Darmstadtium

Darmstadtium is a chemical element with the symbol Ds and atomic number 110. It is an extremely radioactive synthetic element. The most stable known isotope, darmstadtium-281, has a half-life of approximately 12.7 seconds. Darmstadtium was first created in 1994 by the GSI Helmholtz Centre for Heavy Ion Research near the city of Darmstadt, Germany, after which it was named.

"Uun" redirects here. For the urine test abbreviated as UUN, see Urine urea nitrogen.

Darmstadtium, 110Ds
Darmstadtium
Pronunciation/dɑːrmˈstætiəm, -ˈʃtæt-/ (listen)[1][2] ​(darm-S(H)TAT-ee-əm)
Mass number[281]
Darmstadtium in the periodic table
Hydrogen Helium
Lithium Beryllium Boron Carbon Nitrogen Oxygen Fluorine Neon
Sodium Magnesium Aluminium Silicon Phosphorus Sulfur Chlorine Argon
Potassium Calcium Scandium Titanium Vanadium Chromium Manganese Iron Cobalt Nickel Copper Zinc Gallium Germanium Arsenic Selenium Bromine Krypton
Rubidium Strontium Yttrium Zirconium Niobium Molybdenum Technetium Ruthenium Rhodium Palladium Silver Cadmium Indium Tin Antimony Tellurium Iodine Xenon
Caesium Barium Lanthanum Cerium Praseodymium Neodymium Promethium Samarium Europium Gadolinium Terbium Dysprosium Holmium Erbium Thulium Ytterbium Lutetium Hafnium Tantalum Tungsten Rhenium Osmium Iridium Platinum Gold Mercury (element) Thallium Lead Bismuth Polonium Astatine Radon
Francium Radium Actinium Thorium Protactinium Uranium Neptunium Plutonium Americium Curium Berkelium Californium Einsteinium Fermium Mendelevium Nobelium Lawrencium Rutherfordium Dubnium Seaborgium Bohrium Hassium Meitnerium Darmstadtium Roentgenium Copernicium Nihonium Flerovium Moscovium Livermorium Tennessine Oganesson
 Pt
↑
Ds
↓
(Uhq)
meitnerium ← darmstadtium → roentgenium
Atomic number (Z)110
Groupgroup 10
Periodperiod 7
Block  d-block
Electron configuration[Rn] 5f14 6d8 7s2 (predicted)[3]
Electrons per shell2, 8, 18, 32, 32, 16, 2 (predicted)[3]
Physical properties
Phase at STPsolid (predicted)[4]
Density (near r.t.)34.8 g/cm3 (predicted)[3]
Atomic properties
Oxidation states(0), (+2), (+4), (+6), (+8) (predicted)[3][5]
Ionization energies
  • 1st: 960 kJ/mol
  • 2nd: 1890 kJ/mol
  • 3rd: 3030 kJ/mol
  • (more) (all estimated)[3]
Atomic radiusempirical: 132 pm (predicted)[3][5]
Covalent radius128 pm (estimated)[6]
Other properties
Natural occurrencesynthetic
Crystal structure ​body-centered cubic (bcc)

(predicted)[4]
CAS Number54083-77-1
History
Namingafter Darmstadt, Germany, where it was discovered
DiscoveryGesellschaft für Schwerionenforschung (1994)
Main isotopes of darmstadtium
Iso­tope Abun­dance Half-life (t1/2) Decay mode Pro­duct
279Ds syn 0.2 s 10% α 275Hs
90% SF
281Ds syn 14 s 94% SF
6% α 277Hs

In the periodic table, it is a d-block transactinide element. It is a member of the 7th period and is placed in the group 10 elements, although no chemical experiments have yet been carried out to confirm that it behaves as the heavier homologue to platinum in group 10 as the eighth member of the 6d series of transition metals. Darmstadtium is calculated to have similar properties to its lighter homologues, nickel, palladium, and platinum.

Introduction
See also: Superheavy element § Introduction
A graphic depiction of a nuclear fusion reaction. Two nuclei fuse into one, emitting a neutron. Reactions that created new elements to this moment were similar, with the only possible difference that several singular neutrons sometimes were released, or none at all.
External video
Visualization of unsuccessful nuclear fusion, based on calculations by the Australian National University[7]

The heaviest[lower-alpha 1] atomic nuclei are created in nuclear reactions that combine two other nuclei of unequal size[lower-alpha 2] into one; roughly, the more unequal the two nuclei in terms of mass, the greater the possibility that the two react.[13] The material made of the heavier nuclei is made into a target, which is then bombarded by the beam of lighter nuclei. Two nuclei can only fuse into one if they approach each other closely enough; normally, nuclei (all positively charged) repel each other due to electrostatic repulsion. The strong interaction can overcome this repulsion but only within a very short distance from a nucleus; beam nuclei are thus greatly accelerated in order to make such repulsion insignificant compared to the velocity of the beam nucleus.[14] Coming close alone is not enough for two nuclei to fuse: when two nuclei approach each other, they usually remain together for approximately 10−20 seconds and then part ways (not necessarily in the same composition as before the reaction) rather than form a single nucleus.[14][15] If fusion does occur, the temporary merger—termed a compound nucleus—is an excited state. To lose its excitation energy and reach a more stable state, a compound nucleus either fissions or ejects one or several neutrons,[lower-alpha 3] which carry away the energy. This occurs in approximately 10−16 seconds after the initial collision.[16][lower-alpha 4]

The beam passes through the target and reaches the next chamber, the separator; if a new nucleus is produced, it is carried with this beam.[19] In the separator, the newly produced nucleus is separated from other nuclides (that of the original beam and any other reaction products)[lower-alpha 5] and transferred to a surface-barrier detector, which stops the nucleus. The exact location of the upcoming impact on the detector is marked; also marked are its energy and the time of the arrival.[19] The transfer takes about 10−6 seconds; in order to be detected, the nucleus must survive this long.[22] The nucleus is recorded again once its decay is registered, and the location, the energy, and the time of the decay are measured.[19]

Stability of a nucleus is provided by the strong interaction. However, its range is very short; as nuclei become larger, its influence on the outermost nucleons (protons and neutrons) weakens. At the same time, the nucleus is torn apart by electrostatic repulsion between protons, as it has unlimited range.[23] Nuclei of the heaviest elements are thus theoretically predicted[24] and have so far been observed[25] to primarily decay via decay modes that are caused by such repulsion: alpha decay and spontaneous fission;[lower-alpha 6] these modes are predominant for nuclei of superheavy elements. Alpha decays are registered by the emitted alpha particles, and the decay products are easy to determine before the actual decay; if such a decay or a series of consecutive decays produces a known nucleus, the original product of a reaction can be determined arithmetically.[lower-alpha 7] Spontaneous fission, however, produces various nuclei as products, so the original nuclide cannot be determined from its daughters.[lower-alpha 8]

The information available to physicists aiming to synthesize one of the heaviest elements is thus the information collected at the detectors: location, energy, and time of arrival of a particle to the detector, and those of its decay. The physicists analyze this data and seek to conclude that it was indeed caused by a new element and could not have been caused by a different nuclide than the one claimed. Often, provided data is insufficient for a conclusion that a new element was definitely created and there is no other explanation for the observed effects; errors in interpreting data have been made.[lower-alpha 9]

History
The city center of Darmstadt, the namesake of darmstadtium

Discovery

Darmstadtium was first created on November 9, 1994, at the Institute for Heavy Ion Research (Gesellschaft für Schwerionenforschung, GSI) in Darmstadt, Germany, by Peter Armbruster and Gottfried Münzenberg, under the direction of Sigurd Hofmann. The team bombarded a lead-208 target with accelerated nuclei of nickel-62 in a heavy ion accelerator and detected a single atom of the isotope darmstadtium-269:[37]

208
82Pb + 62
28Ni → 269
110Ds + 1
0n

In the same series of experiments, the same team also carried out the reaction using heavier nickel-64 ions. During two runs, 9 atoms of 271Ds were convincingly detected by correlation with known daughter decay properties:[38]

208
82Pb + 64
28Ni → 271
110Ds + 1
0n

Prior to this, there had been failed synthesis attempts in 1986–87 at the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research in Dubna (then in the Soviet Union) and in 1990 at the GSI. A 1995 attempt at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory resulted in signs suggesting but not pointing conclusively at the discovery of a new isotope 267Ds formed in the bombardment of 209Bi with 59Co, and a similarly inconclusive 1994 attempt at the JINR showed signs of 273Ds being produced from 244Pu and 34S. Each team proposed its own name for element 110: the American team proposed hahnium after Otto Hahn in an attempt to resolve the situation on element 105 (which they had long been suggesting this name for), the Russian team proposed becquerelium after Henri Becquerel, and the German team proposed darmstadtium after Darmstadt, the location of their institute.[39] The IUPAC/IUPAP Joint Working Party (JWP) recognised the GSI team as discoverers in their 2001 report, giving them the right to suggest a name for the element.[40]

Naming

Using Mendeleev's nomenclature for unnamed and undiscovered elements, darmstadtium should be known as eka-platinum. In 1979, IUPAC published recommendations according to which the element was to be called ununnilium (with the corresponding symbol of Uun),[41] a systematic element name as a placeholder, until the element was discovered (and the discovery then confirmed) and a permanent name was decided on. Although widely used in the chemical community on all levels, from chemistry classrooms to advanced textbooks, the recommendations were mostly ignored among scientists in the field, who called it "element 110", with the symbol of E110, (110) or even simply 110.[3]

In 1996, the Russian team proposed the name becquerelium after Henri Becquerel.[42] The American team in 1997 proposed the name hahnium[43] after Otto Hahn (previously this name had been used for element 105).

The name darmstadtium (Ds) was suggested by the GSI team in honor of the city of Darmstadt, where the element was discovered.[44][45] The GSI team originally also considered naming the element wixhausium, after the suburb of Darmstadt known as Wixhausen where the element was discovered, but eventually decided on darmstadtium.[46] Policium had also been proposed as a joke due to the emergency telephone number in Germany being 1-1-0. The new name darmstadtium was officially recommended by IUPAC on August 16, 2003.[44]

Isotopes
List of darmstadtium isotopes
Isotope Half-life[lower-alpha 10] Decay
mode		 Discovery
year[47]		 Discovery
reaction[48]
Value Ref
267Ds[lower-alpha 11] 10 µs [47] α 1994 209Bi(59Co,n)
269Ds 230 µs [47] α 1994 208Pb(62Ni,n)
270Ds 205 µs [47] α 2000 207Pb(64Ni,n)
270mDs 10 ms [47] α 2000 207Pb(64Ni,n)
271Ds 90 ms [47] α 1994 208Pb(64Ni,n)
271mDs 1.7 ms [47] α 1994 208Pb(64Ni,n)
273Ds 240 µs [47] α 1996 244Pu(34S,5n)[49]
277Ds 3.5 ms [50] α 2010 285Fl(—,2α)
279Ds 210 ms [51] SF, α 2003 287Fl(—,2α)
280Ds[52] 360 µs [53][54][55] SF 2021 288Fl(—,2α)
281Ds 12.7 s [51] SF, α 2004 289Fl(—,2α)
281mDs[lower-alpha 11] 900 ms [47] α 2012 293mLv(—,3α)
Main article: Isotopes of darmstadtium

Darmstadtium has no stable or naturally occurring isotopes. Several radioactive isotopes have been synthesized in the laboratory, either by fusing two atoms or by observing the decay of heavier elements. Nine different isotopes of darmstadtium have been reported with atomic masses 267, 269–271, 273, 277, and 279–281, although darmstadtium-267 is unconfirmed. Three darmstadtium isotopes, darmstadtium-270, darmstadtium-271, and darmstadtium-281, have known metastable states, although that of darmstadtium-281 is unconfirmed.[56] Most of these decay predominantly through alpha decay, but some undergo spontaneous fission.[57]

Stability and half-lives
This chart of decay modes according to the model of the Japan Atomic Energy Agency predicts several superheavy nuclides within the island of stability having total half-lives exceeding one year (circled) and undergoing primarily alpha decay, peaking at 294Ds with an estimated half-life of 300 years.[58]

All darmstadtium isotopes are extremely unstable and radioactive; in general, the heavier isotopes are more stable than the lighter. The most stable known darmstadtium isotope, 281Ds, is also the heaviest known darmstadtium isotope; it has a half-life of 12.7 seconds. The isotope 279Ds has a half-life of 0.18 seconds, while the unconfirmed 281mDs has a half-life of 0.9 seconds. The remaining seven isotopes and two metastable states have half-lives between 1 microsecond and 70 milliseconds.[57] Some unknown darmstadtium isotopes may have longer half-lives, however.[59]

Theoretical calculation in a quantum tunneling model reproduces the experimental alpha decay half-life data for the known darmstadtium isotopes.[60][61] It also predicts that the undiscovered isotope 294Ds, which has a magic number of neutrons (184),[3] would have an alpha decay half-life on the order of 311 years; exactly the same approach predicts a ~3500-year alpha half-life for the non-magic 293Ds isotope, however.[59][62]

Predicted properties

Other than nuclear properties, no properties of darmstadtium or its compounds have been measured; this is due to its extremely limited and expensive production[13] and the fact that darmstadtium (and its parents) decays very quickly. Properties of darmstadtium metal remain unknown and only predictions are available.

Chemical

Darmstadtium is the eighth member of the 6d series of transition metals, and should be much like the platinum group metals.[45] Calculations on its ionization potentials and atomic and ionic radii are similar to that of its lighter homologue platinum, thus implying that darmstadtium's basic properties will resemble those of the other group 10 elements, nickel, palladium, and platinum.[3]

Prediction of the probable chemical properties of darmstadtium has not received much attention recently. Darmstadtium should be a very noble metal. The predicted standard reduction potential for the Ds2+/Ds couple is 1.7 V.[3] Based on the most stable oxidation states of the lighter group 10 elements, the most stable oxidation states of darmstadtium are predicted to be the +6, +4, and +2 states; however, the neutral state is predicted to be the most stable in aqueous solutions. In comparison, only palladium and platinum are known to show the maximum oxidation state in the group, +6, while the most stable states are +4 and +2 for both nickel and palladium. It is further expected that the maximum oxidation states of elements from bohrium (element 107) to darmstadtium (element 110) may be stable in the gas phase but not in aqueous solution.[3] Darmstadtium hexafluoride (DsF6) is predicted to have very similar properties to its lighter homologue platinum hexafluoride (PtF6), having very similar electronic structures and ionization potentials.[3][63][64] It is also expected to have the same octahedral molecular geometry as PtF6.[65] Other predicted darmstadtium compounds are darmstadtium carbide (DsC) and darmstadtium tetrachloride (DsCl4), both of which are expected to behave like their lighter homologues.[65] Unlike platinum, which preferentially forms a cyanide complex in its +2 oxidation state, Pt(CN)2, darmstadtium is expected to preferentially remain in its neutral state and form Ds(CN)2−
2 instead, forming a strong Ds–C bond with some multiple bond character.[66]

Physical and atomic

Darmstadtium is expected to be a solid under normal conditions and to crystallize in the body-centered cubic structure, unlike its lighter congeners which crystallize in the face-centered cubic structure, because it is expected to have different electron charge densities from them.[4] It should be a very heavy metal with a density of around 34.8 g/cm3. In comparison, the densest known element that has had its density measured, osmium, has a density of only 22.61 g/cm3.[3] This results from darmstadtium's high atomic weight, the lanthanide and actinide contractions, and relativistic effects, although production of enough darmstadtium to measure this quantity would be impractical, and the sample would quickly decay.[3]

The outer electron configuration of darmstadtium is calculated to be 6d8 7s2, which obeys the Aufbau principle and does not follow platinum's outer electron configuration of 5d9 6s1. This is due to the relativistic stabilization of the 7s2 electron pair over the whole seventh period, so that none of the elements from 104 to 112 are expected to have electron configurations violating the Aufbau principle. The atomic radius of darmstadtium is expected to be around 132 pm.[3]

Experimental chemistry

Unambiguous determination of the chemical characteristics of darmstadtium has yet to have been established[67] due to the short half-lives of darmstadtium isotopes and a limited number of likely volatile compounds that could be studied on a very small scale. One of the few darmstadtium compounds that are likely to be sufficiently volatile is darmstadtium hexafluoride (DsF
6), as its lighter homologue platinum hexafluoride (PtF
6) is volatile above 60 °C and therefore the analogous compound of darmstadtium might also be sufficiently volatile;[45] a volatile octafluoride (DsF
8) might also be possible.[3] For chemical studies to be carried out on a transactinide, at least four atoms must be produced, the half-life of the isotope used must be at least 1 second, and the rate of production must be at least one atom per week.[45] Even though the half-life of 281Ds, the most stable confirmed darmstadtium isotope, is 12.7 seconds, long enough to perform chemical studies, another obstacle is the need to increase the rate of production of darmstadtium isotopes and allow experiments to carry on for weeks or months so that statistically significant results can be obtained. Separation and detection must be carried out continuously to separate out the darmstadtium isotopes and have automated systems experiment on the gas-phase and solution chemistry of darmstadtium, as the yields for heavier elements are predicted to be smaller than those for lighter elements; some of the separation techniques used for bohrium and hassium could be reused. However, the experimental chemistry of darmstadtium has not received as much attention as that of the heavier elements from copernicium to livermorium.[3][67][68]

The more neutron-rich darmstadtium isotopes are the most stable[57] and are thus more promising for chemical studies.[3][45] However, they can only be produced indirectly from the alpha decay of heavier elements,[69][70][71] and indirect synthesis methods are not as favourable for chemical studies as direct synthesis methods.[3] The more neutron-rich isotopes 276Ds and 277Ds might be produced directly in the reaction between thorium-232 and calcium-48, but the yield is expected to be low.[3][72][73] Furthermore, this reaction has already been tested without success,[72] and more recent experiments that have successfully synthesized 277Ds using indirect methods show that it has a short half-life of 3.5 ms, not long enough to perform chemical studies.[50][70] The only known darmstadtium isotope with a half-life long enough for chemical research is 281Ds, which would have to be produced as the granddaughter of 289Fl.[74]

See also

Notes
  1. In nuclear physics, an element is called heavy if its atomic number is high; lead (element 82) is one example of such a heavy element. The term "superheavy elements" typically refers to elements with atomic number greater than 103 (although there are other definitions, such as atomic number greater than 100[8] or 112;[9] sometimes, the term is presented an equivalent to the term "transactinide", which puts an upper limit before the beginning of the hypothetical superactinide series).[10] Terms "heavy isotopes" (of a given element) and "heavy nuclei" mean what could be understood in the common language—isotopes of high mass (for the given element) and nuclei of high mass, respectively.
  2. In 2009, a team at JINR led by Oganessian published results of their attempt to create hassium in a symmetric 136Xe + 136Xe reaction. They failed to observe a single atom in such a reaction, putting the upper limit on the cross section, the measure of probability of a nuclear reaction, as 2.5 pb.[11] In comparison, the reaction that resulted in hassium discovery, 208Pb + 58Fe, had a cross section of ~20 pb (more specifically, 19+19
    −11     pb), as estimated by the discoverers.[12]
  3. The greater the excitation energy, the more neutrons are ejected. If the excitation energy is lower than energy binding each neutron to the rest of the nucleus, neutrons are not emitted; instead, the compound nucleus de-excites by emitting a gamma ray.[16]
  4. The definition by the IUPAC/IUPAP Joint Working Party states that a chemical element can only be recognized as discovered if a nucleus of it has not decayed within 10−14 seconds. This value was chosen as an estimate of how long it takes a nucleus to acquire its outer electrons and thus display its chemical properties.[17] This figure also marks the generally accepted upper limit for lifetime of a compound nucleus.[18]
  5. This separation is based on that the resulting nuclei move past the target more slowly then the unreacted beam nuclei. The separator contains electric and magnetic fields whose effects on a moving particle cancel out for a specific velocity of a particle.[20] Such separation can also be aided by a time-of-flight measurement and a recoil energy measurement; a combination of the two may allow to estimate the mass of a nucleus.[21]
  6. Not all decay modes are caused by electrostatic repulsion. For example, beta decay is caused by the weak interaction.[26]
  7. Since mass of a nucleus is not measured directly but is rather calculated from that of another nucleus, such measurement is called indirect. Direct measurements are also possible, but for the most part they have remained unavailable for heaviest nuclei.[27] The first direct measurement of mass of a superheavy nucleus was reported in 2018 at LBNL.[28] Mass was determined from the location of a nucleus after the transfer (the location helps determine its trajectory, which is linked to the mass-to-charge ratio of the nucleus, since the transfer was done in presence of a magnet).[29]
  8. Spontaneous fission was discovered by Soviet physicist Georgy Flerov,[30] a leading scientist at JINR, and thus it was a "hobbyhorse" for the facility.[31] In contrast, the LBL scientists believed fission information was not sufficient for a claim of synthesis of an element. They believed spontaneous fission had not been studied enough to use it for identification of a new element, since there was a difficulty of establishing that a compound nucleus had only ejected neutrons and not charged particles like protons or alpha particles.[18] They thus preferred to link new isotopes to the already known ones by successive alpha decays.[30]
  9. For instance, element 102 was mistakenly identified in 1957 at the Nobel Institute of Physics in Stockholm, Stockholm County, Sweden.[32] There were no earlier definitive claims of creation of this element, and the element was assigned a name by its Swedish, American, and British discoverers, nobelium. It was later shown that the identification was incorrect.[33] The following year, LBNL was unable to reproduce the Swedish results and announced instead their synthesis of the element; that claim was also disproved later.[33] JINR insisted that they were the first to create the element and suggested a name of their own for the new element, joliotium;[34] the Soviet name was also not accepted (JINR later referred to the naming of element 102 as "hasty").[35] The name "nobelium" remained unchanged on account of its widespread usage.[36]
  10. Different sources give different values for half-lives; the most recently published values are listed.
  11. This isotope is unconfirmed

References
  1. "Darmstadtium". Periodic Table of Videos. The University of Nottingham. Retrieved October 19, 2012.
  2. "darmstadtium". Lexico UK Dictionary. Oxford University Press. Retrieved September 1, 2019.
  3. Hoffman, Darleane C.; Lee, Diana M.; Pershina, Valeria (2006). "Transactinides and the future elements". In Morss; Edelstein, Norman M.; Fuger, Jean (eds.). The Chemistry of the Actinide and Transactinide Elements (3rd ed.). Dordrecht, The Netherlands. ISBN 978-1-4020-3555-5.
  4. Östlin, A.; Vitos, L. (2011). "First-principles calculation of the structural stability of 6d transition metals". Physical Review B. 84 (11). Bibcode:2011PhRvB..84k3104O. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.84.113104.
  5. Fricke, Burkhard (1975). "Superheavy elements: a prediction of their chemical and physical properties". Recent Impact of Physics on Inorganic Chemistry. 21: 89–144. doi:10.1007/BFb0116498. Retrieved October 4, 2013.
  6. Chemical Data. Darmstadtium - Ds, Royal Chemical Society
  7. Wakhle, A.; Simenel, C.; Hinde, D. J.; et al. (2015). Simenel, C.; Gomes, P. R. S.; Hinde, D. J.; et al. (eds.). "Comparing Experimental and Theoretical Quasifission Mass Angle Distributions". European Physical Journal Web of Conferences. 86: 00061. Bibcode:2015EPJWC..8600061W. doi:10.1051/epjconf/20158600061. ISSN 2100-014X.
  8. Krämer, K. (2016). "Explainer: superheavy elements". Chemistry World. Retrieved March 15, 2020.
  9. "Discovery of Elements 113 and 115". Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Archived from the original on September 11, 2015. Retrieved March 15, 2020.
  10. Eliav, E.; Kaldor, U.; Borschevsky, A. (2018). "Electronic Structure of the Transactinide Atoms". In Scott, R. A. (ed.). Encyclopedia of Inorganic and Bioinorganic Chemistry. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 1–16. doi:10.1002/9781119951438.eibc2632. ISBN 978-1-119-95143-8.
  11. Oganessian, Yu. Ts.; Dmitriev, S. N.; Yeremin, A. V.; et al. (2009). "Attempt to produce the isotopes of element 108 in the fusion reaction 136Xe + 136Xe". Physical Review C. 79 (2): 024608. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.79.024608. ISSN 0556-2813.
  12. Münzenberg, G.; Armbruster, P.; Folger, H.; et al. (1984). "The identification of element 108" (PDF). Zeitschrift für Physik A. 317 (2): 235–236. Bibcode:1984ZPhyA.317..235M. doi:10.1007/BF01421260. Archived from the original (PDF) on June 7, 2015. Retrieved October 20, 2012.
  13. Subramanian, S. (2019). "Making New Elements Doesn't Pay. Just Ask This Berkeley Scientist". Bloomberg Businessweek. Retrieved January 18, 2020.
  14. Ivanov, D. (2019). "Сверхтяжелые шаги в неизвестное" [Superheavy steps into the unknown]. N+1 (in Russian). Retrieved February 2, 2020.
  15. Hinde, D. (2014). "Something new and superheavy at the periodic table". The Conversation. Retrieved January 30, 2020.
  16. Krása, A. (2010). "Neutron Sources for ADS" (PDF). Czech Technical University in Prague. pp. 4–8. Retrieved October 20, 2019.
  17. Wapstra, A. H. (1991). "Criteria that must be satisfied for the discovery of a new chemical element to be recognized" (PDF). Pure and Applied Chemistry. 63 (6): 883. doi:10.1351/pac199163060879. ISSN 1365-3075. Retrieved August 28, 2020.
  18. Hyde, E. K.; Hoffman, D. C.; Keller, O. L. (1987). "A History and Analysis of the Discovery of Elements 104 and 105". Radiochimica Acta. 42 (2): 67–68. doi:10.1524/ract.1987.42.2.57. ISSN 2193-3405.
  19. Chemistry World (2016). "How to Make Superheavy Elements and Finish the Periodic Table [Video]". Scientific American. Retrieved January 27, 2020.
  20. Hoffman 2000, p. 334.
  21. Hoffman 2000, p. 335.
  22. Zagrebaev 2013, p. 3.
  23. Beiser 2003, p. 432.
  24. Staszczak, A.; Baran, A.; Nazarewicz, W. (2013). "Spontaneous fission modes and lifetimes of superheavy elements in the nuclear density functional theory". Physical Review C. 87 (2): 024320–1. arXiv:1208.1215. Bibcode:2013PhRvC..87b4320S. doi:10.1103/physrevc.87.024320. ISSN 0556-2813.
  25. Audi 2017, pp. 030001-128–030001-138.
  26. Beiser 2003, p. 439.
  27. Oganessian, Yu. Ts.; Rykaczewski, K. P. (2015). "A beachhead on the island of stability". Physics Today. 68 (8): 32–38. Bibcode:2015PhT....68h..32O. doi:10.1063/PT.3.2880. ISSN 0031-9228. OSTI 1337838.
  28. Grant, A. (2018). "Weighing the heaviest elements". Physics Today. doi:10.1063/PT.6.1.20181113a.
  29. Howes, L. (2019). "Exploring the superheavy elements at the end of the periodic table". Chemical & Engineering News. Retrieved January 27, 2020.
  30. Robinson, A. E. (2019). "The Transfermium Wars: Scientific Brawling and Name-Calling during the Cold War". Distillations. Retrieved February 22, 2020.
  31. "Популярная библиотека химических элементов. Сиборгий (экавольфрам)" [Popular library of chemical elements. Seaborgium (eka-tungsten)]. n-t.ru (in Russian). Retrieved January 7, 2020. Reprinted from "Экавольфрам" [Eka-tungsten]. Популярная библиотека химических элементов. Серебро — Нильсборий и далее [Popular library of chemical elements. Silver through nielsbohrium and beyond] (in Russian). Nauka. 1977.
  32. "Nobelium – Element information, properties and uses | Periodic Table". Royal Society of Chemistry. Retrieved March 1, 2020.
  33. Kragh 2018, pp. 38–39.
  34. Kragh 2018, p. 40.
  35. Ghiorso, A.; Seaborg, G. T.; Oganessian, Yu. Ts.; et al. (1993). "Responses on the report 'Discovery of the Transfermium elements' followed by reply to the responses by Transfermium Working Group" (PDF). Pure and Applied Chemistry. 65 (8): 1815–1824. doi:10.1351/pac199365081815. Archived (PDF) from the original on November 25, 2013. Retrieved September 7, 2016.
  36. Commission on Nomenclature of Inorganic Chemistry (1997). "Names and symbols of transfermium elements (IUPAC Recommendations 1997)" (PDF). Pure and Applied Chemistry. 69 (12): 2471–2474. doi:10.1351/pac199769122471.
  37. Hofmann, S.; Ninov, V.; Heßberger, F. P.; Armbruster, P.; Folger, H.; Münzenberg, G.; Schött, H. J.; Popeko, A. G.; Yeremin, A. V.; Andreyev, A. N.; Saro, S.; Janik, R.; Leino, M. (1995). "Production and decay of 269110". Zeitschrift für Physik A. 350 (4): 277. Bibcode:1995ZPhyA.350..277H. doi:10.1007/BF01291181. S2CID 125020220.
  38. Hofmann, S (1998). "New elements – approaching". Reports on Progress in Physics. 61 (6): 639. Bibcode:1998RPPh...61..639H. doi:10.1088/0034-4885/61/6/002.
  39. Barber, R. C.; Greenwood, N. N.; Hrynkiewicz, A. Z.; Jeannin, Y. P.; Lefort, M.; Sakai, M.; Ulehla, I.; Wapstra, A. P.; Wilkinson, D. H. (1993). "Discovery of the transfermium elements. Part II: Introduction to discovery profiles. Part III: Discovery profiles of the transfermium elements". Pure and Applied Chemistry. 65 (8): 1757. doi:10.1351/pac199365081757. S2CID 195819585. (Note: for Part I see Pure Appl. Chem., Vol. 63, No. 6, pp. 879–886, 1991)
  40. Karol, P. J.; Nakahara, H.; Petley, B. W.; Vogt, E. (2001). "On the discovery of the elements 110–112 (IUPAC Technical Report)". Pure and Applied Chemistry. 73 (6): 959. doi:10.1351/pac200173060959. S2CID 97615948.
  41. Chatt, J. (1979). "Recommendations for the naming of elements of atomic numbers greater than 100". Pure and Applied Chemistry. 51 (2): 381–384. doi:10.1351/pac197951020381.
  42. "Chemistry : Periodic Table : darmstadtium : historical information". January 17, 2005. Archived from the original on January 17, 2005.
  43. Albert, Ghiorso; Darleane, Hoffman C; Glenn, Seaborg T (January 21, 2000). Transuranium People, The: The Inside Story. ISBN 9781783262441.
  44. Corish, J.; Rosenblatt, G. M. (2003). "Name and symbol of the element with atomic number 110" (PDF). Pure Appl. Chem. 75 (10): 1613–1615. doi:10.1351/pac200375101613. S2CID 97249985. Retrieved October 17, 2012.
  45. Griffith, W. P. (2008). "The Periodic Table and the Platinum Group Metals". Platinum Metals Review. 52 (2): 114–119. doi:10.1595/147106708X297486.
  46. "Chemistry in its element – darmstadtium". Chemistry in its element. Royal Society of Chemistry. Retrieved October 17, 2012.
  47. Audi, G.; Kondev, F. G.; Wang, M.; Huang, W. J.; Naimi, S. (2017). "The NUBASE2016 evaluation of nuclear properties" (PDF). Chinese Physics C. 41 (3): 030001. Bibcode:2017ChPhC..41c0001A. doi:10.1088/1674-1137/41/3/030001.
  48. Thoennessen, M. (2016). The Discovery of Isotopes: A Complete Compilation. Springer. pp. 229, 234, 238. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-31763-2. ISBN 978-3-319-31761-8. LCCN 2016935977.
  49. Lazarev, Yu. A.; Lobanov, Yu.; Oganessian, Yu.; Utyonkov, V.; Abdullin, F.; Polyakov, A.; Rigol, J.; Shirokovsky, I.; Tsyganov, Yu.; Iliev, S.; Subbotin, V. G.; Sukhov, A. M.; Buklanov, G. V.; Gikal, B. N.; Kutner, V. B.; Mezentsev, A. N.; Subotic, K.; Wild, J. F.; Lougheed, R. W.; Moody, K. J. (1996). "α decay of 273110: Shell closure at N=162". Physical Review C. 54 (2): 620–625. Bibcode:1996PhRvC..54..620L. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.54.620. PMID 9971385.
  50. Utyonkov, V. K.; Brewer, N. T.; Oganessian, Yu. Ts.; Rykaczewski, K. P.; Abdullin, F. Sh.; Dimitriev, S. N.; Grzywacz, R. K.; Itkis, M. G.; Miernik, K.; Polyakov, A. N.; Roberto, J. B.; Sagaidak, R. N.; Shirokovsky, I. V.; Shumeiko, M. V.; Tsyganov, Yu. S.; Voinov, A. A.; Subbotin, V. G.; Sukhov, A. M.; Karpov, A. V.; Popeko, A. G.; Sabel'nikov, A. V.; Svirikhin, A. I.; Vostokin, G. K.; Hamilton, J. H.; Kovrinzhykh, N. D.; Schlattauer, L.; Stoyer, M. A.; Gan, Z.; Huang, W. X.; Ma, L. (January 30, 2018). "Neutron-deficient superheavy nuclei obtained in the 240Pu+48Ca reaction". Physical Review C. 97 (14320): 014320. Bibcode:2018PhRvC..97a4320U. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.97.014320.
  51. Oganessian, Y.T. (2015). "Super-heavy element research". Reports on Progress in Physics. 78 (3): 036301. Bibcode:2015RPPh...78c6301O. doi:10.1088/0034-4885/78/3/036301. PMID 25746203.
  52. Forsberg, U.; et al. (2016). "Recoil-α-fission and recoil-α-α-fission events observed in the reaction 48Ca + 243Am". Nuclear Physics A. 953: 117–138. arXiv:1502.03030. Bibcode:2016NuPhA.953..117F. doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2016.04.025. S2CID 55598355.
  53. Morita, K.; et al. (2014). "Measurement of the 248Cm + 48Ca fusion reaction products at RIKEN GARIS" (PDF). RIKEN Accel. Prog. Rep. 47: xi.
  54. Kaji, Daiya; Morita, Kosuke; Morimoto, Kouji; Haba, Hiromitsu; Asai, Masato; Fujita, Kunihiro; Gan, Zaiguo; Geissel, Hans; Hasebe, Hiroo; Hofmann, Sigurd; Huang, MingHui; Komori, Yukiko; Ma, Long; Maurer, Joachim; Murakami, Masashi; Takeyama, Mirei; Tokanai, Fuyuki; Tanaka, Taiki; Wakabayashi, Yasuo; Yamaguchi, Takayuki; Yamaki, Sayaka; Yoshida, Atsushi (2017). "Study of the Reaction 48Ca + 248Cm → 296Lv* at RIKEN-GARIS". Journal of the Physical Society of Japan. 86 (3): 034201–1–7. Bibcode:2017JPSJ...86c4201K. doi:10.7566/JPSJ.86.034201.
  55. Såmark-Roth, A.; Cox, D. M.; Rudolph, D.; Sarmento, L. G.; Carlsson, B. G.; Egido, J. L.; Golubev, P; Heery, J.; Yakushev, A.; Åberg, S.; Albers, H. M.; Albertsson, M.; Block, M.; Brand, H.; Calverley, T.; Cantemir, R.; Clark, R. M.; Düllmann, Ch. E.; Eberth, J.; Fahlander, C.; Forsberg, U.; Gates, J. M.; Giacoppo, F.; Götz, M.; Hertzberg, R.-D.; Hrabar, Y.; Jäger, E.; Judson, D.; Khuyagbaatar, J.; et al. (2021). "Spectroscopy along Flerovium Decay Chains: Discovery of 280Ds and an Excited State in 282Cn". Physical Review Letters. 126: 032503. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.032503.
  56. Hofmann, S.; Heinz, S.; Mann, R.; Maurer, J.; Khuyagbaatar, J.; Ackermann, D.; Antalic, S.; Barth, W.; Block, M.; Burkhard, H. G.; Comas, V. F.; Dahl, L.; Eberhardt, K.; Gostic, J.; Henderson, R. A.; Heredia, J. A.; Heßberger, F. P.; Kenneally, J. M.; Kindler, B.; Kojouharov, I.; Kratz, J. V.; Lang, R.; Leino, M.; Lommel, B.; Moody, K. J.; Münzenberg, G.; Nelson, S. L.; Nishio, K.; Popeko, A. G.; et al. (2012). "The reaction 48Ca + 248Cm → 296116* studied at the GSI-SHIP". The European Physical Journal A. 48 (5): 62. Bibcode:2012EPJA...48...62H. doi:10.1140/epja/i2012-12062-1. S2CID 121930293.
  57. Sonzogni, Alejandro. "Interactive Chart of Nuclides". National Nuclear Data Center: Brookhaven National Laboratory. Retrieved June 6, 2008.
  58. Koura, H. (2011). Decay modes and a limit of existence of nuclei in the superheavy mass region (PDF). 4th International Conference on the Chemistry and Physics of the Transactinide Elements. Retrieved November 18, 2018.
  59. P. Roy Chowdhury; C. Samanta & D. N. Basu (2008). "Search for long lived heaviest nuclei beyond the valley of stability". Phys. Rev. C. 77 (4): 044603. arXiv:0802.3837. Bibcode:2008PhRvC..77d4603C. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.77.044603. S2CID 119207807.
  60. P. Roy Chowdhury; C. Samanta & D. N. Basu (2006). "α decay half-lives of new superheavy elements". Phys. Rev. C. 73 (1): 014612. arXiv:nucl-th/0507054. Bibcode:2006PhRvC..73a4612C. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.73.014612. S2CID 118739116.
  61. C. Samanta; P. Roy Chowdhury & D.N. Basu (2007). "Predictions of alpha decay half lives of heavy and superheavy elements". Nucl. Phys. A. 789 (1–4): 142–154. arXiv:nucl-th/0703086. Bibcode:2007NuPhA.789..142S. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.264.8177. doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2007.04.001. S2CID 7496348.
  62. P. Roy Chowdhury; C. Samanta & D. N. Basu (2008). "Nuclear half-lives for α -radioactivity of elements with 100 ≤ Z ≤ 130". Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables. 94 (6): 781–806. arXiv:0802.4161. Bibcode:2008ADNDT..94..781C. doi:10.1016/j.adt.2008.01.003.
  63. Rosen, A.; Fricke, B.; Morovic, T.; Ellis, D. E. (1979). "Relativistic molecular calculations of superheavy molecules". Journal de Physique Colloques. 40: C4–218–C4–219. doi:10.1051/jphyscol:1979467.
  64. Waber, J. T.; Averill, F. W. (1974). "Molecular orbitals of PtF6 and E110 F6 calculated by the self-consistent multiple scattering Xα method". J. Chem. Phys. 60 (11): 4460–70. Bibcode:1974JChPh..60.4466W. doi:10.1063/1.1680924.
  65. Thayer, John S. (2010), "Relativistic Effects and the Chemistry of the Heavier Main Group Elements", Relativistic Methods for Chemists, Challenges and Advances in Computational Chemistry and Physics, 10, p. 82, doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-9975-5_2, ISBN 978-1-4020-9974-8
  66. Demissie, Taye B.; Ruud, Kenneth (February 25, 2017). "Darmstadtium, roentgenium, and copernicium form strong bonds with cyanide" (PDF). International Journal of Quantum Chemistry. 2017: e25393. doi:10.1002/qua.25393. hdl:10037/13632.
  67. Düllmann, Christoph E. (2012). "Superheavy elements at GSI: a broad research program with element 114 in the focus of physics and chemistry". Radiochimica Acta. 100 (2): 67–74. doi:10.1524/ract.2011.1842. S2CID 100778491.
  68. Eichler, Robert (2013). "First foot prints of chemistry on the shore of the Island of Superheavy Elements". Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 420 (1): 012003. arXiv:1212.4292. Bibcode:2013JPhCS.420a2003E. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/420/1/012003. S2CID 55653705.
  69. Oganessian, Y. T.; Utyonkov, V.; Lobanov, Y.; Abdullin, F.; Polyakov, A.; Shirokovsky, I.; Tsyganov, Y.; Gulbekian, G.; Bogomolov, S.; Gikal, B.; et al. (2004). "Measurements of cross sections for the fusion-evaporation reactions 244Pu(48Ca,xn)292−x114 and 245Cm(48Ca,xn)293−x116". Physical Review C. 69 (5): 054607. Bibcode:2004PhRvC..69e4607O. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.69.054607.
  70. Public Affairs Department (October 26, 2010). "Six New Isotopes of the Superheavy Elements Discovered: Moving Closer to Understanding the Island of Stability". Berkeley Lab. Retrieved April 25, 2011.
  71. Yeremin, A. V.; et al. (1999). "Synthesis of nuclei of the superheavy element 114 in reactions induced by 48Ca". Nature. 400 (6741): 242–245. Bibcode:1999Natur.400..242O. doi:10.1038/22281. S2CID 4399615.
  72. "JINR Publishing Department: Annual Reports (Archive)". www1.jinr.ru.
  73. Feng, Z; Jin, G.; Li, J.; Scheid, W. (2009). "Production of heavy and superheavy nuclei in massive fusion reactions". Nuclear Physics A. 816 (1): 33. arXiv:0803.1117. Bibcode:2009NuPhA.816...33F. doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2008.11.003. S2CID 18647291.
  74. Moody, Ken (November 30, 2013). "Synthesis of Superheavy Elements". In Schädel, Matthias; Shaughnessy, Dawn (eds.). The Chemistry of Superheavy Elements (2nd ed.). Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 24–8. ISBN 9783642374661.

Bibliography
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.