Possible Third Mattauch Violation: Beta Decay in Cm-247?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter snorkack
  • Start date Start date
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
11 replies · 2K views
snorkack
Messages
2,388
Reaction score
537
Notorious Mattauch violations are:
Sb-123 and Te-123 (both stable)
Hf-180 and Ta-180 (both stable)
But should Cm-247 and Bk-247 also count?
Both are radioactive - but only to alpha decay and, in case of Bk-247, fission.
Does the absence of electron capture or beta decay count as third Mattauch violation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you sure there are no beta decays or electron capture possible? The non-observation doesn’t mean they don’t exist, especially for exotic nuclides.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
Bk-247 decays by beta emission to Cm-247. However it will be very slow: possibly millions of years.
By both emission and capture, or by capture alone?
 
I seem to get
Cm-247: 247.070354
Bk-247: 247.070307

Is that the mass of atom, with electrons?
 
Which means that it is Cm-247 which is heavier.
 
mfb said:
Right.
Then might Cm-247 undergo beta decay?
Cm-247 is also notable for absence of spontaneous fission.
 
snorkack said:
Then might Cm-247 undergo beta decay?
It is not impossible. With the tiny energy difference and the large spin difference it is extremely unlikely, however.