Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Why is Technetium (Element 43) radioactive?

  1. Jun 8, 2016 #1
    It seems odd to me that there would be a radioactive atom so far up the periodic table. What is it about this atom's atomic nucleus that makes it so unstable?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 8, 2016 #2

    fresh_42

    Staff: Mentor

    According to the liquid-drop-model of nuclei the most stable isotope would be 100-Tc. But with two odd numbers of protons (43) and neutrons (57) it could only be stable if there weren't other stable nuclei with two even numbers of protons and neutrons, which are 100-Mo (42/58) and 100-Ru (44/56). The second is stable and the first almost ##(7.3 \cdot 10^{18}a)##. (Also a consequence of this model, however, I haven't found a short way to see it.)
    Thus the heavy isotopes decay per neutron emission and the lighter per electron capture.
     
  4. Jun 8, 2016 #3

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    Did you check the Wikipedia page? It has a good introduction. There are several factors, mainly the very low energy of nuclei of elements nearby combined with the odd number of protons of technetium.
     
  5. Jun 8, 2016 #4

    fresh_42

    Staff: Mentor

    I have taken the German one and wrote a kind of summarization. Unfortunately the English site wasn't as detailed concerning the radioactivity of the isotopes. The good thing is, I learned something about the stability of nuclei myself.

    Edit: the 100-Tc was a result from a formula on the liquid-drop-model page plus Wolfram.
     
  6. Jun 8, 2016 #5

    mathman

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    All (?) elements have radioactive isotopes.
    All (?) elements have radioactive isotopes. What is unusual is that elements 43 and 61 are the only elements with atomic number < 82 that have no stable isotope.
     
  7. Jun 10, 2016 #6
    Is it pure random chance that elements 43 and 61 don't have any stable isotopes, or is there any more reason?
    From elements 1 to 16, every element has exactly 1 stable odd isotope. Starting with 17, the pattern gets more random:
    17: 2 - 35, 37
    18: 0
    19: 2 - 39, 41
    20: 1 - 43
    21: 1 - 45
    22: 2 - 47, 49
    23: 1 - 51
    24: 1 - 53
    25: 1 - 55
    26: 1 - 57
    27: 1 - 59
    28: 1 - 61
    29: 2 - 63, 65
    30: 1 - 67
    31: 2 - 69, 71
    32: 1 - 73
    33: 1 - 75
    34: 1 - 77
    35: 1 - 79, 81
    36: 1 - 83
    37: 1 - 85
    38: 1 - 87
    39: 1 - 89
    40: 1 - 91
    41: 1 - 93
    42: 2 - 95, 97
    43: 0
    44: 2 - 99, 101
    45: 1 - 103
    46: 1 - 105
    47: 2 - 107, 109
    48: 1 - 111
    49: 1 - 113
    50: 3 - 115, 117, 119
    51: 2 - 121, 123
    52: 1 - 125
    53: 1 - 127
    54: 2 - 129, 131
    55: 1 - 133
    56: 2 - 135, 137
    57: 1 - 139
    58: 0
    59: 1 - 141
    60: 2 - 143, 145
    61: 0
    62: 2 - 147, 149
    63: 2 - 151, 153
    64: 2 - 155, 157
    65: 1 - 159
    66: 2 - 161, 163
    67: 1 - 165
    68: 1 - 167
    69: 1 - 169
    70: 2 - 171, 173
    71: 1 - 175
    72: 2 - 177, 179
    73: 1 - 181
    74: 1 - 183
    75: 1 - 185
    76: 2 - 187, 189
    77: 2 - 191, 193
    78: 1 - 195
    79: 1 - 197
    80: 2 - 199, 201
    81: 2 - 203, 205
    82: 1 - 207
    83: 1 - 209.

    The absence of stable odd isotopes of elements 18 and 58 is just as odd as their absence for elements 43 and 61.
     
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2016
  8. Jun 10, 2016 #7

    fresh_42

    Staff: Mentor

    As far as I can see it, the liquid-drop-model is - as quoted - semi-empirical, i.e. it takes the observations and tries to explain them by patterns. Those patterns represent the more general principle, that nature always tries to find local energy minima, stable points of balance where energy from elsewhere is needed to leave those states. Since all three atomic forces play a role here the overall situation can be pretty complex. The patterns mentioned in the liquid-drop-model are meant to reduce this complexity onto computational principles. And it works astonishingly well as I experienced as I took them to calculate 100-Tc as a preferred state.
     
  9. Jun 10, 2016 #8

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    All the odd isotopes argon. scnr.

    It is not that odd for the even-numbered elements - 37Ar would have 19 neutrons, 39Ar would have 21 neutrons. 20 is a magic number (the nuclear equivalent of noble gases - completed shells), so 37Cl and 39K are strongly bound, and the argon isotopes decay to those.

    139Ce has 81 neutrons, 141 has 83. And 82 is a magic number again.

    While the Wikipedia page about technetium is a bit short, the linked article isotopes of technetium has more details.

    Magic numbers for reference: 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82, and 126
     
  10. Jun 11, 2016 #9
    Then why are 55 and 85 the preferred neutron numbers, seeing how both are odd?
     
  11. Jun 11, 2016 #10

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    Preferred in which way, and where do those numbers come from?

    Cerium has the most stable isotope at 82 neutrons, 78, 80 and 84 neutrons also lead to isotopes without observed decay.
     
  12. Jun 12, 2016 #11
    Technetium has no stable isotope because both 97 and 99 are unstable. For 97, the stable isobar is Mo, with 55 neutrons. For 99, the stable isobar is Ru, also with 55 neutrons. What´s special about 55 neutrons?
    Promethium has no stable isotopes because both 145 and 147 are unstable. For 145, the stable isobar is Nd, with 85 neutrons. For 147, the stable isobar is Sm, also with 85 neutrons.
     
  13. Jun 12, 2016 #12

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    It's not the 55 neutrons, it's the paired 42 and 44 protons. There can be only one stable isotope with an odd sum of protons and neutrons, in both cases the elements nearby have a slightly lower energy. Same for promethium.
     
  14. Jun 12, 2016 #13
    Are 43 and 44 then both magic numbers?
     
  15. Jun 12, 2016 #14

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    None of them is magic, see above. But paired protons and neutrons in general lead to lower energies, and in this case the paired protons win by a small margin.
     
  16. Jul 2, 2016 #15
    Thank you for the replies I especially learned much about the liquid drop model. Very useful explination.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted



Similar Discussions: Why is Technetium (Element 43) radioactive?
  1. Radioactive elements (Replies: 3)

Loading...