Spiritual thought for the day from the world of particle physics

[Vort]

Some time back, I read about how radioactive isotopes of gold could be used for various nefarious purposes such as "dirty" bombs. A couple of months ago, I got curious about the decay chains leading to regular gold (not a radioactive isotope). I don't know much about that, so I did what anyone would do and googled "decay chain gold" or something of the sort. I think I asked ChatGPT, too.

My investigation led to an amazing discovery: There are no radioactive decay chains that lead to the production of stable gold. There is in fact only one stable isotope of gold, ¹⁹⁷Au. That's regular gold. Any other isotope of gold decays away quickly; the longest-lived radioactive gold isotope is ¹⁹⁵Au, with a half-life of about six months. So if you had a coin made of ¹⁹⁵Au (which would be super-dangerous and quickly kill you from radioactivity), in five years only 1/1000th of that coin would still be gold. Five years after that, there would be only a millionth of the original gold isotope left. Within one human lifetime, all of that "gold", down to the last atom, would simply go away. And none of it would ever transmute into regular, stable gold. Like leprechaun gold, it would be lethal and evanescent.

In fact, other than atom-by-atom transmutation of platinum or iridium into gold inside a nuclear reactor (and what a shameful waste of platinum or iridium that would be!), there is no other way of creating gold than how it is created in dying stars.

Gold is created in the heart of stars, and only there. All of the gold you have ever seen has been created this way. There is no substitute method, no shortcut, no clever way to get around that. To the dismay of the alchemist, you can't decay away some type of radioactive lead to make gold. Lead can never be gold. I trust the spiritual parallels are obvious, so I won't belabor the point.

So there's your Sunday thought. Gold is created only the heart of stars. Don't think you can get it some other way. You can't.

[zil2]

40 minutes ago, Vort said:

transmutation of platinum or iridium into gold inside a nuclear reactor (and what a shameful waste of platinum or iridium that would be!)

The proper use of iridium:

 

(full disclosure: they say nibs aren't tipped with iridium any more, even though most Chinese nibs claim to be - but then those same Chinese nibs usually say "IRIDIUM POINT GERMANY" on them - I suspect the nibs on the left and right are Chinese.  The one in the middle is not and likely has an iridium tip.)

(I'm not aware of any fountain pens with platinum(-plated) nibs, but here's one with platinum-plated trim:

There.  Now everyone knows the proper uses for platinum and iridium.  (Let me know if you'd like to see palladium too. )

[NeuroTypical]

6 hours ago, Vort said:

In fact, other than atom-by-atom transmutation of platinum or iridium into gold inside a nuclear reactor (and what a shameful waste of platinum or iridium that would be!), there is no other way of creating gold than how it is created in dying stars.

 

Fusion reactor, or could it be done in a fission reactor?  If the latter, Earth creates those naturally without humans, and maybe we got some gold that way?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nuclear_fission_reactor

 

(I understand a full 20% of this thread, which qualifies me to post here and sound smart.)

 

[Traveler]

10 hours ago, Vort said:

Some time back, I read about how radioactive isotopes of gold could be used for various nefarious purposes such as "dirty" bombs. A couple of months ago, I got curious about the decay chains leading to regular gold (not a radioactive isotope). I don't know much about that, so I did what anyone would do and googled "decay chain gold" or something of the sort. I think I asked ChatGPT, too.

My investigation led to an amazing discovery: There are no radioactive decay chains that lead to the production of stable gold. There is in fact only one stable isotope of gold, ¹⁹⁷Au. That's regular gold. Any other isotope of gold decays away quickly; the longest-lived radioactive gold isotope is ¹⁹⁵Au, with a half-life of about six months. So if you had a coin made of ¹⁹⁵Au (which would be super-dangerous and quickly kill you from radioactivity), in five years only 1/1000th of that coin would still be gold. Five years after that, there would be only a millionth of the original gold isotope left. Within one human lifetime, all of that "gold", down to the last atom, would simply go away. And none of it would ever transmute into regular, stable gold. Like leprechaun gold, it would be lethal and evanescent.

In fact, other than atom-by-atom transmutation of platinum or iridium into gold inside a nuclear reactor (and what a shameful waste of platinum or iridium that would be!), there is no other way of creating gold than how it is created in dying stars.

Gold is created in the heart of stars, and only there. All of the gold you have ever seen has been created this way. There is no substitute method, no shortcut, no clever way to get around that. To the dismay of the alchemist, you can't decay away some type of radioactive lead to make gold. Lead can never be gold. I trust the spiritual parallels are obvious, so I won't belabor the point.

So there's your Sunday thought. Gold is created only the heart of stars. Don't think you can get it some other way. You can't.

I was recently reading a white paper on neutrinos which are believed to be the most abundant particle in the universe with mass.  James Webb telescope and super Kamiokande (large volume of water surrounded by phototubes detecting Cherenkov radiation).  Without going into all the problems of neutrinos (a particle with mass traveling at the speed of light) – there are a lot of seemingly contradiction with neutrinos.  Anyway, the theory is that not all heavy elements are forged in the heart of dying stars.  Neutrinos are held in stars by weak interactions and gravity.  According to the theory the heaviest element in an active star is iron.  As a star collapses the outer rim plasma of the star is ejected in chaotic plumes which is followed by a gigantic burst release of high energy neutrinos.  When a neutrino makes a direct hit on the nucleus of an atom a fusion reaction takes place that can then cause other reactions with near by atoms that will forge elements heaver than iron that are then pushed out into space.

This high energy neutrino reaction is why some believe cold fusion is and impossible fantasy.   Getting back to the theory that the heavy elements in the heart of the dying star remain with the collapsing star creating red dwarfs, pulsars, blackholes and other exotic stars (matter).   

The basic concept of your presentation remains intact – those heavy metals (gold etc.) in space are only created from dying stars (at least that is the only possibility science can currently conger).

 

The Traveler

[Traveler]

4 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

 

Fusion reactor, or could it be done in a fission reactor?  If the latter, Earth creates those naturally without humans, and maybe we got some gold that way?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nuclear_fission_reactor

 

(I understand a full 20% of this thread, which qualifies me to post here and sound smart.)

 

As I am understanding the current proposed theory – posted above – neutrinos are required in order to have nuclear fusion.  The reason that our current nuclear fusion bomb works is because it is set off by a nuclear fission reaction that releases the necessary neutrinos for a fusion reaction.

 

The Traveler

[Vort]

For the record, I don't know that what I wrote above is actually true. Seems like I saw a conversation on physics StackExchange that suggested that making ¹⁹⁷Au in reactors was indeed possible and that there is at least one decay chain (from lead, no less) that results in ¹⁹⁷Au. Don't know if this is true or not. I am interested to know the truth, but apparently not enough to do any research right now. But the idea was so strong and so appealing to my romantic sensibilities that I thought I'd post it, anyway.

[Vort]

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

As I am understanding the current proposed theory – posted above – neutrinos are required in order to have nuclear fusion.  The reason that our current nuclear fusion bomb works is because it is set off by a nuclear fission reaction that releases the necessary neutrinos for a fusion reaction.

 

The Traveler

Traveler, I believe you're mistaken on a few points:

1. I'm pretty sure you're talking about neutrons, not neutrinos.

2. It's not the neutrons (or neutrinos) release from fission that ignites the fusion; rather, it is the immense temperature and pressure generated by the fission weapons that enables the fusion to occur. The neutrons are a relatively small part of that heat and pressure.

3. The fusion explosion accounts for maybe half of the blast energy released from a thermonuclear device. The fusion releases a very large neutron flux, used to ignite (fission) the non-fissile tamper and casing, which is typically made of U-238. U-238 won't sustain a nuclear fission reaction (that is, U-238 is not fissile), but if exposed to a very large neutron flux, it will fission and blow up just fine. The casing ignition is thought to provide about half of the blast energy of a thermonuclear device.

The things that people of our generations were taught in public school about how nuclear devices work were only vaguely accurate. I'm not a Wikipedia fan, but on scientific and other fact-driven, relatively non-political topics like the operation of thermonuclear weaponry, it has some good information.

[zil2]

Aren't neutrinos just young neutrons from south of the border?

[mikbone]

On 1/7/2024 at 8:02 AM, Vort said:

Gold is created in the heart of stars, and only there. All of the gold you have ever seen has been created this way.

 

Nucleosynthesis is crazy complicated.  From what I gather, fusion of lighter elements into heaver elements in the core of stars is what causes them to create energy.  It is a crazy balance between energy production and gravity.  As you progress down the chain less energy is being produced and more compression from gravity is required.

H -> He  Main Sequence (Billions of years)

3He -> C (Million years)

->Ne (1000 years)

->Si (1 year)

->Fe (1 day)

When Fe is produced it unfortunately consumes more energy than it produces, leading to core collapse. Then the upper layers of the star rush onto the core (23% of the speed of light) creating a compressional shockwave rebounding outward - the supernova and a gamma ray burst (GRB).

But the supernova shockwave can only produce elements up to atonic numbers of up to around 28-56.  

To make Gold you actually need a Kilonova.

Kilonova - merger of 2 neutron stars. Causing gravitational waves LIGO,  -> Short GRB & Heavy Elements, Au (79), Pb (82)  Rapid Neutron Capture.  Several x the mass of Earth in Gold. 

Of course this is a just current theory.  And a vast over-simplification.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2026110118#:~:text=Although supernova explosions%2C such as,most of these cataclysmic events.

Edited January 8 by mikbone

[Carborendum]

10 hours ago, Traveler said:

(at least that is the only possibility science can currently conger).

Yeah, fusion is pretty slippery that way.  

[Carborendum]

10 hours ago, Vort said:

1. I'm pretty sure you're talking about neutrons, not neutrinos.

No, he's talking about neutrinos.  But he has a few things mixed up about it.

10 hours ago, Vort said:

2. It's not the neutrons (or neutrinos) release from fission that ignites the fusion; rather, it is the immense temperature and pressure generated by the fission weapons that enables the fusion to occur.

Correct. 

He got it backwards.  He stated that neutrinos were required as among of the reactants.  Instead, they are (currently theorized to be) among the products of the reaction.

However, what happens is that Uranium can decay into lead.  The Lead continues to get bombarded by neutrons.  This can go down several paths of decay and loss of neutrons to turn into gold.

This process is a TINY percentage of the Uranium decay.  However, Uranium mining tends to produce gold as a by-product.  Can you imagine that gold is a "by-product"?  Amazing world we live in.

@Traveler, I'm not going to claim expertise on neutrinos.  I just happen to know more than the average person.  So, if you can point to a study which shows that neutrinos are among the reactants to a fusion reaction, then I'll accept that correction.  But as far as I know, it is one of the products, not a reactant.

10 hours ago, Vort said:

The neutrons are a relatively small part of that heat and pressure.

They're beginning to wonder about that regarding fusion in stars.  We'll see where the science takes us on that.

Edited January 8 by Carborendum

[Carborendum]

22 hours ago, Vort said:

So there's your Sunday thought. Gold is created only the heart of stars. Don't think you can get it some other way. You can't.

I happened to mention to a young co-worker that I'd been married for X years.  She was impressed and asked me what our secret was.  I gave her a cutesy answer and was  about done. 

Since then I realized that there really isn't a secret.  It is just the same age-old wisdom that everyone tells you, but fewer and fewer actually do anymore.

In the same way, the family was going over the Come Follow Me lesson for the week.  The subject came up "how do we use the BoM to increase our faith in Christ?"  Well, do what it says.  Moroni's promise.  Simple.

Read, study, ponder, pray, live.

There is no secret.  There is no magic wand.  There are plenty of excuses.  But no alternatives.  Simply do what Moroni says.  Nothing else will work.

How do we gain eternal life?  "What does it say in the Law?... this do, and thou shalt live."

********************

* I almost didn't want to post this. But I had to, to pre-empt any naysayers.  Man has been able to alter the nucleus of other elements in laboratories to make gold.  However, the process takes so much energy that it is cost prohibitive to do so.  It may be an interesting mental exercise to consider the original intent of this thread, if that fact has any useful metaphorical meaning.

So far as I'm aware, it has been through (effectively) fission methods.  While fusion is theoretically possible (as proven by the reactions in stars) we have not had a successful instance of gold formed by laboratory fusion (that I'm aware of).  Primarily, they have done the calcs, considered the resources involved, and figured "why bother?"

Edited January 8 by Carborendum

[NeuroTypical]

3 hours ago, mikbone said:

To make Gold you actually need a Kilonova.

@zil2 has been pushing that particular brand of fountain pen for at least 3 years.

[zil2]

28 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

@zil2 has been pushing that particular brand of fountain pen for at least 3 years.

Love me a good snake clip.  Here is my "holy grail" pen (that I'll never, ever own, unless the world turns upside down):

(Montblanc Agatha Christie - some have emerald eyes rather than ruby - not sure I have a preference since I'll never actually own one.  But dig that snake on the nib!)

[Traveler]

Supernovas will not occur without neutrinos.  Here are a couple of links for those interested to get started:

https://phys.org/news/2021-07-supernova-explosions-sustained-neutrinos-neutron.html#:~:text=It's hard to conceive that,the heating provided by neutrinos.

https://phys.org/news/2021-04-titanium-triggers-titanic-explosions.html

Here is a fun question for the forum - For each neutron and proton in the universe -- how many neutrinos are there?  Try guessing first and looking up the answer second.

 

The Traveler

Edited January 8 by Traveler

[Carborendum]

58 minutes ago, Traveler said:

Supernovas will not occur without neutrinos.  Here are a couple of links for those interested to get started:

https://phys.org/news/2021-07-supernova-explosions-sustained-neutrinos-neutron.html#:~:text=It's hard to conceive that,the heating provided by neutrinos.

https://phys.org/news/2021-04-titanium-triggers-titanic-explosions.html

Here is a fun question for the forum - For each neutron and proton in the universe -- how many neutrinos are there?  Try guessing first and looking up the answer second.

From your links, it appears we're both right and both wrong.  It is not exactly a "reaction".  It is a process.  And it appears that neutrinos are involved in the process.

To answer your question, I had believed that the number of neutrinos:neutrons was roughly 1:1 or possibly 10:1.  Do you know of a source that gives a more specific number?

[mikbone]

How the Universe Works

Season 9, Episode 8

Secret lives of Nutrinos

[Traveler]

26 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

From your links, it appears we're both right and both wrong.  It is not exactly a "reaction".  It is a process.  And it appears that neutrinos are involved in the process.

To answer your question, I had believed that the number of neutrinos:neutrons was roughly 1:1 or possibly 10:1.  Do you know of a source that gives a more specific number?

I had a problem finding a link that estimates 1 billion to one (nuetrinos to protons)  however here is a link :https://www.newsweek.com/precise-neutrino-measurement-ever-brings-us-closer-understanding-universe-katrin-1679303

quote: "In fact, neutrinos are so light, virtually chargeless and so abundant that NASA estimates around 100 billion neutrinos pass every other square centimeter of our body every second, without our noticing them or their noticing our body."

 

The Traveler

[Carborendum]

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

I had a problem finding a link that estimates 1 billion to one (nuetrinos to protons)

You had asked about Neutrinos to Neutrons, not protons.

EDIT:  Oops.  I guess you asked for both.  Well, the answer would be different for each wouldn't it?

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

however here is a link :https://www.newsweek.com/precise-neutrino-measurement-ever-brings-us-closer-understanding-universe-katrin-1679303

This doesn't say how many there are.  Neither link did.

Edited January 8 by Carborendum

[zil2]

39 minutes ago, Traveler said:

without our noticing them or their noticing our body

How rude!

[askandanswer]

2 hours ago, Traveler said:

In fact, neutrinos are so light, virtually chargeless and so abundant that NASA estimates around 100 billion neutrinos pass every other square centimeter of our body every second, without our noticing them or their noticing our body."

 

The Traveler

I’ve just done a brief fact check on this and am happy to report the following:

6:55:10 seconds – 100,000,000,002 neutrinos through left thumb

6:55:12 seconds 99,999,999,981 neutrinos through right thumb

6:55:14 seconds 100,000,000,104 neutrinos through tip of nose

6:55:16 seconds 100,000,000,046 neutrinos through left middle toenail

The theory seems to be substantially correct.

[NeuroTypical]

Did you ask them where they were all going?

https://www.nature.com/articles/news.2011.554

[askandanswer]

They were passing through on their way from a bar of lead to a speck of gold.

[Vort]

28 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

I’ve just done a brief fact check on this and am happy to report the following:

6:55:10 seconds – 100,000,000,002 neutrinos through left thumb

6:55:12 seconds 99,999,999,981 neutrinos through right thumb

6:55:14 seconds 100,000,000,104 neutrinos through tip of nose

6:55:16 seconds 100,000,000,046 neutrinos through left middle toenail

The theory seems to be substantially correct.

Your left thumb is slightly larger than the right. Maybe you need to cut your nails.

Your nose is pretty good-sized, but your left middle toenail is strangely large. I think the Bible says to be wary of people with large middle toenails. Something about it being better to live on the corner of a roof than with someone that has a large left middle toenail.

[mordorbund]

3 hours ago, askandanswer said:

I’ve just done a brief fact check on this and am happy to report the following:

6:55:10 seconds – 100,000,000,002 neutrinos through left thumb

6:55:12 seconds 99,999,999,981 neutrinos through right thumb

6:55:14 seconds 100,000,000,104 neutrinos through tip of nose

6:55:16 seconds 100,000,000,046 neutrinos through left middle toenail

The theory seems to be substantially correct.