July 14, 2024, 04:27:18 AM
Forum Rules: Read This Before Posting

Topic: Transuranium elements - Cm-250, Bk-248, hypernuclei, criticality, etc.  (Read 6122 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline gippgig

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 139
  • Mole Snacks: +8/-2
Are there any plans anywhere to make a Cm-250 target? It would be extremely useful for making more neutron rich (longer lived)
isotopes &, with a half-life of thousands of years, once made could be used almost forever. Speaking of Cm-250, I've seen
several listings that show significant alpha & beta decay branches for this isotope but I can't find any reports on this. Has this
been published anywhere?

Are there any plans to characterize the mysterious long lived isomer of Bk-248?

Has anyone studied the possibility of stabilizing superheavy nuclei by introducing lambda hyperons (done for years with very
small nuclei)? These neutral particles would dilute the coulomb repulsion of the protons like neutrons do & it should also be
possible to make triply magic nuclei. The limiting factor is that lambdas only live for about a hundred picoseconds (but I recall
reading somewhere that the minimal time for a chemical change is around a hundredth of a picosecond so this raises some
interesting theoretical possibilities).

I was very surprised to read a few years ago that Np-237 could go critical since this isotope, with an even number of neutrons,
is considered nonfissionable. The difference is obviously that criticality depends on fast rather than slow neutrons but this
raises another question - since Np-237 can go critical why can't U-238 (and is there any way to predict which isotopes can go

Are there any plans to try Cf-252 + Ca-48 (should both have a larger cross section & produce a longer lived isotope of 118 than
Cf-249), Bk-249 + Ca-48, or Es-254 + C-13 (to make Db-264)? Is there any chance of making enough Es-255 to use it as a target?

Is there a key anywhere for the Periodic Table of Isotopes on this site? I suspect many of the entries are predictions rather than
actual data. Is this correct & if so, which entries are real & which are estimates?

In the Periodic Table (not of isotopes) section of this site the entry for radium uses the symbol Fr in a couple places.


Sponsored Links