The discussion revolves around the detection and stability of trans-uranium elements, particularly focusing on whether stable isotopes of these elements could be overlooked and the methods used to observe them. It touches on theoretical aspects of nuclear stability, decay products, and experimental techniques in element production.
Participants express differing views on the existence of stable isotopes among trans-uranium elements, with some asserting that none exist while others propose that they may be detectable under certain conditions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the potential for stable isotopes and the methods of their detection.
Participants note the limitations of current understanding regarding the stability of heavy elements and the dependence on experimental techniques and definitions of stability. There are unresolved questions about the timescales involved in nuclear processes and the effectiveness of various detection methods.
I may misunderstand your objection, but you may also be unaware of the timescales involved. Take 1 fm as a typical nuclear size. Take the speed of light as a typical velocity (we are only interested in the odrer of scales involved). You will find that, the time it takes for a nucleon to go from on side of the nucleus to the other is of the order [tex]10^{-24}[/tex] s. Here we are talking about nuclei with halflives above 1 ms. This is a huge time at the nuclear scale. Besides, it could very well be that, in the island of stability, there are elements with halflives of the order of days.mathman said:Your question is academic in that elements with atomic no. >82 have no stable isotopes (Bi was recently discovered to be radioactive).