Talk:Isotopes of flerovium

Orphaned references in Isotopes of ununquadium

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Isotopes of ununquadium's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "00Og01":

From Ununhexium: Oganessian, Yu. Ts. (2000). "Observation of the decay of ^{292}116". Physical Review C. 63: 011301. Bibcode:2001PhRvC..63a1301O. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.63.011301.
From Ununquadium: Oganessian, Yu. Ts.; Utyonkov, V.; Lobanov, Yu.; Abdullin, F.; Polyakov, A.; Shirokovsky, I.; Tsyganov, Yu.; Gulbekian, G.; Bogomolov, S. (2000). "Synthesis of superheavy nuclei in the ⁴⁸Ca+²⁴⁴Pu reaction: ²⁸⁸Uuq". Physical Review C. 62 (4): 041604. Bibcode:2000PhRvC..62d1604O. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.62.041604.

Reference named "04Og01":

From Ununquadium: Oganessian, Yu. Ts.; Utyonkov, V.; Lobanov, Yu.; Abdullin, F.; Polyakov, A.; Shirokovsky, I.; Tsyganov, Yu.; Gulbekian, G.; Bogomolov, S. (2004). "Measurements of cross sections for the fusion-evaporation reactions ²⁴⁴Pu(⁴⁸Ca,xn)^292−xUuq and ²⁴⁵Cm(⁴⁸Ca,xn)^293−x116". Physical Review C. 69 (5): 054607. Bibcode:2004PhRvC..69e4607O. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.69.054607.
From Ununhexium: Oganessian, Yu. Ts. (2004). "Measurements of cross sections and decay properties of the isotopes of elements 112, 114, and 116 produced in the fusion reactions ^{233,238}U, ^{242}Pu, and ^{248}Cm+^{48}Ca". Physical Review C. 70: 064609. Bibcode:2004PhRvC..70f4609O. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.70.064609.
From Copernicium: Yu. Ts. Oganessian; et al. (2004). "Measurements of cross sections and decay properties of the isotopes of elements 112, 114, and 116 produced in the fusion reactions ^233,238U, ²⁴²Pu, and ²⁴⁸Cm+⁴⁸Ca". Phys. Rev. C. 70 (6): 064609. Bibcode:2004PhRvC..70f4609O. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.70.064609. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help)

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:32, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Isotopes of flerovium. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 14:13, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

^287mFl and ^283mCn

Possibly they are ²⁸⁸Nh and ²⁸⁴Rg? Burzuchius (talk) 11:25, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of name?

With most or all the other artificial elements that have been given official "real" names, rather than temporary "number names" like "ununquadium" ("one-one-four metal"), there's a history of the name. This one should have an explanation too. --Thnidu (talk) 02:17, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Thnidu: The explanations are at the main element articles, in this case in Flerovium#Naming. Double sharp (talk) 03:38, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Double sharp: Thank you. --Thnidu (talk) 11:25, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Most stable isotopes of Fl

According to [1], one would expect ²⁹⁵Fl and ²⁹⁷Fl to have half-lives on the order of several days. 129.104.241.214 (talk) 00:25, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have an idea on how to synthesize ²⁹⁸Fl

So I heard a bit back that compound nuclei tend to fission by expelling closed shell nuclei (such as ¹³²Sn), so if we made a compound nucleus with Z=196-200ish that would fission by expelling the closed shell ²⁰⁸Pb, we could get ²⁹⁸Fl. This would optimally be done with the ²⁵⁷Fm+²⁵⁷Fm reaction, which would make a compound nucleus with Z=200 and N=314 that would expel ²⁰⁸Pb to make... ³⁰⁶Og, which would quickly expel two alpha particles to make ²⁹⁸Fl. One possible flaw is that the fission could also get rid of several neutrons, however that could still discover new isotopes at the end of the periodic table. I'm also not sure if it'd fission like compound nuclei produced when synthesizing superheavy elements do, but multinucleon transfer could still end up producing cool new isotopes of superheavy elements (such as ²⁷¹Db) 24.115.255.37 (talk) 02:26, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What are your thoughts on this idea 24.115.255.37 (talk) 01:10, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why do I have a revdeleted revision on this page 24.115.255.37 (talk) 00:21, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One of your revisions has been suppressed because it contained some personal information that is best not shared on the site.

Regarding this proposal, multinucleon transfer reactions have been theoretically examined in the literature, though AFAIK no new isotopes of superheavy isotopes have yet been synthesized via this approach. ²⁵⁷Fm, however, is not available in the necessary quantities to be useful in SHE synthesis (only picograms are available compared to milligrams or even hundreds of micrograms of actinides up to Cf), and theoretical models suggest that the yield decreases with increasing atomic number, so production of heavy isotopes with Z ~ 105 is probably more likely. In any case, if you want to mention these reactions as a route to ²⁹⁸Fl in the article, you'll need to provide a citation to a reliable source – your own thoughts, while intriguing, constitute original research. ^Complex/_Rational 12:48, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense 24.115.255.37 (talk) 15:45, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]