skeleton
> of Platinum is very different from that of Gold iow

But the various isotopes of Pt have all a similar 'skeleton',
or not, according to your model? Moreover, I couldn't
understand why 'natural 197Au' should be different wrt
that coming from 197Pt: the individual protons and
neutrons in the nucleus are perhaps blocked in an altered
arrangement which is not that of the ground state?

> differnt in obvious detales
> if you donrt believe you can ask those people who got my book

(I don't know which are those people, except possibly,
IIRC, Bjoern Feurbacher, from what I read in previous
threads, some months ago)

> and that is not the only possible prediction
> ther are there i would say much more meaninful fo r praticl use
> in present and for future!!
> so thank you again Aggelo

You are welcome, but please mind that as far as
QM, QED, QFT are not falsified, I trust them.

> may be we stated to do history on live internet

This statement seems to me an exaggerated one.
You are free to think so (obviously). I, on my side,
would have expected at least one prediction by you
that is simultaneously in contrast with the above
theories, and better described known facts.
This to be sincere: I hope you won't take it bad.

> ps other peole as swell are invited to veryfy or disprove my above
> claim

Ok, no problem for me. Anyway, do you think
that claim so strong to be proved? I mean, we
all know that Pt and Au have different physical
and chemical properties. So, what else would entail
your prediction? IMHO, you should provide a more
precise differentiating feature, don't you think so?

> another ps
> Angelo you still didnt answer me about your triton Alpha question
> that you presented
> my question was
> what is your question there and
> is it unsolved otherwise?

It is solved. The formed (H-He)^+ bond (from H-T)
is sufficiently strong to resist breaking (in those
described conditions) notwithstanding the multiple
excitations undergone after T decay to 3He. The
reverse is true for (H3C-He)^+ bond (from H3C-T).

I simply wanted to know if that behavior fits in
your model, or not. IOW, it was say a sort of
probe, a possible test which I offered to you
(don't know if appropriate).
Sorry: forgot to say that.

> ----------------------------
> TIA
> Y.Porat
> ------------------------

Best regards,
Angelo

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Isotope decay chains
    ... Angelo wrote: ... the *nuclear structure* of Pt and Gold ... exactly as i sayed about the chrt of isotops brought above ... > would have expected at least one prediction by you ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Isotope decay chains
    ... because if that is the case you helpe dme to start veryfy one of my ... 'out of the blue' prediction' it is obvious there that the basic ... may be we stated to do history on live internet ... Angelo you still didnt answer me about your triton Alpha question ...
    (sci.physics)