Follow this blog:
RSS

Unstable element 114 reproduced; dashes hopes of atomic stability

By | September 30, 2009, 9:03 AM PDT

Scientists at Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory last week confirmed that they were able to produce element 114, but the super-heavy sample quickly decayed, dashing hopes that it would be stable.

Russian scientists first claimed to create atoms of the element informally referred to as “ununquadium” 10 years ago. Since then, scientists hoped that the element, number 114 on the periodic table, was an “island of stability” where it could exist in large quantities for a long period of time.

That turned out not to be true, sending scientists back to the drawing board.

Scientists make super-heavy elements one atom at at time by smashing together the nuclei of lighter elements, fusing them together to form the heavier nucleus of the larger element.

But most super-heavy elements are unstable, and only exist for fractions of a second before rapidly decaying back into lighter material.

Nuclear physicists believe that the instability plateaus at a particular number, with the number of protons and neutrons able to produce enough binding energy to counteract the forces that tear apart the heavy nuclei.

Called an “island of stability”, the stable elements are usually surrounded by unstable elements that dissipate in nanoseconds.

There aren’t any practical uses for super-heavy elements at the end of the periodic table, but it’s a frontier still to be explored.

As for that island of stability: the hope now rests on elements 120 and 126.

[via; via]

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Andrew Nusca

About Andrew Nusca

Andrew Nusca is editor of SmartPlanet.

Andrew Nusca

Andrew Nusca

Editor

Andrew Nusca is editor of SmartPlanet and an associate editor for ZDNet. Previously, he worked at Money, Men's Vogue and Popular Mechanics magazines. He holds degrees from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism and New York University. He based in New York but resides in Philadelphia.

Follow him on Twitter.

Andrew Nusca

Andrew Nusca
Andrew Nusca does not hold any investments in the companies he covers.
5
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
0 Votes
+ -
Not enough material to come up with practical uses
New discoveries rarely yeild anything of practical value until a long time after they've been around.

Give a significant amount to as many people as possible to play with and you'll eventually see uses for it.
Posted by Dr_Zinj
1st Oct 2009
0 Votes
+ -
It's a "black swan"
You don't know what you don't know. Since everyone seems to consider
such elements impossibly unstable and therefore useless, few have seen
reason to consider the useful possibilities for such elements. But
since we obviously don't fully understand where the "instability
plateau" is and all the factors that render such elements stable or
unstable, do we really know that there are not other possibilities?

Perhaps there will be a day when such elements are better understood,
can be tested, and then possible uses can be contemplated. After all,
how many "useless" aspects of science 100 years ago are now
indispensable aspects of every day life?
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
1st Oct 2009
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Unstable element 114 reproduced; dashes hopes of atomic stability
Note: the theory is that there are "magic numbers" for protons and neutrons, which then have special stability like the electron configurations of noble gases. The theory predicted that 114 protons should be stable and apparently it is not.

In the field of science fiction, element 114 was said to power anti-gravity UFO's.
Posted by rjmuench@...
1st Oct 2009
0 Votes
+ -
any one care for an electron?
Unless I am mistaken, these heavy atoms are not at all properly
balanced. From what little I have read they do take and build heavy
particles one Proton or Neutron at a time. But for reasons I don't
understand they never mention the rest of the parts. So from my
perspective an atom comprised only of Neutrons or visa versa is
hardly an island of stability if more than half the island is
unaccounted for.

The way I see it, every one likes to try to create particles from a few
nano seconds after the big bang. We seem to agree that those
particles quickly became other things. What makes us think any
different now? Infact modern elements are very well behaved
because they consist of multiple subatomic structures whose own
unique properties balance and compliment each other.

Posted by rflulling@...
1st Oct 2009
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Unstable element 114 reproduced; dashes hopes of atomic stability
According to theory, the instability is a logical consequence of the nature of the strong nuclear force: that force (or "glue") which ordinarily binds the nucleus of an atom together. It is so localised a force that it barely extends across the diameter of the nucleus. When the nucleus exceeds a certain size, the strong nuclear force can no longer hold the protons and neutrons together, so the element is unstable. Element 114 is a case in point; and the more neutrons you add, to try to bind the protons together, the bigger a nucleus you create: you're just reinforcing the problem. So there is no logic in the suggestion that any element comprising more than 114 protons can be stable either.

Ed
Posted by Ed999
2nd Oct 2009
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet Community and join the conversation! Signing-up is free and quick, Do it now, we want to hear your opinion.