Quote:
Originally Posted by rkomar
Sticking to my old field, even the most wildly optimistic theories state that nuclei in these islands of stability will still decay radioactively, so they really aren't stable (i.e. with lifetimes near or above the age of the universe). More realistic theories only predict lifetimes that are somewhat longer than the extremely short ones of neighbouring isotopes. Extensive searches for these longer-lived isotopes have been going on for decades, so that's one strike against finding any that are stable. Another strike is that we would probably see them in the wild if they existed, since they would be produced in supernovae.
I think it's worth looking to better our understanding of nuclear physics, but I have no confidence that we will find anything with a long enough lifetime that we can do useful chemistry with it and not fatally irradiate anyone standing close by.
Here's a nice interactive chart of the nuclides: http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/chart/. I have a printed copy that is a few decades old that ends at about Z=109 and N=160. The interactive chart shows that they have pushed well beyond that since, but the lifetimes are getting shorter and shorter. |
But wasn't the idea of a nuclear bomb also at one time science fiction? I seem to remember an editor (I think it was John W. Campbell) who advised an author on some story details and found himself being investigated by the F.B.I. because he had the details of the possible process for a nuclear detonation too perfect. And they suspected him of spying or something as a result though it turned out all the information was already out in books on the subject.
Sometimes art imitates life I guess.