**Trying to discover the quadrupole moment for 4Be7**
The exchange of emails is between me and the editor N. J. Stone, of the nuclear table published by Oxford Physics, Clarendon Laboratory

============================================================

From: wladimirguglinski /To: n.stone1

Subject: quadrupole electric moment of 4Be7

Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2013 19:36:01 -0300

Dear Dr. Nicholas Stone

The Nuclear Table published by Clarendon Laboratory gives the nuclear spin and magnetic moment of the nucleus 4Be7, respectivelly 3/2 and -1,398: http://faculty.missouri.edu/~glaserr/8160f09/STONE_Tables.pdf

But the quadrupole electric moment of the 4Be7 is not quoted.

May you tell me why ?

Regards

Wladimir Guglinski

============================================================

From: n.stone1@physics.ox.ac.uk

To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com

Subject: RE: quadrupole electric moment of 4Be7

Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 10:22:09 +0000

Dear Dr Guglinski,

To
give you a quick answer – I have no record of a measurement of Q for
7Be. Do you have a reference to a publication? I am aware of the
magnetic moment result PRL 101 212502 Okada et al and of the more recent
one by Nortershauser et al PRL 102 062503.

Yours,

Nick Stone

============================================================

============================================================

From: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com

To: n.stone1@physics.ox.ac.uk

Subject: RE: quadrupole electric moment of 4Be7

Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 08:53:14 -0300

Dear Dr. Stone

No, I dont have any reference.

Actually
I dont understand why there is not a record of Q for 4Be7, because
along 20 years some theorists have enphasized the importance of getting
its measurement.

In the paper Solar Neutrinos: Where We Are, What
We Need , published in 1998 byJohn Bahcall , he explains the importance
of the measurement of the quadrupole moment for 7Be for the
understanding of the sun shines by nuclear fusion reactions among light
elements in its interior.

http://www.sns.ias.edu/~jnb/Papers/Preprints/Groningen/paper.pdf

In the paper he says:

“A
measurement of the 7Be quadrupole moment would help distinguish between
different nuclear models for the 7Be(p,g)8B reaction (see 38) ”.

38. A. Csoto, K. Langanke, S. E. Koonin, and T. D. Shoppa, Phys. Rev. C. 52 , 1130 (1995)

Csolo
and Langanke had published several papers along 20 years, where they
explain the importance of the measurement of Q for 7Be. In a paper
publihed in 2008 they write in the page 6:

We also note that a
precise measurement of the 7Be quadrupole moment or radius could test
the self-consistency of our conclusions.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/nucl-th/9408001.pdf

So, I dont understand why we dont know the Q for 7Be yet.

Is not possible to measure it in the Clarendon Laboratory ?

Regards

Wladimir Guglinski

============================================================

============================================================

From: n.stone1@physics.ox.ac.uk

To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com

Subject: RE: quadrupole electric moment of 4Be7

Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 12:37:54 +0000

Hi,
Quadrupole moments are particularly hard to measure in light nuclei
since they are small and so produce small energy splittings which
require very high resolution. The 9Be Q was measured by atomic beam
which has the highest resolution. Laser spectroscopy would probably not
be good enough.

============================================================

============================================================

From: n.stone1@physics.ox.ac.uk

To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com

Subject: RE: quadrupole electric moment of 4Be7

Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 12:41:37 +0000

Further, theoreticians can call all they like, but it doesn’t provide a method for the measurement.

I’m now retired. There is no experimental group at the Clarendon that could attempt the measurement.

Your
best bet would seem to be the Japanese groups with some variant of beta
NMR, but I haven’t checked if there is suitable beta decay in 7Be.

============================================================

.

.

.

**AND THEREFORE THE MYSTERIY OF 7Be CONTINUES:**

My question to Dr. Stone:

==========================================================

From: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com

To: n.stone1@physics.ox.ac.uk

Subject: RE: quadrupole electric moment of 4Be7

Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 11:31:27 -0300

Hi, Dr Stone

I suspect that 7Be has Q very near to zero, that’s why it is not quoted in nuclear tables.

I
suspect that the experimentalist already had tried to measure it, and
they had expected to measure a value near to the value of Q for 9Be
(0,053 barns).

As the experimentists did not succeed to get a value
far away from zero (and as they know that from the theoretical viewpoint
7Be cannot have Q very near to zero) then they did not report the
results of experiments.

Dr. Attila Csolo had calculated theoretically that Q for 7Be must be in order of 0,07barns.

**I have my suspiction because of the following:**

9Be is stable

7Be has half-life of 53 days

Both them are very small

Q for 9Be had been measured by atomic beam, and got 0,053 barns.

———————————————————–

**CONCLSUSION : why cannot the Q for 7Be be measured by atomic beam ?**

———————————————————–

So,
I suspect that Q for 7Be had already been measured by atomic beam (like
done for 9Be), but the experiments had NOT detected a value far away of
zero (as expected theoretically).

Do you think that my suspiction can explain why Q for 7Be is not quoted in nuclear tables?

Regards

Wladimir Guglinski

==========================================================

.

.

.

**Reply by Dr. Stone**

=========================================================

From: n.stone1@physics.ox.ac.uk

To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com

Subject: RE: errata: FW: quadrupole electric moment of 4Be7

Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 15:48:54 +0000

Just to say that IF a measurement had been made, it would certainly have been published.

==========================================================

**My reply:**

==========================================================

From: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com

To: n.stone1@physics.ox.ac.uk; csoto@matrix.elte.hu

Subject: RE: errata: FW: quadrupole electric moment of 4Be7

Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 19:58:07 -0300

Dear Dr. Stone

Suppose that an experimentalist had measured the Q for 7Be, and the experiment had detected nothing.

Would the experimentalist report the value Q= 0 ?

4Be7 has A= 7 (odd), and therefore it cannot have Q= 0 , by considering the current nuclear models.

Then
, instead of to report the value Q= 0, probably the experimentalist
would rather interpret the value zero due to some imperfection of the
measurement.

And from such interpretation he decided do not report the result.

After
all, as 9Be and 7Be have practically the same radius, I cant see any
reasonable explanation so that to justify why 9Be had been measured and
7Be had not.

regards

Wladimir Guglinski

==========================================================

,

.

.

Dr.
Nicholas Stone did not reply my last email, where I had shown that we
have strong evidences supporting the hypothesis that 4Be7 has quadrupole
moment very near to zero (an IMPOSSIBLE hypothesis, according to
current nuclear models).

The email ahead had been sent to Dr. Attila Csolo.

====================================================================

From: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com

To: csoto@matrix.elte.hu; n.stone1@physics.ox.ac.uk

Subject: effort to get 4Be7 quadrupole moment

Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 22:48:53 -0300

To: Dr Attila Csolo

cc: Dr. Nicholas Stone

Dear Dr. Csolo

The Standard Nuclear Physics have been successful for the development of technology.

But there are nuclear phenomena which do not fit to what we expect from the current nuclear models.

In
particular, the current nuclear models cannot explain the behavior of
some light nuclei. And it seems that the quadrupole moment of 4Be7 is
one among several nuclear properties which do not fit the current
nuclear models.

As I have shown along a series of emails exchanged
with Dr. Nicholas Stone, it’s hard to believe that Q for 7Be had not
been measured yet. And as it is not quoted in nuclear tables, we have to
conclude that Q for 7Be is very near to zero, and this is the reason
why it had not been detected in any experiment, unlike had happened with
9Be, which Q had been measured to be 0,053barns.

As a value near
to zero of Q for 7Be cannot be fit to any of the current nuclear models
(shell model, core model, cluster model, etc), then obviously there is
need to look for a new nuclear model, capable to explain such bizarre
nuclear property of 7Be.

A new nuclear model is proposed in my book Quantum Ring Theory, published in 2006.

http://www.bauuinstitute.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=22:quantum-ring-theory-foundations-for-cold-fusion&catid=8&Itemid=103

The
reason why 7Be has Q near to zero is shown in the page 48 (Figure 37)
of my paper Stability of Light Nuclei , published by Rossi’s blog
Journal of Nuclear Physics:

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Stability%20of%20light%20nuclei.pdf

Of course you do not need to consider that my new nuclear model is correct.

But you need to consider it from the following very important viewpoint:

——————————————————————

the
possibility of conciliating a value of Q very close to zero for 7Be ,
if we consider a new nuclear model working with some new principles
missing in the Standard Nuclear Physics.

——————————————————————

Dear Dr. Csolo,

of
course it is more comfortable to neglect the existence of any
experiment which disprove the current nuclear models, and to continue
trying to explain the nuclear phenomena by keeping those current models,
with the hope that one day in the future the theorists will succeed to
conciliate their models with all the results of experiments.

However
it’s hard to believe that this sort of procedure will lead the
theorists to a successful end. Science cannot be developed by such a
way.

So, it’s mandatory to face the reality, undertaking an effort
so that to eliminate the controversy regarding the value of the
quadrupole moment of 7Be , because if its Q is really very near to zero,
then the theorists need to recognize that we need a New Nuclear Model,
working with some new principles missing in the current Standard Nuclear
Physics.

If we do not undertake such effort, some theoretical
nuclear paradoxes will never be eliminated, and the Nuclear Physics will
be forever lying on false principles and wrong nuclear models.

Regards

Wladimir Guglinski

====================================================================