Talk:Isotopes of lawrencium/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Isotopes of lawrencium. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Data 2003

This article is part of Wikipedia:Wikiproject Isotopes. Please keep style and phrasings consistent across the set of pages. For later reference and improved reliability, data from all considered multiple sources is collected here. References are denoted by these letters:

(A) G. Audi, O. Bersillon, J. Blachot, A.H. Wapstra. The Nubase2003 evaluation of nuclear and decay properties, Nuc. Phys. A 729, pp. 3-128 (2003). — Where this source indicates a speculative value, the # mark is also applied to values with weak assignment arguments from other sources, if grouped together. An asterisk after the A means that a comment of some importance may be available in the original.
(B) National Nuclear Data Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory, information extracted from the NuDat 2.1 database. (Retrieved Sept. 2005, from the code of the popup boxes).
(C) David R. Lide (ed.), Norman E. Holden in CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 85th Edition, online version. CRC Press. Boca Raton, Florida (2005). Section 11, Table of the Isotopes. — The CRC uses rounded numbers with implied uncertainties, where this concurs with the range of another source it is treated as exactly equal in this comparison.
(D) More specific level data from reference B's Levels and Gammas database.
(E) Same as B but excitation energy replaced with that from D.

  Z   N refs symbol   half-life                   spin              excitation energy
103 148 A   |Lr-251  |150# µs                    |
103 148 C   |Lr-251  |39 min                     |
103 149 A   |Lr-252  |390(90) ms                 |
103 149 B   |Lr-252  |0.36(+11-7) s              |
103 149 C   |Lr-252  |~0.36 s                    |
103 150 A   |Lr-253  |580(70) ms                 |(7/2-)
103 150 B   |Lr-253  |0.57(+7-6) s               |
103 150 C   |Lr-253  |1.5 s                      |
103 150 A   |Lr-253m |1.5(3) s                   |(1/2-)           |30(100)# keV
103 150 E   |Lr-253m |1.5(+3-2) s                |                 |0+X keV
103 150 D   |Lr-253m |0.57(+7-6) s               |                 |0+Y keV
103 150 C   |Lr-253m |~0.57 s                    |
103 151 ABC |Lr-254  |13(3) s                    |
103 152 A   |Lr-255  |22(4) s                    |7/2-#
103 152 BC  |Lr-255  |22(4) s                    |
103 153 AB  |Lr-256  |27(3) s                    |
103 153 C   |Lr-256  |28. s                      |
103 154 A   |Lr-257  |646(25) ms                 |9/2+#
103 154 B   |Lr-257  |0.646(25) s                |
103 154 C   |Lr-257  |0.65 s                     |7/2+
103 155 AB  |Lr-258  |4.1(3) s                   |
103 155 C   |Lr-258  |3.9 s                      |
103 156 A   |Lr-259  |6.2(3) s                   |9/2+#
103 156 B   |Lr-259  |6.2(3) s                   |
103 156 C   |Lr-259  |6.1 s                      |
103 157 AC  |Lr-260  |3.0(5) min                 |
103 157 B   |Lr-260  |180(30) s                  |
103 158 ABC |Lr-261  |39(12) min                 |
103 159 AB  |Lr-262  |~4 h                       |
103 159 C   |Lr-262  |3.6 h                      |
103 160 AB  |Lr-263  |5# h                       |
103 161 AB  |Lr-264  |10# h                      |
103 162 AB  |Lr-265  |10# h                      |
103 163 AB  |Lr-266  |1# h                       |

Femto 11:43, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

I'd be willing to bet that ²⁶⁶Lr, like the other long-lived odd-odd nuclei (cf. the heavy Db isotopes), does not actually undergo SF; instead it would undergo electron capture to ²⁶⁶No, and that, being even-even, could readily fission. Double sharp (talk) 07:22, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Yup! Double sharp (talk) 08:31, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

I think the possibility of β⁻ decay to ²⁶⁶Rf should also be considered. See [1]. Burzuchius (talk) 16:14, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

True: ²⁶⁵Lr is expected to be on the line of beta-stability, so ²⁶⁶Lr should probably instead be beta-minus. It's interesting to see from your link that ²⁷⁰Db might actually SF directly instead of undergoing electron capture to form ²⁷⁰Rf, and that ²⁶⁸Db may also have an alpha branch to ²⁶⁴Lr (presumably undetected due to its amazingly long half-life). Double sharp (talk) 13:23, 30 December 2016 (UTC)