Talk:Bismuth-209/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

Seeing a contradiction between the section on cosmological origin indicating that Bi-209 comes from the s-process vs. the periodic table of cosmological origin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-process#/media/File:Nucleosynthesis_periodic_table.svg) which shows it to originate in SuperNovae. Clarity would be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.125.48.25 (talk) 21:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I corrected the half-life figure by removing a decimal point. Two sources suggested a half-life of 19 exayears not 1.9 exayears. This was the edit of 16 september 2007. Christopher Warren Gossett warreng9999@yahoo.com Warreng9999 07:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)---------------------------------------------- So some of the OE83BI209 matter had Alpha particle activity. How can you jump from that observation to the categorical statement that all Bi209 is unstable? WFPMWFPM (talk) 16:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC) And what about nuclear isomers and nuclear structure variations? See Talk:nuclear model WFPMWFPM (talk) 16:17, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

=Consider the addition of a thermal neutron to OE93Bi209. This converts it into an atom of EE84Po210, which is reported to be unstable and an Alpha particle emitter with a half life of 5.01 days. This results in it's conversion into an atom orf EE92Pb206, which is stable. But it also implies that the structure of the created atom of EE94Po210 had a structure instability problem, involving a loosely attached alpha particle mass, plus a time dependent binomially distributed probability of decay occurrence. And which is at the edge of the Z=or<96 area where EE isotopes should have zero spin and 3 of the 4 isotopes of EE82Pb are stable. So the consideration of atomic structure considerations in this area becomes important. WFPMWFPM (talk) 16:26, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

One must question if this could even be considered as being "unstable" as at the current figure of a half life as that of billions of times the age of the universe then no Atom of Bismuth-209 has ever decayed since the beginning of time and none ever will before the end of time/the universe. So, according to our concept of stable then I would think that ALL isotopes of ALL elements has a half life at least limited by the lifespan of the Universe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.136.51.108 (talk) 12:18, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Half-life is a statistical trait. See exponential decay. With a half-life of 1.9E19 years, then on average, you would expect to see 1/2.7E19 of the atoms in any given sample to decay per year. 2.7E19 atoms of Bismuth-209 would amount to about 9.4 milligrams. So, for example, 1 kilogram of ²⁰⁹Bi would have about 110,000 decays per year, or about 1 decay every 5 minutes. Very low level of activity, but it is more than zero XinaNicole (talk) 02:17, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

But...

All isotopes are unstable over an extremely long period of time (with the possible exceptions of Fe and Ni.) Attinio (talk) 08:06, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, just about all isotopes are at least slightly unstable, probably even Fe (Iron), & Ni (Nickel) 173.54.224.138 (talk) 23:40, 14 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.54.224.138 (talk) 21:37, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

For this reason we've labeled isotopes unstable only if they've been observed to decay, or their decay products have been observered in place, so our estimate of their halflive has a firm number, and just just a lower limit. Bi-209 was not classed as a radioisotope until it was actually observed to decay. A sample with a decay constant λ of roughly 10^-19 years will have a decay rate dN/dt of Nλ = 6e4 = 60,000 decays per year for a mole (209 grams) of bismuth (N = 6e23 atoms). THis is almost 7 decays per minute. SBHarris 03:55, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Correction, 7 decays per hour XinaNicole (talk) 02:17, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

According to List of nuclides, all elements with atomic numbers less than or equal to 40 have at least one isotope theoretically stable to all forms of decay, with the possible exception of proton decay, which, if it happens, would affect all nuclides, even protium XinaNicole (talk) 02:17, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Decay of matter is entropy in action.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bismuth-209. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110928143717/http://presolar.wustl.edu/work/noblegas.html to http://presolar.wustl.edu/work/noblegas.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:16, 3 November 2016 (UTC)