What is being discussed seems to reflect what might happen in a small system with a new particle being introduced to that system with significant kinetic energy. What happens in a coherent system (with many particles with their mass, charge and spin) that hosts the introduction of a new particle with significant kinetic energy may be a different story, since the inertia and angular momentum of many particles of that system may be involved in the kinetics that happen. For example, kinetic energy of the incoming particle may be distributed evenly as a in-phase vibration, phonon, of the lattice electrons of the coherent system.
In other words the many-particles of a large coherent system is a tough problem to solve. However, I suspect the wave length of the incoming particle and its relation to the vibrational modes of a coherent system is a pertinent parameter as to what will happen in way of sharing the incoming kinetic energy, momentum, angular momentum etc. An additional consideration may be the geometry of the coherent system as to whether or not Casmir effects prevail and change the effective dimensions and normal electric field directional arrangements. IMHO empirical correlation of known parameters is the key to understanding the situation being discussed in this thread. I wish there was a better instrument to measure in-phase lattice vibrations of nano particles on a short time frame. Maybe a fast infrared spectrum analyzer to look for peaks in a given frequency with large intensity would be such an instrument. Bob Cook From: David Roberson Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 8:24 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: How many atoms to make condensed matter? Robin, I agree that the field strength originating from the central tiny charge would be the same as without the presence of the external ring once the alpha breaches that ring. The main idea is that the alpha would only require an incoming amount of energy associated with passage from that outer ring to the center charge. This would of course be a smaller energy requirement than without the ring being in place. The reduction in alpha incoming energy is inversely proportional to the square of the radius of the outer ring. That implies that the central charge will dominate the total required energy to a very large extent unless the radius of the outer spherical ring of negative charge is small compared to that of the central charge. For this reason I also would not expect the energy reduction to be very large, but it should be present. You are correct in suggesting that a symmetrical sphere of negative charge surrounding a nucleus would not impact the field within that nucleus. And, one would not expect the alpha to be encouraged to leave a nucleus for that reason. On the other hand, one leaving should enjoy less net energy than an alpha ejected from a bare nucleus once it has left the near region. This appears to be an interesting concept. I suppose that it implies that since the alpha was once part of the nucleus, it shares a portion of the energy loss that occurs when the external electrons shed orbital energy as the atom reaches ground state by electromagnetic radiation. Robin, are you aware of any direct correlation between the energy emitted by a particle and its decay rate? The spherical symmetrical shell structure should likely result in a slightly lower energy alpha emission by the process outlined above. Even though the electric field within the nucleus would remain the same, the energy of the released alpha would be less. At the moment it is not clear as to how to handle the energy associated with the electrons that are released from the atom at the same time as the alpha. Your description of the field fluctuations occurring due to random processes taking place does seem logical. What would you expect to observe if a nucleus that typically emits alphas is placed within a strong electric field? For example, placing some of these ions within the field located between the plates of a high voltage capacitor? One might expect that type of arrangement to have an effect upon the alpha energy and decay rate. In this structure the field could be adjusted to quantify the functional relationships. Dave -----Original Message----- From: mixent <mix...@bigpond.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Tue, Dec 1, 2015 4:34 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: How many atoms to make condensed matter? In reply to David Roberson's message of Mon, 30 Nov 2015 18:10:02 -0500: Hi, [snip] Dave, I like your analysis. However it implies that if the field were spherically symmetrical alpha decay would not be enhanced since the nucleus would not feel the external electrons at all. Since increasing the electron density is known to slightly increase the alpha decay rate, one can only draw the conclusion that the field is not (always) spherically symmetrical. In fact given the high mobility of electrons, I would expect there to be very high frequency and essentially random fluctuations in the local electron density at any given point. A momentary peak would temporarily enhance the chances of alpha decay. Furthermore a specific arrangement of atoms in a molecule or lattice may well create an asymmetric field. Such fields may play a role in catalysis. (I'm thinking especially of active sites in enzymes here.) >I was thinking along the same lines as you Eric. If you take a positive charge >of tiny size and surround it with an equal amount of symmetrically distributed >negative charge the structure is overall electrically neutral when viewed at a >distance. An alpha approaching from the outside would not encounter any force >until it passes through the negative electrical spherical shell. > >Once the alpha passes through the negative charge shell it encounters a >portion of the original positive field that is the same as previously observed >without the negative charge shell present. In effect the alpha has avoided the >energy required to breach the negative shell distance from the central charge. >The negative field is balanced out within the region from its surface all the >way to the central charge due to its symmetrical structure. > >Dave > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> >To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> >Sent: Mon, Nov 30, 2015 4:03 pm >Subject: Re: [Vo]: How many atoms to make condensed matter? > > > > >On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 2:41 PM, <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote: > > > >No, I'm saying it does both. When the alpha particle is far away it enhances >it, > >but when it get close to a target nucleus it works against it. I'm not sure >what >the net result would be. > > > > >If the volume of the surplus negative charge is spherical about the >positively-charged nucleus, the shell theorem implies that one can neglect any >negative charge that lies on the far side of the alpha particle from the >nucleus. (It is probably not spherical, whatever it is, unless that s-orbital >thing is what's going on.) > > >Also, I'm going to guess that we have to be careful not to treat the negative >and positive charge separately; i.e., what is seen by the alpha particle is >the result of their overlap. So in this understanding, if the field of the >nucleus is overwhelmingly positive, the negative charge is experienced by the >alpha particle to be a little less positive charge. > > >Eric > > > Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
