Talk:Isotopes of plutonium

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Isotopes of plutonium. 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://archive.is/20101119071142/http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jnst/41/4/448/_pdf to http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jnst/41/4/448/_pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080923135135/http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/amdc/nubase/Nubase2003.pdf to http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/amdc/nubase/Nubase2003.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080923135135/http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/amdc/nubase/Nubase2003.pdf to http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/amdc/nubase/Nubase2003.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:18, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Decay modes
I see that 236Pu is listed as undergoing double beta plus decay, but on another page Double beta decay it is not listed as being capable of doing so. I suggest removing double beta plus decay from the list of decay modes for 236Pu. 2001:8003:641A:1200:4C:DA93:35BB:AF8F (talk) 13:00, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
 * According to NUBASE2020, double decay decay of 236Pu is an energetically favorable transition. However, it has never been experimentally observed or reported in the literature. I have removed it accordingly. Complex / Rational  14:18, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
 * IIRC there are a lot of never-seen double-betas on the isotope articles. Isotopes of curium has them too. They might just be marked whenever they are energetically possible. Double sharp (talk) 20:09, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't mind removing them because it's a similar case to observationally stable nuclides. Namely, I don't think we should treat decay modes that are possible but not observed the same way as known decay modes, just as we don't treat observationally stable nuclides the same way as known primordial radionuclides. Perhaps endnotes such as "Theoretically also capable of β+β+ decay to 236U" ought to suffice. Complex / Rational  20:29, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree. Double sharp (talk) 21:02, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Possible alpha decay of 243Pu and 246Pu
243Pu has only slightly higher alpha-decay energy than 244Pu (4.758 MeV vs 4.665 MeV), so its alpha-decay half-life should be at the order of 107 years, or alpha-decay probability be at the order of 10-10%.

As for 246Pu, its alpha partial half-life is calculated as 2×1011 years. 129.104.241.214 (talk) 21:12, 26 November 2023 (UTC)