CMB, we may need to agree to disagree. Your representation of the crossection and the KE of the approaching proton needs to overcome the Coulomb repulsion are both reasonable but irrelivant to the energy balance between 62Ni and Cu63.
I at one time thought the Coulomb repulsion and the speed...
No, at least in my understanding. The KE of the incoming particles has nothing to do with the binding energy of the product. It does effectthe probability of the reaction. The Ke of the proton approaching a nucleus at rest, is not absorbed into the nucleus, except as heat/ vibration. This may...
PAllen, First the Binding energy per nucleon graph/ tables show the binding energy of the bound nucleons within that nucleus. It has nothing to do with any free protons that may be around. It takes so much energy to tear off one nucleon. It takes less energy to tear off one nucleon from 63Cu...
JeffKoch,
The basic question is if the binding energy per nucleon, which peaks at 62Ni (or 56Fe in some considerations) the appropriate way to predict the direction of energy flow (endothermic or exothermic), and the quantity of the energy absorbed or emitted when nucleons are added or removed...
PAllen , the claim that Cu63 has higher binding energy per nucleus is valid, but that is not the question. The question is if this is a proper measure for energy flow. My contention. is that it is not. The relevant measure is the binding energy per nucleon.
In my previous post I included two...
There is a flaw in your reasoning. When you say 63Cu is stable, do you mean it is more stable than 62Ni, despite multiple statements to the contrary. Whether 63Cu, is relatively stable with a made up half life of 100 billion years, does that mean it is more stable than 62Ni with a half life...
PAllen, concerning probability issues, they are circumvented by Rossi's claim of a super secret catalyst that eliminates the coulomb barrier.
The question of cold fusion despite the conventional coulomb barrier , whether real or not, at least when discussing deuterium - deuterium fusion by...
Shoot, I just lost a long reply that explained things completely.
Oh well, I will try again with a more brief response.
The total binding energy is derived from the mass deficit. There is not consideration of the nature of the energy that makes up this missing mass. There are two primary...
I have argued with others on the Talk Polywell forum about the Nuclear Binding Energy per Nucleon vs the Total Nuclear Binding Energy per Nucleus graphs (which is the NBE/Nucleon * the atomic mass number). Despite referenced statements that, while the total binding energy increases continuously...