Ni-60 >>> Fe-56 + a (why not possible?)

  • Thread starter karakele
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses the potential for alpha decay in elements heavier than iron, specifically nickel. The speaker expresses interest in why certain reactions, such as Ni-60 >>> Fe-56 + a, do not occur despite the fact that the daughter element has a higher binding energy. They also mention their personal opinion that alpha decay is not possible for elements lighter than carbon due to their low binding energy. The conversation ends with the speaker asking for more information on the process of alpha decay.
  • #1
karakele
3
0
Neodynium-144 is the lightest nuclide with -observed- alpha decay (it decays to Se-140 if I'm not wrong), but I'm using it just an example I don't care about Neodynium, rather Nickel, which is my favourite element by far (yes, I know its somewhat freak) and I've been smashing my brains reading post and more post again related to stability and stuff like that. Notice I'm talking like a noob but I'm not. I know how does the BE works, know why Iron and Nickel are the 'most stable' elements etc so focus (please) on the following question::
According to Wiki (and more pages/also personal opinion) alpha decay can occur in any nuclide heavier than iron-56 and 58 (since the fact no one -except- Ni-62 has greater BE and thus the decay is enabled energetically), so what prevents some reactions like the Ni-60 >>> Fe-56 + a to occur?

Another example: Cu-63 >>> Co-59 + a (since the fact Co-59 has greater BE than Cu-63)

Also notice I'm talking about "post-Iron" elements, whose BE is decreasing as the Z number increases. No pre-Iron stable isotopes can undergo alpha decay (theoritically) since the fact they're not only light but also their BE is superior to the lighter pre-step isotopes in the "burning-star" event chain. I mean... for example, Si-28 shouldn't never decay into Mg-24 as it would actually require an energy -induced- particle or beam to split to, so in this sense Si-28 is inmune to alpha decay...

But what about the elements which are heavier than Iron? Ovbiously, there are lots of "stable" nuclides heavier than Fe in our world, but... aren't they prone to alpha decay through the mechanism I explained before?? (yes, I know beta and EC are more common but please focus on the so-called "stable" even-even nuclides like i.e. Germanium-72) Remember I'm talking about -natural- decay with the pass of time. Wikipedia states that Ni-60 is 100% stable but I don't really know why, considering it could release an alpha particle in order to gain some extra binding energy in the process (as the daughter's BE is higher), my personal opinion is that, even if it can't be measured as today, it can occur (just would take millions of millions of millions of years to do so) and I don't like that, because I like nickel (freak mode on :) I assume that at the very end of everything (also assuming protons doesn't decay - but forgot that detail please its not related to my question) all solid mass is got to be Ni-62, Fe-56, Fe-58 and the pre-iron elements (as they are too light to decay - also there's no decaying method to do so specially alpha one)... Wikipedia also states that alpha decay is -theoritically- possible for any element heavier than Iron/Nickel and it has other articles stating that, in case protons doesn't decay, almost all matter is going to be converted into Fe-56. It sounds reasonable if you consider the damn alpha decay as the most imporant cluster decay exploiding the BE mechanism stuff. In my personal opinion no element is more stable to alpha decay than Carbon, oxygen, neon etc, which are so light... the decay wouldn't be feasible as the final product would always have less BE. That's OK. But my favourite elements... all of them seems to be bound to loss mass until reaching Fe-56, Fe-58 and Ni-62. So.. what prevents such reactions?

I know the post was huge so I'm sorry dudes. Also, I apologize for my English level. It is not as bad as it could be considering I learned it by reading Wiki posts, but I know isn't perfect yet.

Cheerio.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
karakele said:
So.. what prevents such reactions?
You might want to learn more about why alpha decay happens in the first place. It can only occur when the alpha particle occupies (or is excited into) a quasi-bound resonance state. From this high energy state, the alpha particle can then tunnel through the nuclear coulomb barrier with a certain probability (this probability determines the half-life of the particle). Tell you what, a picture is probably more helpful than my explanation. Here's one:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nuclear/alptun.html
 

1. What is Ni-60 and Fe-56?

Ni-60 and Fe-56 are both elements on the periodic table. Ni-60 is the symbol for Nickel and Fe-56 is the symbol for Iron.

2. What happens when Ni-60 is combined with Fe-56?

If Ni-60 is combined with Fe-56, it will undergo a nuclear reaction called fusion, resulting in the formation of a new element.

3. Why is the reaction of Ni-60 and Fe-56 not possible?

The reaction of Ni-60 and Fe-56 is not possible because they both have the same number of protons, which makes them the same element. In order for a nuclear reaction to occur, there must be a difference in the number of protons between the elements involved.

4. Are there any other elements that could potentially be formed from the reaction of Ni-60 and Fe-56?

No, there are no other elements that can be formed from the reaction of Ni-60 and Fe-56 because they have the same number of protons and cannot undergo a fusion reaction.

5. Why is it important to understand why certain reactions are not possible?

It is important to understand why certain reactions are not possible because it helps us to better understand the behavior of atoms and the principles of nuclear chemistry. This knowledge can also be applied in other areas of science and technology, such as in the development of new materials and energy sources.

Similar threads

  • New Member Introductions
Replies
1
Views
427
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • Materials and Chemical Engineering
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
929
  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Chemistry
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
716
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
6
Views
1K
Back
Top