Article View: sci.chem
Article #1747Re: technetium
From: Paul Karol
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 16:10
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 16:10
23 lines
1803 bytes
1803 bytes
A very short response to the question about the nuclear instabilities of Tc and Pm imvolves 'instability with respect to what?' As in ordinary chemical changes, one must consider not only the structure of some collection of nuclei and electrons (i.e. a specific molecule), but also alternative arrangements that might be more stable. It is not so much that Tc and Pm isotopes are unstable, but that there are alternate arrangements, lower in energy, that can be reached relatively easily. The beta-decay products are more stable. (Perhaps somewhat analogously is the question about why doesn't cyclic tetraoxygen exist as a stable molecule? It's got a great Lewis structure! The answer is that two di-oxygens are 'more stable' and easily formed from the cyclic tetramer.) A deeper answer lies in nuclear forces, nuclear structure, and the shape of the mass-energy surface (or binding energy curve). It furthermore demonstrates that all nuclei above A~140 are unstable towards alpha decay (but don't necessarily have an easy time pulling it off) and that nuclei of even lower mass number are unstable with respect to heavy-cluster (e.g. Ne-22) emission. There's no mystery about Tc and Pm instability. It's just that a comprehensible answer is long. Paul J. Karol Nuclear Chemist (also unstable)
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<UfO0JhG00WBN02I1wl@andrew.cmu.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!pk03+Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Organization: Chemistry, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!pk03+ Newsgroups: sci.chem Message-ID: <UfO0JhG00WBN02I1wl@andrew.cmu.edu> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 11:10:21 -0500 From: Paul Karol <pk03+@andrew.cmu.edu> Subject: Re: technetium In-Reply-To: <93027.132834CHT012@DJUKFA11.BITNET> Lines: 24