Unbiunium, also known aseka-actinium orelement 121, is a hypotheticalchemical element; it hassymbolUbu andatomic number 121.Unbiunium andUbu are the temporarysystematic IUPAC name and symbol respectively, which are used until the element is discovered, confirmed, and a permanent name is decided upon. In theperiodic table of the elements, it is expected to be the first of thesuperactinides, and the third element in the eighthperiod. It has attracted attention because of some predictions that it may be in theisland of stability. It is also likely to be the first of a newg-block of elements.
Unbiunium has not yet been synthesized. It is expected to be one of the last few reachable elements with current technology; the limit could be anywhere between element120 and124. It will also likely be far more difficult to synthesize than the elements known so far up to 118, and still more difficult than elements119 and120. The teams atRIKEN in Japan and at theJINR inDubna, Russia have indicated plans to attempt the synthesis of element 121 in the future after they attempt elements 119 and 120.
The position of unbiunium in the periodic table suggests that it would have similar properties tolanthanum andactinium; however,relativistic effects may cause some of its properties to differ from those expected from a straight application ofperiodic trends. For example, unbiunium is expected to have a s2p valenceelectron configuration, instead of the s2d of lanthanum and actinium or the s2g expected from theMadelung rule, but this is not predicted to affect its chemistry much. It would on the other hand significantly lower its first ionization energy beyond what would be expected from periodic trends.
A graphic depiction of anuclear fusion reaction. Two nuclei fuse into one, emitting aneutron. Reactions that created new elements to this moment were similar, with the only possible difference that several singular neutrons sometimes were released, or none at all.
A superheavy[a]atomic nucleus is created in a nuclear reaction that combines two other nuclei of unequal size[b] into one; roughly, the more unequal the two nuclei in terms ofmass, the greater the possibility that the two react.[8] The material made of the heavier nuclei is made into a target, which is then bombarded by thebeam of lighter nuclei. Two nuclei can onlyfuse into one if they approach each other closely enough; normally, nuclei (all positively charged) repel each other due toelectrostatic repulsion. Thestrong interaction can overcome this repulsion but only within a very short distance from a nucleus; beam nuclei are thus greatlyaccelerated in order to make such repulsion insignificant compared to the velocity of the beam nucleus.[9] The energy applied to the beam nuclei to accelerate them can cause them to reach speeds as high as one-tenth of thespeed of light. However, if too much energy is applied, the beam nucleus can fall apart.[9]
Coming close enough alone is not enough for two nuclei to fuse: when two nuclei approach each other, they usually remain together for about 10−20 seconds and then part ways (not necessarily in the same composition as before the reaction) rather than form a single nucleus.[9][10] This happens because during the attempted formation of a single nucleus, electrostatic repulsion tears apart the nucleus that is being formed.[9] Each pair of a target and a beam is characterized by itscross section—the probability that fusion will occur if two nuclei approach one another expressed in terms of the transverse area that the incident particle must hit in order for the fusion to occur.[c] This fusion may occur as a result of the quantum effect in which nuclei cantunnel through electrostatic repulsion. If the two nuclei can stay close past that phase, multiple nuclear interactions result in redistribution of energy and an energy equilibrium.[9]
The resulting merger is anexcited state[13]—termed acompound nucleus—and thus it is very unstable.[9] To reach a more stable state, the temporary merger mayfission without formation of a more stable nucleus.[14] Alternatively, the compound nucleus may eject a fewneutrons, which would carry away the excitation energy; if the latter is not sufficient for a neutron expulsion, the merger would produce agamma ray. This happens in about 10−16 seconds after the initial nuclear collision and results in creation of a more stable nucleus.[14] The definition by theIUPAC/IUPAP Joint Working Party (JWP) states that achemical element can only be recognized as discovered if a nucleus of it has notdecayed within 10−14 seconds. This value was chosen as an estimate of how long it takes a nucleus to acquireelectrons and thus display its chemical properties.[15][d]
The beam passes through the target and reaches the next chamber, the separator; if a new nucleus is produced, it is carried with this beam.[17] In the separator, the newly produced nucleus is separated from other nuclides (that of the original beam and any other reaction products)[e] and transferred to asurface-barrier detector, which stops the nucleus. The exact location of the upcoming impact on the detector is marked; also marked are its energy and the time of the arrival.[17] The transfer takes about 10−6 seconds; in order to be detected, the nucleus must survive this long.[20] The nucleus is recorded again once its decay is registered, and the location, theenergy, and the time of the decay are measured.[17]
Stability of a nucleus is provided by the strong interaction. However, its range is very short; as nuclei become larger, its influence on the outermostnucleons (protons and neutrons) weakens. At the same time, the nucleus is torn apart by electrostatic repulsion between protons, and its range is not limited.[21] Totalbinding energy provided by the strong interaction increases linearly with the number of nucleons, whereas electrostatic repulsion increases with the square of the atomic number, i.e. the latter grows faster and becomes increasingly important for heavy and superheavy nuclei.[22][23] Superheavy nuclei are thus theoretically predicted[24] and have so far been observed[25] to predominantly decay via decay modes that are caused by such repulsion:alpha decay andspontaneous fission.[f] Almost all alpha emitters have over 210 nucleons,[27] and the lightest nuclide primarily undergoing spontaneous fission has 238.[28] In both decay modes, nuclei are inhibited from decaying by correspondingenergy barriers for each mode, but they can be tunneled through.[22][23]
Scheme of an apparatus for creation of superheavy elements, based on the Dubna Gas-Filled Recoil Separator set up in theFlerov Laboratory of Nuclear Reactions in JINR. The trajectory within the detector and the beam focusing apparatus changes because of adipole magnet in the former andquadrupole magnets in the latter.[29]
Alpha particles are commonly produced in radioactive decays because the mass of an alpha particle per nucleon is small enough to leave some energy for the alpha particle to be used as kinetic energy to leave the nucleus.[30] Spontaneous fission is caused by electrostatic repulsion tearing the nucleus apart and produces various nuclei in different instances of identical nuclei fissioning.[23] As the atomic number increases, spontaneous fission rapidly becomes more important: spontaneous fission partial half-lives decrease by 23 orders of magnitude fromuranium (element 92) tonobelium (element 102),[31] and by 30 orders of magnitude fromthorium (element 90) tofermium (element 100).[32] The earlierliquid drop model thus suggested that spontaneous fission would occur nearly instantly due to disappearance of thefission barrier for nuclei with about 280 nucleons.[23][33] The laternuclear shell model suggested that nuclei with about 300 nucleons would form anisland of stability in which nuclei will be more resistant to spontaneous fission and will primarily undergo alpha decay with longer half-lives.[23][33] Subsequent discoveries suggested that the predicted island might be further than originally anticipated; they also showed that nuclei intermediate between the long-lived actinides and the predicted island are deformed, and gain additional stability from shell effects.[34] Experiments on lighter superheavy nuclei,[35] as well as those closer to the expected island,[31] have shown greater than previously anticipated stability against spontaneous fission, showing the importance of shell effects on nuclei.[g]
Alpha decays are registered by the emitted alpha particles, and the decay products are easy to determine before the actual decay; if such a decay or a series of consecutive decays produces a known nucleus, the original product of a reaction can be easily determined.[h] (That all decays within a decay chain were indeed related to each other is established by the location of these decays, which must be in the same place.)[17] The known nucleus can be recognized by the specific characteristics of decay it undergoes such as decay energy (or more specifically, thekinetic energy of the emitted particle).[i] Spontaneous fission, however, produces various nuclei as products, so the original nuclide cannot be determined from its daughters.[j]
The information available to physicists aiming to synthesize a superheavy element is thus the information collected at the detectors: location, energy, and time of arrival of a particle to the detector, and those of its decay. The physicists analyze this data and seek to conclude that it was indeed caused by a new element and could not have been caused by a different nuclide than the one claimed. Often, provided data is insufficient for a conclusion that a new element was definitely created and there is no other explanation for the observed effects; errors in interpreting data have been made.[k]
Chart of nuclide stability as used by the Dubna team in 2010. Characterized isotopes are shown with borders. Beyond element 118 (oganesson, the last known element), the line of known nuclides is expected to rapidly enter a region of instability, with no half-lives over one microsecond after element 121. The elliptical region encloses the predicted location of the island of stability.[46]
Fusion reactions producingsuperheavy elements can be divided into "hot" and "cold" fusion,[l] depending on the excitation energy of the compound nucleus produced. In hot fusion reactions, very light, high-energy projectiles are accelerated toward very heavy targets (actinides), giving rise to compound nuclei at high excitation energies (~40–50 MeV) that may fission or evaporate several (3 to 5) neutrons.[48] In cold fusion reactions (which use heavier projectiles, typically from thefourth period, and lighter targets, usuallylead andbismuth), the fused nuclei produced have a relatively low excitation energy (~10–20 MeV), which decreases the probability that these products will undergo fission reactions. As the fused nuclei cool to theground state, they require emission of only one or two neutrons. However, hot fusion reactions tend to produce more neutron-rich products because the actinides have the highest neutron-to-proton ratios of any element that can presently be made in macroscopic quantities; it is currently the only method to produce the superheavy elements fromflerovium (element 114) onward.[49]
Attempts to synthesize elements 119 and 120 push the limits of current technology, due to the decreasingcross sections of the production reactions and their probably shorthalf-lives,[46] expected to be on the order of microseconds.[1][50] Heavier elements, beginning with element 121, would likely be too short-lived to be detected with current technology, decaying within a microsecond before reaching the detectors.[46] Where this one-microsecond border of half-lives lies is not known, and this may allow the synthesis of some isotopes of elements 121 through 124, with the exact limit depending on the model chosen for predicting nuclide masses.[50] It is also possible that element 120 is the last element reachable with current experimental techniques, and that elements from 121 onward will require new methods.[46]
Because of the current impossibility of synthesizing elements beyondcalifornium (Z = 98) in sufficient quantities to create a target, witheinsteinium (Z = 99) targets being currently considered, the practical synthesis of elements beyond oganesson requires heavier projectiles, such astitanium-50,chromium-54,iron-58, ornickel-64.[51][52] This, however, has the drawback of resulting in more symmetrical fusion reactions that are colder and less likely to succeed.[51] For example, the reaction between243Am and58Fe is expected to have a cross section on the order of 0.5fb, several orders of magnitude lower than measured cross sections in successful reactions; such an obstacle would make this and similar reactions infeasible for producing unbiunium.[53]
Predicted decay modes of superheavy nuclei. The line of synthesized proton-rich nuclei is expected to be broken soon afterZ = 120, because of the shortening half-lives until aroundZ = 124, the increasing contribution of spontaneous fission instead of alpha decay fromZ =122 onward until it dominates fromZ = 125, and the protondrip line aroundZ = 130. Beyond this is a region of slightly increased stability of second-living nuclides aroundZ = 124 andN = 198, but it is separated from the mainland of nuclides that may be obtained with current techniques. The white ring denotes the expected location of the island of stability; the two squares outlined in white denote291Cn and293Cn, predicted to be the longest-lived nuclides on the island with half-lives of centuries or millennia.[55][50]
Currently, the beam intensities at superheavy element facilities result in about 1012 projectiles hitting the target per second; this cannot be increased without burning the target and the detector, and producing larger amounts of the increasingly unstableactinides needed for the target is impractical. The team at theJoint Institute for Nuclear Research (JINR) in Dubna has built a new superheavy element factory (SHE-factory) with improved detectors and the ability to work on a smaller scale, but even so, continuing beyond element 120 and perhaps 121 would be a great challenge.[56] It is possible that the age of fusion–evaporation reactions to produce new superheavy elements is coming to an end due to the increasingly short half-lives to spontaneous fission and the looming protondrip line, so that new techniques such as nuclear transfer reactions (for example, firing uranium nuclei at each other and letting them exchange protons, potentially producing products with around 120 protons) would be required to reach the superactinides.[56]
Because thecross sections of these fusion-evaporation reactions increase with the asymmetry of the reaction, titanium would be a better projectile than chromium for the synthesis of element 121,[57] though this necessitates aneinsteinium target. This poses severe challenges due to the significant heating and damage of the target due to the high radioactivity of einsteinium-254, but it would nonetheless probably be the most promising approach. It would require working on a smaller scale due to the lower amount of254Es that can be produced. This small-scale work could in the near future only be carried out in Dubna's SHE-factory.[58]
The isotopes299Ubu,300Ubu, and301Ubu, that could be produced in the reaction between254Es and50Ti via the 3n and 4n channels, are expected to be the only reachable unbiunium isotopes with half-lives long enough for detection. The cross sections would nevertheless push the limits of what can currently be detected. For example, in a 2016 publication, the cross section of the aforementioned reaction between254Es and50Ti was predicted to be around 7 fb in the 4n channel,[59] four times lower than the lowest measured cross section for a successful reaction. A 2021 calculation gives similarly low theoretical cross sections of 10 fb for the 3n channel and 0.6 fb for the 4n channel of this reaction, along with cross sections on the order of 1–10 fb for the reactions249Bk+54Cr,252Es+50Ti, and258Md+48Ca.[60] However,252Es and258Md cannot currently be synthesized in sufficient quantities to form target material.[citation needed]
Should the synthesis of unbiunium isotopes in such a reaction be successful, the resulting nuclei would decay through isotopes of ununennium that could be produced by cross-bombardments in the248Cm+51V or249Bk+50Ti reactions, down through known isotopes of tennessine and moscovium synthesized in the249Bk+48Ca and243Am+48Ca reactions.[46] The multiplicity of excited states populated by the alpha decay of odd nuclei may however preclude clear cross-bombardment cases, as was seen in the controversial link between293Ts and289Mc.[61][62] Heavier isotopes are expected to be more stable;320Ubu is predicted to be the most stable unbiunium isotope, but there is no way to synthesize it with current technology as no combination of usable target and projectile could provide enough neutrons.[2]
The teams atRIKEN and at JINR have listed the synthesis of element 121 among their future plans.[58][63][64] These two laboratories are best suited to these experiments as they are the only ones in the world where long beam times are accessible for reactions with such low predicted cross-sections.[65]
UsingMendeleev's nomenclature for unnamed and undiscovered elements, unbiunium should be known aseka-actinium. Using the 1979 IUPACrecommendations, the element should betemporarily calledunbiunium (symbolUbu) until it is discovered, the discovery is confirmed, and a permanent name chosen.[66] Although widely used in the chemical community on all levels, from chemistry classrooms to advanced textbooks, the recommendations are mostly ignored among scientists who work theoretically or experimentally on superheavy elements, who call it "element 121", with the symbolE121,(121), or121.[1]
The stability of nuclei decreases greatly with the increase in atomic number aftercurium, element 96, whose half-life is four orders of magnitude longer than that of any currently known higher-numbered element. All isotopes with an atomic number above101 undergoradioactive decay with half-lives of less than 30 hours. No elements with atomic numbers above 82 (afterlead) have stable isotopes.[67] Nevertheless, for reasons not yet well understood, there is a slight increase of nuclear stability around atomic numbers110–114, which leads to the appearance of what is known in nuclear physics as the "island of stability". This concept, proposed byUniversity of California professorGlenn Seaborg and stemming from the stabilizing effects of the closednuclear shells aroundZ = 114 (or possibly120,122,124, or126) andN = 184 (and possibly alsoN = 228), explains why superheavy elements last longer than predicted.[68][69] In fact, the very existence of elements heavier thanrutherfordium can be attested to shell effects and the island of stability, asspontaneous fission would rapidly cause such nuclei to disintegrate in amodel neglecting such factors.[70]
A 2016 calculation of the half-lives of the isotopes of unbiunium from290Ubu to339Ubu suggested that those from290Ubu to303Ubu would not be bound and would decay throughproton emission, those from304Ubu through314Ubu would undergo alpha decay, and those from315Ubu to339Ubu would undergo spontaneous fission. Only the isotopes from309Ubu to314Ubu would have long enough alpha-decay lifetimes to be detected in laboratories, starting decay chains terminating in spontaneous fission atmoscovium,tennessine, orununennium. This would present a grave problem for experiments aiming at synthesizing isotopes of unbiunium if true, because the isotopes whose alpha decay could be observed could not be reached by any presently usable combination of target and projectile.[71] Calculations in 2016 and 2017 by the same authors on elements 123 and 125 suggest a less bleak outcome, with alpha decay chains from the more reachable nuclides300–307Ubt passing through unbiunium and leading down tobohrium ornihonium.[72] It has also been suggested thatcluster decay might be a significant decay mode in competition with alpha decay and spontaneous fission in the region pastZ = 120, which would pose yet another hurdle for experimental identification of these nuclides.[73][74][75]
Unbiunium is predicted to be the first element of an unprecedentedly long transition series, called thesuperactinides in analogy to the earlier actinides. While its behavior is not likely to be very distinct from lanthanum and actinium,[1] it is likely to pose a limit to the applicability of the periodic law; from element 121, the 5g, 6f, 7d, and 8p1/2 orbitals are expected to fill up together due to their very close energies, and around the elements in the late 150s and 160s, the 9s, 9p1/2, and 8p3/2 subshells join in, so that the chemistry of the elements just beyond 121 and122 (the last for which complete calculations have been conducted) is expected to be so similar that their position in the periodic table would be purely a formal matter.[76][1]
Based on theAufbau principle, one would expect the 5g subshell to begin filling at the unbiunium atom. However, while lanthanum does have significant 4f involvement in its chemistry, it does not yet have a 4f electron in its ground-state gas-phase configuration; a greater delay occurs for 5f, where neither actinium nor thorium atoms have a 5f electron although 5f contributes to their chemistry. It is predicted that a similar situation of delayed "radial" collapse might happen for unbiunium so that the 5g orbitals do not start filling until around element 125, even though some 5g chemical involvement may begin earlier. Because of the lack of radial nodes in the 5g orbitals, analogous to the 4f but not the 5f orbitals, the position of unbiunium in the periodic table is expected to be more akin to that of lanthanum than that of actinium among its congeners, andPekka Pyykkö proposed to rename the superactinides as "superlanthanides" for that reason.[77] The lack of radial nodes in the 4f orbitals contribute to their core-like behavior in the lanthanide series, unlike the more valence-like 5f orbitals in the actinides; however, the relativistic expansion and destabilization of the 5g orbitals should partially compensate for their lack of radial nodes and hence smaller extent.[78]
Unbiunium is expected to fill the 8p1/2 orbital due to its relativistic stabilization, with a configuration of [Og] 8s2 8p1. Nevertheless, the [Og] 7d1 8s2 configuration, which would be analogous to lanthanum and actinium, is expected to be a low-lying excited state at only 0.412 eV,[79] and the expected [Og] 5g1 8s2 configuration from the Madelung rule should be at 2.48 eV.[80] The electron configurations of the ions of unbiunium are expected to beUbu+, [Og]8s2;Ubu2+, [Og]8s1; andUbu3+, [Og].[81] The 8p electron of unbiunium is expected to be very loosely bound, so that its predicted ionization energy of 4.45 eV is lower than that of ununennium (4.53 eV) and all known elements except for thealkali metals frompotassium tofrancium. A similar large reduction in ionization energy is also seen inlawrencium, another element having an anomalous s2p configuration due torelativistic effects.[1]
Despite the change in electron configuration and possibility of using the 5g shell, unbiunium is not expected to behave chemically very differently from lanthanum and actinium. A 2016 calculation on unbiunium monofluoride (UbuF) showed similarities between the valence orbitals of unbiunium in this molecule and those of actinium in actinium monofluoride (AcF); in both molecules, thehighest occupied molecular orbital is expected to be non-bonding, unlike in the superficially more similarnihonium monofluoride (NhF) where it is bonding. Nihonium has the electron configuration [Rn] 5f14 6d10 7s2 7p1, with an s2p valence configuration. Unbiunium may hence be somewhat like lawrencium in having an anomalous s2p configuration that does not affect its chemistry: the bond dissociation energies, bond lengths, and polarizabilities of the UbuF molecule are expected to continue the trend through scandium, yttrium, lanthanum, and actinium, all of which have three valence electrons above a noble gas core. The Ubu–F bond is expected to be strong and polarized, just like for the lanthanum and actinium monofluorides.[2]
The non-bonding electrons on unbiunium in UbuF are expected to be able to bond to extra atoms or groups, resulting in the formation of the unbiuniumtrihalidesUbuX3, analogous toLaX3 andAcX3. Hence, the main oxidation state of unbiunium in its compounds should be +3, although the closeness of the valence subshells' energy levels may permit higher oxidation states, just like in elements 119 and 120.[1][2][77] Relativistic effects appear to be small for the unbiunium trihalides, withUbuBr3 andLaBr3 having very similar bonding, though the former should be more ionic.[82] Thestandard electrode potential for theUbu3+ → Ubu couple is predicted as −2.1 V.[1]
^Innuclear physics, an element is calledheavy if its atomic number is high;lead (element 82) is one example of such a heavy element. The term "superheavy elements" typically refers to elements with atomic number greater than103 (although there are other definitions, such as atomic number greater than100[3] or112;[4] sometimes, the term is presented an equivalent to the term "transactinide", which puts an upper limit before the beginning of the hypotheticalsuperactinide series).[5] Terms "heavy isotopes" (of a given element) and "heavy nuclei" mean what could be understood in the common language—isotopes of high mass (for the given element) and nuclei of high mass, respectively.
^In 2009, a team at the JINR led by Oganessian published results of their attempt to create hassium in a symmetric136Xe + 136Xe reaction. They failed to observe a single atom in such a reaction, putting the upper limit on the cross section, the measure of probability of a nuclear reaction, as 2.5 pb.[6] In comparison, the reaction that resulted in hassium discovery,208Pb +58Fe, had a cross section of ~20 pb (more specifically, 19+19 -11 pb), as estimated by the discoverers.[7]
^The amount of energy applied to the beam particle to accelerate it can also influence the value of cross section. For example, in the28 14Si +1 0n →28 13Al +1 1p reaction, cross section changes smoothly from 370 mb at 12.3 MeV to 160 mb at 18.3 MeV, with a broad peak at 13.5 MeV with the maximum value of 380 mb.[11]
^This figure also marks the generally accepted upper limit for lifetime of a compound nucleus.[16]
^This separation is based on that the resulting nuclei move past the target more slowly then the unreacted beam nuclei. The separator contains electric and magnetic fields whose effects on a moving particle cancel out for a specific velocity of a particle.[18] Such separation can also be aided by atime-of-flight measurement and a recoil energy measurement; a combination of the two may allow to estimate the mass of a nucleus.[19]
^It was already known by the 1960s that ground states of nuclei differed in energy and shape as well as that certain magic numbers of nucleons corresponded to greater stability of a nucleus. However, it was assumed that there was no nuclear structure in superheavy nuclei as they were too deformed to form one.[31]
^Since mass of a nucleus is not measured directly but is rather calculated from that of another nucleus, such measurement is called indirect. Direct measurements are also possible, but for the most part they have remained unavailable for superheavy nuclei.[36] The first direct measurement of mass of a superheavy nucleus was reported in 2018 at LBNL.[37] Mass was determined from the location of a nucleus after the transfer (the location helps determine its trajectory, which is linked to the mass-to-charge ratio of the nucleus, since the transfer was done in presence of a magnet).[38]
^If the decay occurred in a vacuum, then since total momentum of an isolated system before and after the decaymust be preserved, the daughter nucleus would also receive a small velocity. The ratio of the two velocities, and accordingly the ratio of the kinetic energies, would thus be inverse to the ratio of the two masses. The decay energy equals the sum of the known kinetic energy of the alpha particle and that of the daughter nucleus (an exact fraction of the former).[27] The calculations hold for an experiment as well, but the difference is that the nucleus does not move after the decay because it is tied to the detector.
^Spontaneous fission was discovered by Soviet physicistGeorgy Flerov,[39] a leading scientist at JINR, and thus it was a "hobbyhorse" for the facility.[40] In contrast, the LBL scientists believed fission information was not sufficient for a claim of synthesis of an element. They believed spontaneous fission had not been studied enough to use it for identification of a new element, since there was a difficulty of establishing that a compound nucleus had only ejected neutrons and not charged particles like protons or alpha particles.[16] They thus preferred to link new isotopes to the already known ones by successive alpha decays.[39]
^For instance, element 102 was mistakenly identified in 1957 at the Nobel Institute of Physics inStockholm,Stockholm County,Sweden.[41] There were no earlier definitive claims of creation of this element, and the element was assigned a name by its Swedish, American, and British discoverers,nobelium. It was later shown that the identification was incorrect.[42] The following year, RL was unable to reproduce the Swedish results and announced instead their synthesis of the element; that claim was also disproved later.[42] JINR insisted that they were the first to create the element and suggested a name of their own for the new element,joliotium;[43] the Soviet name was also not accepted (JINR later referred to the naming of the element 102 as "hasty").[44] This name was proposed to IUPAC in a written response to their ruling on priority of discovery claims of elements, signed 29 September 1992.[44] The name "nobelium" remained unchanged on account of its widespread usage.[45]
^Despite the name, "cold fusion" in the context of superheavy element synthesis is a distinct concept from the idea that nuclear fusion can be achieved in room temperature conditions (seecold fusion).[47]
^abcdefghijHoffman, Darleane C.; Lee, Diana M.; Pershina, Valeria (2006). "Transactinides and the future elements". In Morss; Edelstein, Norman M.; Fuger, Jean (eds.).The Chemistry of the Actinide and Transactinide Elements (3rd ed.). Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Springer Science+Business Media.ISBN978-1-4020-3555-5.
^abcdAmador, Davi H. T.; de Oliveira, Heibbe C. B.; Sambrano, Julio R.; Gargano, Ricardo; de Macedo, Luiz Guilherme M. (12 September 2016). "4-Component correlated all-electron study on Eka-actinium Fluoride (E121F) including Gaunt interaction: Accurate analytical form, bonding and influence on rovibrational spectra".Chemical Physics Letters.662:169–175.Bibcode:2016CPL...662..169A.doi:10.1016/j.cplett.2016.09.025.hdl:11449/168956.
^"Популярная библиотека химических элементов. Сиборгий (экавольфрам)" [Popular library of chemical elements. Seaborgium (eka-tungsten)].n-t.ru (in Russian). Retrieved2020-01-07. Reprinted from"Экавольфрам" [Eka-tungsten].Популярная библиотека химических элементов. Серебро – Нильсборий и далее [Popular library of chemical elements. Silver through nielsbohrium and beyond] (in Russian).Nauka. 1977.
^Fleischmann, Martin; Pons, Stanley (1989). "Electrochemically induced nuclear fusion of deuterium".Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry and Interfacial Electrochemistry.261 (2):301–308.doi:10.1016/0022-0728(89)80006-3.
^Jiang, J.; Chai, Q.; Wang, B.; et al. (2013). "Investigation of production cross sections for superheavy nuclei withZ = 116~121 in dinuclear system concept".Nuclear Physics Review.30 (4):391–397.doi:10.11804/NuclPhysRev.30.04.391.
^Sokolova, Svetlana; Popeko, Andrei (24 May 2021)."How are new chemical elements born?".jinr.ru. JINR. Retrieved4 November 2021.JINR is currently building the first factory of superheavy elements in the world to synthesize elements 119, 120 and 121, and to study in depth the properties of previously obtained elements.
^Hagino, Kouichi; Hofmann, Sigurd; Miyatake, Hiroari; Nakahara, Hiromichi (July 2012)."平成23年度 研究業績レビュー（中間レビュー）の実施について" [Implementation of the 2011 Research Achievement Review (Interim Review)](PDF).www.riken.jp (in Japanese). RIKEN. Archived fromthe original(PDF) on 2019-03-30. Retrieved5 May 2017.
^Santhosh, K. P.; Sukumaran, Indu (25 January 2017). "Decay of heavy particles fromZ = 125 superheavy nuclei in the regionA = 295–325 using different versions of proximity potential".International Journal of Modern Physics E.26 (3). 1750003.Bibcode:2017IJMPE..2650003S.doi:10.1142/S0218301317500033.
^Poenaru, Dorin N.; Gherghescu, R. A.; Greiner, W.; Shakib, Nafiseh (September 2014).How Rare Is Cluster Decay of Superheavy Nuclei?. Nuclear Physics: Present and Future FIAS Interdisciplinary Science Series 2015.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-10199-6_13.
^Loveland, Walter (2015)."The Quest for Superheavy Elements"(PDF).www.int.washington.edu. 2015 National Nuclear Physics Summer School. Retrieved1 May 2017.
^Dolg, Michael (2015).Computational Methods in Lanthanide and Actinide Chemistry. John Wiley & Sons. p. 35.ISBN978-1-118-68829-8.
^Pinheiro, Alan Sena; Gargano, Ricardo; dos Santos, Paulo Henrique Gomes; de Macedo, Luiz Guilherme Machado (26 August 2021). "Fully relativistic study of polyatomic closed shell E121X3 (X = F, Cl, Br) molecules: effects of Gaunt interaction, relativistic effects and advantages of an exact-two component (X2C) hamiltonian".Journal of Molecular Modeling.27 (262): 262.doi:10.1007/s00894-021-04861-7.PMID34435260.S2CID237299351.
Visualization of unsuccessful nuclear fusion, based on calculations from theAustralian National University[12]
