User talk:JWB/Nuclide chart with skew 1 then 2


 * Yes, I like this chart better. The implication being that the larger the nucleus, the more room for extra neutrons. In my models, I added the extra neutrons to the surface of the A=2Z nucleus, which has a limited number of available locations. And it promotes the idea of maintaining stability (in the stable configuration area) by adding two more neutrons instead of one to retain stability.WFPM (talk) 04:36, 31 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The Gray color is for stable nuclei. Do you have a description of the significance of the other colors?WFPM (talk) 15:41, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Colors are based on the spectrum. Originally the high-energy (blue) end of the spectrum was for high-energy, low-halflife nuclides. Someone reversed this interpretation at some point to make the red end be low-halflife. I would support reversing it back. --JWB (talk) 16:21, 31 August 2009 (UTC)


 * If you want to consider relative halflife values, you simply calculate the base 10 log-second halflife values and show them with the isotope. And you'll notice that the even Z isotopes usually have longer halflives than the odd Z's for comparable isotopes.WFPM (talk) 18:31, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Not sure what you are meaning by relative halflife values. I agree a powers of 10 color scheme is good at least for years and have implemented one (slightly modified at long end) and used it in a new template. --JWB (talk) 21:42, 31 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The degree of unstability of a nuclide may be associated with it's halflife time period since the more unstable isotopes decay at a faster rate. Therefore the base 10 log-second halflife time value is a quantitative indication of the relative instability of the various isotopes. And the even Z elements log halflife time values compare favorably to those of the odd Z elements in a comparative chart such as the skew 1 section of your chart.WFPM (talk) 22:56, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Even neutron number is about as important as even proton number. See Isotope. --JWB (talk) 23:04, 31 August 2009 (UTC)


 * It sounds to me that you're just taking their word for it, rather than making up the chart in order to find out. It just so happens that I have a chart that is formatted just like your step 1 skew chart and note that the stability of the unstable even Z isotopes is generally greater than the stability of the odd Z isotopes for the comparable (same) extra neutron (A-2Z) number. My troubles include the problem of keeping up with the way you people keep dividing up the subject manner into articles like that one that I'd never seen or heard of.WFPM (talk) 02:17, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Some other editor created that page recently. I didn't necessarily think it was a good idea to have another separate page on a subtopic, but I don't care that much.
 * Anyway, do you want to provide the data so I can make it into a chart? --JWB (talk) 04:02, 1 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't have data, just the log-second halflife numbers noted on my modified nuclide chart which I made to try to understand where to put the extra neutrons. And its old data from the 63rd CRC handbook and needs to be updated so it wouldn;t do you much good. By now I'm through the 74th handbook and into the 87th, but the indications of the 63rd data are still significant.WFPM (talk) 11:58, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * My advice is just get numbers from a recent source, preferably online. The log and other computations can be done by program, you don't have to do them by hand. --JWB (talk) 16:36, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The only difference between your step 1 chart section and mine is that my abcissa is the Z number and I showed the log-second halflife values of all the isotopes listed in this area. So if you'll call up that data for your step 1 chart section you'll have all the data that's available.WFPM (talk) 17:21, 1 September 2009 (UTC)What I would really like to do is to clear up some noted discrepancies in the reported data and to update the post radium (Row 8) section of the chart to see if we cant better understand the configuration of the heavier nuclides. And my chart extends your skew 1 format into that end of the chart.WFPM (talk) 17:43, 1 September 2009 (UTC)You might try to make sense out of that area with your step 2 format but I don't understand it and I think your step 1 format is better.WFPM (talk) 18:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You mean like User:JWB/Nuclide chart with skew 1? --JWB (talk) 19:48, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah fine! all you have to do is to start plunking in log-second halflife time values at the interesting areas of investigation, and you'll see how those values, together with their decay mode indication tell you whats going on in that area.WFPM (talk) 21:44, 1 September 2009 (UTC)And you might try drawing in an isotope stability line with formula A=3Z-38 to see how it goes through the center of the area stability values in the Lanthinide series and greater area.WFPM (talk) 21:51, 1 September 2009 (UTC) No, I take it back, its A=3Z-36 up to 67Ho, where it changes to 3Z-38 for 68Er.WFPM (talk) 22:09, 1 September 2009 (UTC)