Re: Isotope decay chains

From: Angelo (patrik56_at_libero.it)
Date: 02/07/05 

Date: 7 Feb 2005 06:38:34 -0800

Y.Porat wrote:
> Angelo wrote:
> > Y.Porat wrote:

Sorry for the delay.

[snip]

> > > why strange
> > > could you or anyone else predict
> > > (based of those charts waht i predicted that
> > > Gold cannot be created from Pt ???!!!
> >
> > 1) In the beginning you *claimed* (i.e. made
> > a prediction) that Gold cannot in any way be
> > formed starting with any isotope of Platinum,
> > and asked me to possibly find some data that
> > could confirm such claim. I found what you've
> > seen from those charts and a textbook.
> > Then you concluded that your prediction was
> > verified.
> -------------------
> oh now i see what imho you didnt notice:
> a prediction or a verification is not in bringing asomething
> tha tnothing of it exists!!!

I never said so. You saw wrong about my noticing.

> in many cases it is :
> take one data and another and another and COMBINE them
> to something that no one before did !!!
> in too many cases the 'golden egg' is just in front of everybody
> but
> no one sees it
> i will givwe you somwething not sure scintific but relevant to the
> above
> from history just a little sory:
> do you think that Cristoph Culombus was just a mad mann that took
> hundred of people on a few expensive ships at those times
> and saled them to the unknown risdky advancher(sp?)???
> not at all
> he was just a bit smarter in *collectiong the known data*
> of his time the emphasic\s is on the colletive data.
> ther e was just in front of him but not only on him
> it was known to other people as well
> but no one as him made the *acumulative* assesment
> tha tled him to be more than a just irrsponsible oportunist
> ther was cases of corpses of stange people that came
> from the eastern unknown side of the Atlantic
> ther were strage plants that came flowting
> he knew from others that the planet is a spheere etc etc
> morover he new the nature of the winds by observations
> to be able to plan his trip at the righ t time etc etc
> so
> you see in mant cases all the evidence in 'on the table'
> but not everyone is capable to see it
> and make thr right conclusions
> in too many cases the evidence is on the table but .
> it is predudu\ice that is blinding peoples eys.
> etc etc
> so the achivement is in mant cases not by bringing evidence
> from out of the blue!1
> in many cases it is just the *comnibnation of known data*
> and not least- making the right conclusions.

And those 40 lines (or so) to explain the obvious?

> no one before me claimes that pt cannot be the mother
> of the main body of Gold right?
> than you brought known data that there is Pt 179
> and even suggested a 'reasonable posibility' that this is
> the mother of Gold
> now since it didnt make sense to me looking on my model
> it was only me that could objest your suggestion
> and than i invested some not to much effort to try and refute
> your claim

Err, not ''claim'', only a possible suggestion. You may
reread and see about this.

> i was puting before myself your scenario and sayed to myself
> lets see if it fits all the known data about Pt and Gold
> and .....
> found that .... it does not fit all the known data
> ie in this caase Pt 179 is vary rare nearly zero
> its life time is very short so you cant say lers wait another
> say thosand years ans see if it will produce more Gold
> and another known data was that gold is much more abundant then
> 179 Pt so ???

That is rather obscure to me. In a decay chain
involving a number of nuclides there may be
be one or more short lived nuclides. Instead,
that decay chain may require some 10 times
the half-life of the longest lived nuclide comprised
in it, in order to come to an end (practically).

> the last one cannot be the source of Gold
> so now the only posible scenario that you could offer
> was refuted
> and morover no one that folowed that discussion
> (and you can be sure it is not just me and you0
> no one coud bring another alternative scenario that will
> show how paltinum can be transformed to gold
> and fit to the facts of abundancy of gold in our crest of globe.
> iow it is not just to show a posible process
> thjere is still the problem of abundancy of 'how much'
> of each of the ingrediants is available!1
> hope i made it a bit cleare
> and actually toooo long (:-)

You seem to believe that ''likeliness'' and ''sureness''
have equal meanings in physics: the former is quite
irrelevant.

> 2 i then bring another prediction that no one before did ie
> tp say that a much more viable scenario acording to my model
> is to to find a common jistory between Gold and .... Hg
> though Hg is a liquid
> it is only my model tha can say:
> from Gold- one step to the 'left' of its position' - not possible
> yet one step to the 'right' - is possible!!
> so please do not make me much smaller than i am ! (:-)
> ie dont underestimate the step i did .

Please don't think that the questions I bring about
your model mask in any way an intention (by me)
to underestimate, nor deride you. I'm only asking
to get an idea of your model, and possibly about
its soundness, nothing personal.

> ----------------

[snip older stuff]

> > Sorry to say this, but the above is not an answer to my
> > questions. BTW, which other properties, besides those I
> > pointed out, just to let me understand?
> ----------
> dat alike chemical valence spectrum specific weight etc etc.
> -----------

I'm quite sure those data are (practically) the same of
natural Gold. I see you think otherwise. I told it can
positively ascertained with a costly experiment I could
devise, which can distinguish if they are two (different),
or one (the same).

[snip older stuff]

> ---
> exactly thats why my life in that case is simpler
> supose that there were many isotops of pt and many isotops of Gold
> it could complicate the issue to the imjposible !!

Ok.

[snip older stuff]

> angelo
> if you suport for instance his invention of the FERTZ
> then just 'step one step forwards and suport it!!
> the Fertz just if you dont know is :
> and em wave with ....... listen carefully
> with one cycle per ...... year...
> is that your understanding of em waves as well ??

Dear Porat, Maxwell equations say that is plainly
possible to conceive an EM wave with that frequency,
and, since Maxwell theory has not (yet) been falsified,
personally I can' see any reason for refute that concept.
You are free to do so, but *intellectual* honesty would
demand having another (unfalsified) theory that negates
that possibility: don't you agree?

[snip OT personal stuff]

> it is your choice to make your 'heroes' and 'reliable people'

No 'heroes', by my side.

> but whati suggested is tha you will ask him just about the fact
> that pf and Gold in my model (more than 10 years ago)
> are obviously different --thats all no need for his personal
> assesments just sticking to facts as a withness in court.

I reassured you about this in another post in this thread:
recall my sentence ''nihil timeas'' ?

> ----------

[snip older stuff]

> > Let's see. When 197Pt decays to yield 197Au
> > its 'skeleton', 'spine', 'chest' radically change
> > to those of 197Au, including the 42 links, which
> > become 45 ones?
> no no no just stop[ hear!!
> what i sayed is
> trhat pl 179 cannot change its basic skeleton

197Pt, please, don't copy my typos :-))

> no links etc fo rthat you need as i sayed another 'big bang'!!
> the beta decay and alike are doing just marginal changes
> '*at the edges of the structure* ie just 'cosmetic ' changes
> not in the main skeleton
> therefore .....
> pt 179 cannot be the real Gold !!!
> it migh thave just the sanme number of protons

Err, same number of 'nucleons':
197Pt has one less proton than 197Au.

> but its 'gutts' arwe very different
> no way to 'change '42 links of the spine to 45 or vice versa'
> and now you came to the crux of my claim
> thats xactly why i sayed that pt179 is no way Gold!1

Err, since Pt and Au are obviously different Elements,
I think you meant that the product of beta decay of
197Pt hasn't the properties of Gold.

> and we started to verify it as above .

I repeat: insufficiently, AFAIK.

> i start to mistype just by being tired....
> so i will make it shorter
>
>
> > If so, why 196Pt or 198Pt,
> > which share the same skeleton, spine etc with
> > 197Pt are incapable to decay at all?
> > IOW, is radioactivity explained in your model?

Now I leave that text above in the hope you are
willing to answer the questions.
BTW, why then Au and Hg should be
interchangeable, as you say? IOW, isn't there
a contradiction?

[snip older stuff]

> i offered that just for instanc so that you could see
> tha my claim that Pt cannot be the mother of Gold
> and how it is substabtiated.there

Ok. Likely, I'll have an opportunity to see that.

> -------
> so i think enough for this article

So I will follow you and snip the rest.

> (before i loos all waht i typed just above (:-)
> all the best
> Y.Porat

Best regards,
Angelo

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Good, bad or meh
    ... looking at a new potential pot of money ... the RIAA can't get it through their thick skulls that most of ...
    (rec.sport.pro-wrestling)
  • Re: Isotope decay chains
    ... > Gold cannot be created from Pt ???!!! ... Then you concluded that your prediction was ... > now time to snip the too havy double tripple quotes ... > if Pt say have 42 links in its spine ...
    (sci.physics)
  • J. McKane -- the kookout continues
    ... Republican John McCain accused presidential rival Mitt Romney of ... flip-flopping on immigration Monday and said with sarcasm: ...
    (rec.sport.pro-wrestling)
  • YAVP DECj by the numbers
    ... Zot 5 required a bit of luck. ... set fire to things above ground. ... f - a scroll of teleportation (30 gold) ...
    (rec.games.roguelike.misc)
  • Re: Isotope decay chains
    ... [You repropose your prediction about gold / nickel, ... >> familiar with these decay family trees, ... Take NO, an odd electron species ...
    (sci.physics)