July 16, 2024, 01:36:33 AM
Forum Rules: Read This Before Posting

Topic: Morita's Element 112 Confirmation: 112-277  (Read 8796 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mitch

  • General Chemist
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5298
  • Mole Snacks: +376/-3
  • Gender: Male
  • "I bring you peace." -Mr. Burns
    • Chemistry Blog
Morita's Element 112 Confirmation: 112-277
« on: May 09, 2007, 12:40:47 AM »
Morita et al.1 have recently published the details of their confirmation experiment of the German's claim for the discovery of element 112.2,3 The paper reports similar decay properties to the Germans, and for all intents and purposes it looks like element 112 has now been confirmed. Unfortunately, the paper is a really good and easy read. There is no scandal or fishy decay chains anywhere in it. Since I'm a fan of decay chains, a summary of all known and not faked3 decay chains of 277112 are shown below.


A summary of the table above in an easy, digestible, fun and always enthralling Nuclear Trading Card format is shown below.

Remember, the yellow means alpha-emitter and t1/2 is the half-life.

Enjoy the newest trading card! An element needs a confirmation experiment before it can be given a name. The only remaining question is, "What will the name be?" Ghiorsoium anyone?

[1]Japanese confirmation: http://dx.doi.org/10.1143/JPSJ.76.043201
[2,3]Germans: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s002180050036, http://dx.doi.org/10.1140/epja/i2001-10119-x

« Last Edit: May 09, 2007, 02:00:08 AM by Mitch »
Most Common Suggestions I Make on the Forums.
1. Start by writing a balanced chemical equation.
2. Don't confuse thermodynamic stability with chemical reactivity.
3. Forum Supports LaTex

Offline lemonoman

  • Atmospheric
  • Chemist
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 607
  • Mole Snacks: +71/-8
  • Gender: Male
Re: Morita's Element 112 Confirmation: 112-277
« Reply #1 on: May 19, 2007, 11:42:26 PM »
I keep looking for packs of those trading cards at the store, but no one seems to sell them.

0.69 ms is unusally long, isn't it?

Sponsored Links