The Structured Atom Model has been around for some years now and we made all kinds of explanations of how the structure actually correlates to physics (phenomenon). People often ask, where is the evidence?! Well first of all the evidence is in the fact of how well SAM deals with nuclear known decay steps, explains fission and where the energy is coming from! Then we show that the structure of the nucleus is directly related to the outer electron realm (orbitals and oxidation state). But all this is part of the known body of data out there.
Just a few days ago though this came out:
https://english.imp.cas.cn/new…311/t20231124_644997.html
So, I consider this clear cut evidence or support for the structure of the nucleus as SAM proposes, but coming from the mainstream efforts.
They just need to learn that there is more than the very old alpha particle model which has very little details and cannot solve nuclear structure issue either. SAM can, did and does.
Perhaps time to start thinking about a structured nucleus? And then of course what that means!
Structure of the nucleus (Structured Atom Model)
-
this came out
Full paper here..
Validation of the $^{10}\mathrm{Be}$ Ground-State Molecular Structure Using $^{10}\mathrm{Be}(p,pα)^{6}\mathrm{He}$ Triple Differential Reaction Cross-Section MeasurementsThe cluster structure of the neutron-rich isotope $^{10}$Be has been probed via the $(p,pα)$ reaction at 150 MeV/nucleon in inverse kinematics and in quasifree…arxiv.orgI read it briefly..
Could find no explanation of the gamma spectra of Be10 or
of the natural isotope Be9...
maybe in another decade or so..
-
-
10Be has a simple SOP quantum structure that shows 2 isolated alphas and 11 free flux waves centered around 2 neutron waves. Strong force bonds between alpha's first show up with 21-Ne.
-
Edo can you share with us the SAM interpretation for these Be isotopes, if you have them on hand, so we can appreciate the similarities? Sorry to bother you!
This is not easy (being short) and ascribe to your request. We have described all we know in the book and its appendix has (all) the isotopes/elements with their data that is commonly accepted plus what we have learned such as the radius of the nucleus, or even the roughly calculated nuclear energy that can be potentially released above the iron mark. Be can be seen in our builder here -https://structuredatom.org/atomizer/atom-viewer
and the data can be accessed here - https://structuredatom.org/book/appendix_h.pdf
SAM is in principle a "Deuteron building block" model. So we see Be10 to have 4 d-pairs (the old n-p combo) and 2 extra PeP's or proton-electron-pairs, which is the old 'neutron'. The availability of two of those PePs means is can Beta decay into B10 (edit / typo) by evicting one of the two nuclear electrons into an orbital structure.
Be is somewhat special because traditionally is is close to or used to do nuclear physics whereby we see 2 alpha particles coming off. This is the results of the Binding Energy story. mind you the alpha particle is still a combo of two D.
What does the structure in general teach us for example? Well for one thing that the number of points where protons actually connect to neighboring protons by default is THREE. however in the geometric build-up phases a substructure of the nucleus is the icosahedron (Carbon) and this leads to extra ! connections totaling 4 or 5 connections. This utterly straightforwardly correlates with the number of 'quarks'..... Sooooooooooooooooo, Quarks are the connections between the protons, they ARE the connection if you will. They are in number the connection or touching points of the protons in the nucleus. They are not what makes the protons!
So
- neutrons are not fundamental (yes free n exists, duh)
- quarks are the actual connection between protons in the nucleus.- the nucleus is made up of deuterons as building block.
And that is just the start I think. Hope to have accommodated your request. -
Currently I'm doing some Neutron work in relation with SOP. It looks like neutrons really can traverse a nucleus through the hole we have, given the Clifford torus geometry. (Has nothing do do with Clifford algebra!!)
Some special nuclei like 155-Gd or on the other end 75-As show some very good agreement (resonant energies) with the SOP quantum/wave structure.
One thing is obvious. A neutron that passes through e.g. 155Gd can and will never stimulate fusion as its normal behavior is a "thermal" cool down by resonant gammas that are neutron specific and "only" are related to the interacting nucleus SOP quantum structure. This relation is extremely complex and may be one reason the classic models are heuristic only with huge error bars for specific resonant energies. For 75-As the SOP relations could help to find more answers.
So one should really forget any neutron driven CF/LENR!
Here a sample of the high AS-75 (cross section) resonance energies that go up to 10keV (image delivered by V.Hahn) green is reflection
On the other side such work could help to understand which energies produce nuclear coupling also in CF/LENR.
-
One thing is obvious. A neutron that passes through e.g. 155Gd can and will never stimulate fusion as its normal behavior is a "thermal" cool down by resonant gammas that are neutron specific and "only" are related to the interacting nucleus SOP quantum structure. This relation is extremely complex and may be one reason the classic models are heuristic only with huge error bars for specific resonant energies. For 75-As the SOP relations could help to find more answers.
What I can say about these nuclei is that, from a structural perspective, Gd155 has a lot of potential for neutron absorption without a nuclear reaction taking place (Beta decay). Depending on where the neutron takes place it could have a internal transition with the energy release that is driven by the densest packing principle. It can simply readily accept another neutron, should have relatively high cross section therefore?
The As75 is structurally very complete, in fact any addition WILL result in a decay step, depending on the specific spot where the neutron interacts, it decay's upwards or downwards, (mostly upwards to Se).
As is therefore not readily accepting neutrons, cross section should be low? -
in fact any addition WILL result in a decay step, depending on the specific spot where the neutron interacts, it decay's upwards or downwards, (mostly upwards to Se).
What I have learned is that there are two(3) totally difference process. First thermal neutrons > 1eV rarely do activate a nucleus as the Q - decay energy of Z,N --> Z,N+1 usually is 2-3MeV >> 782keV of the neutron excess energy. Only a few isotopes have lower neutron add thresholds.
Thermal neutrons nevertheless get captured and decay themselves by a cascade of induced gammas. 75-As has a very high neutron capture/self decay rate at low to medium (10keV) energies that fully agree with SOP rules for the first 3 low energies. This is what it makes an exceptional nucleus.
neutron captured usually uses higher energy neutrons that change the isotope.
So we have self decay of n and adsorption.
The third process is reflection that is also energy dependent.
-
Also remember halo nuclei like Li11 - with single neutrons or protons stably bind e.g. for milliseconds in distances larger than of nuclear force (~1fm):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_nucleus
http://theor.jinr.ru/~ntaa/17/files/lectures/Ershov.pdfThey seem to require 1D stable (topological) structures to bind them, e.g. like below from https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/2856493
Some other arguments for existence of fluxon-like stable 1D objects in vacuum:
- Holding nucleus together against Coulomb repulsion (?), halo neutrons
- popular quark string model, Nature article suggesting being topological
- coronal heating problem (surface 6000K, corona 10^7K), reconnections
- electrons in anti-parallel alignment – in 100-1000nm for Cooper pairs
- Brawley et. al., “Electron-like scattering of positronium”, Science 2010
- Cosmic strings – 1D topological defects of arg(ψ), evidence?
Shinning stable lines in Sun's corona: "Physics of Magnetic Flux Tubes" book by Ryutova:
“Vortices in superfluid Helium and superconductors, magnetic flux tubes in solar atmosphere and space, filamentation process in biology and chemistry have probably a common ground, which is to be yet established. One conclusion can be made for sure: formation of filamentary structures in nature is energetically favorable and fundamental process.”
-
Also remember halo nuclei like Li11 - with single neutrons or protons stably bind e.g. for milliseconds in distances larger than of nuclear force (~1fm):
Please study once the multiple verified electro weak proton-proton bond with a binding energy of 495.8eV + change in electron binding energy.
Standard model people ignore the realty brought light by CF researchers like Mills, Holmlid, Santilli. Thus neutrons can bind the same way a proton binds just a bit stronger. No way to show this with QED,QCD,QFT garbage. You have to understand the SO(4) wave model.
Nuclear bonds have nothing to do with charge. All forces are based on the electro strong force and only the flux topology (2,3,5D rotations) defines the strength.
-
What such ~0.5keV contributions would have to do with halo nuclei? They have separation energies in MeVs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_nucleus
http://theor.jinr.ru/~ntaa/17/files/lectures/Ershov.pdfThey have stably bind (e.g. for milliseconds) single nucleons in a few femtometer distance, while nuclear force has ~0.8 fm range: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_force
-
I think that Edo and his SAM team colleagues are doing very interesting work on understanding nuclear configurations.
In my opinion, the foundation is to understand the proton's and neutron's correct internal structures. Once that is clear, we can rationally discuss how they interact. I.e. this thread is closely linked to the New book published: "The proton's and neutron's internal structures: Physics foundations and new measurements reveal the truth" thread.
It would be good to precisely understand the deuteron internal structure and binding, as next step.
Regarding 9Be and 10Be, its molecular-like structure can be also deduced from its excitation levels. The attachment illustrates that a subset of 9Be excitations is just rotational excitation. The existence of such rotational excitation is indeed the signature of alpha+alpha+n molecular-like structure: I discuss the details of this in the "The proton's and neutron's internal structures" book.
Good news RobartBryant: we don't need to wait a decade for the explanation
-
Worth to also mention approaching mainstream skyrmion models of nuclei - using topological charge as baryon number, making it quantized and indestructible (not true e.g. in baryogenesis and Hawking radiation - we use topological charge as electric charge instead).
E.g. below are some their views on first nuclei from https://journals.aps.org/prl/a…03/PhysRevLett.121.232002
Dozens of talks from this group (around Nick Manton) and similar: http://solitonsatwork.net/?display=archive
-
It would be good to precisely understand the deuteron internal structure and binding, as next step.
This I agree with 100%, Understanding the Deuteron system, meaning the bond between two protons, the role and state of the nuclear electron and all that comes from this is crucial in fact and will reveal many more enigma's regarding the nuclear realm once solved. Conversely, the structure of the nucleus (SAM) reveals clues about that fundamental system. One could call it reverse engineering.
Andras his efforts are highly appreciated because it makes the effort to connect the properties of the proton / electron with the interaction between them and hence the structure of the elements (SAM). That is IMHO what current fundamental physics should be all about. This needs resolving and current QM etc. is not adequate at all, in fact I would argue that it keeps us from making progress very much... We need, as I always state, "a clean slate" approach to resolve this. Luckily some of us have been doing just that for a while now, so there is a beginning of this new understanding or at least the recognition that we need this different approach. This is I believe the most interesting quest we can be on, by admitting we do not know, and true to real scientific methods, we can make the effort to increase out understanding. isn't that what makes the heart of a scientist beat a bit faster?! -
This "baryon requires some positive charge" looking simple consequence of the model I am considering (charge as hedgehog enforced by interaction of two vortices) also suggests the basic binding mechanism - some its consequences:
- neutron is heavier than proton due to requirement to compensate this charge, also getting known experimentally neutron charge distribution: positive core-negative shell,
- in deuteron we have two baryons requiring some charge - to minimize energy they share a single charge (binding), also leading to "+-+" electric quadrupole - known experimentally.
-
Good news RobartBryant: we don't need to wait a decade for the explanation
Merry Xmas is a good time for the Good News
Pls enlighten us Andras
maybe start with the first gamma line of Be9 at
3.36803 Mev...
there are quite a few more unreachable lines
in the Standard Model darkness
I can't find a Be9 shell model but there are some vain/valiant attempts for other light nuclei ....eg Li6
first gamma at 2.186Mev
https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1802486
-
maybe start with the first gamma line of Be9 at
3.36803 Mev...
Factually 9-Be like 2-H has no gamma spectrum at all. We call the first gamma radiation reaction photo dissociation gamma that usually must have a higher energy than the net energy of the bond.
See also arXiv:2302.03869v1 [physics.ins-det] 8 Feb 2023
-
Display More
Merry Xmas is a good time for the Good News
Pls enlighten us Andras
maybe start with the first gamma line of Be9 at
3.36803 Mev...
there are quite a few more unreachable lines
in the Standard Model darkness
I can't find a Be9 shell model but there are some vain/valiant attempts for other light nuclei ....eg Li6
first gamma at 2.186Mev
https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1802486
In my post I was referring to the Be9 rotational excitations only, which have 5/2- and 7/2- J state. The existence of molecular-like structure can be deduced from the energy levels of these rotational excitations.
I did not have any ambition of explaining other excitation energy levels, which may correspond to various internal rearrangements or oscillation modes.
-
I can't find a Be9 shell model but there are some vain/valiant attempts for other light nuclei ....eg Li6
first gamma at 2.186Mev
I did not have any ambition of explaining other excitation energy levels,
On your path to "reveal the truth" maybe you could look into Jurg;s
SOP model which models magnetic moments masses and gamma lines with good accuracy..(plus gravity).
but you will need to start thinking in 4D... 6D... something I'm still grappling with
...maybe for another decade
Here the Li7 first gamma with an accuracy of about 0.005%
a bit beyond the Standard Model lagrangian fantasy
st
-
Here the Li7 first gamma with an accuracy of about 0.005%
No its the 6Li line...
We can also do it more exactly by using orbit weights.The result is much better than the measurement.
