In this guest editorial, Dean L Sinclair suggests that there is no direct evidence of neutrons in the atomic nucleus and posits a new explanation of the nuclear phenomena we observe.
We consider atomic nuclei as being made up of protons and neutrons. Actually, there appears to be no evidence whatsoever for the presence of neutrons, as such, in nuclei.
If we consider nuclei as being made up of protons held together by orbital electrons, somewhat similarly to the way we consider atoms to be held together in molecules by orbital electrons, we find that we have a continuity of structural models from the usual chemistry of molecules to nuclear chemistry.
We can visualize nuclei as having geometric form as objects arranged about a point. The deuterium nucleus would be an ovoid, tritium would have some sort of a triangular structure, as would He-3, and He-4 would be a tetrahedron. This type of modelling can be easily visualized up through about 12 objects arranged in space by the use of balloons twisted together. Presumably computer modelling of objects arranged about a point could carry on this idea of the shapes of nuclear structures. It may also be noted that in this type of view there is no need for an mysterious exchange force or strong force to exist in in the nuclei of atoms. As it can be seen that hydrogen ("protium") and the neutron, ("neutronium") actually could be considered as stereoisomers of one another, as also can the hydrogen molecule and deuterium, the possibilities of previously unsuspected transformations arises.
It may well be that the "Cold Fusion" results that have puzzled scientists for almost two decades come from reactions such as the catalyzed transformation of hydrogen molecules to deuterium,. The possibility of transforming lithium hydride to Be-8 (which is unknown) and thence to two He-4 atoms is only one of the many ideas that come to mind.
Discarding the concept of neutrons existing in nuclei, leads to a number of
intriguing possibilities for a fresh look at the entire field of chemistry.
It may also be noted that if one does the math. looking at the published
mass and size ratios of the proton and the electron, one finds that, on a
mass/unit volume basis, the electron is far more massive than the proton! A
model of the nucleus is usually thought of as heavy protons and light
electrons. It would appear that the situation is more like huge, heavy
"marshmallows" sewn together by much lighter, but far denser, "speeding
bullets!"