LLNL-BOOK-793713

The Search for "Heavy"

Elements

G. Aubrecht, A. B. Balantekin, W. Bauer, J. Beacom, E. J. Beise, D.

Bodansky, E. Browne, P. Carlock, Y. D. Chan, M. Cherney, J. Cramer,
S. Corneliussen, J. Dairiki, M. Drawgowsky, K. Krane, R. M. Larimer, M.
Liebl, H. S. Matis, M. McMahan, R. McDonald, V. Noto, E. Norman, J.
O'Connell, G. T. Seaborg, R. J. Shalit, M. A. Stoyer, D. Shaughnessy,
K. Street

October 14, 2019

Nuclear Science -- A Guide to the Nuclear Science Wall Chart

-- 5th Edition
Disclaimer

This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States
government. Neither the United States government nor Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC,
nor any of their employees makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or
responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or
process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein
to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or
otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the
United States government or Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC. The views and opinions of
authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or
Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, and shall not be used for advertising or product
endorsement purposes.
 Nuclear Science—A Guide to the Nuclear Science Wall Chart
©2019 Contemporary Physics Education Project (CPEP)

Chapter 8 The Search for “Heavy” Elements

The known chemical elements are arranged (Fig. 8-1) in a pattern that relates their
chemical properties. That arrangement is called the “Periodic Table”, and is the
fundamental tool for physicists and chemists. The elements are arranged in groups
(columns) indicative of similar chemical properties and periods (rows) indicative of
electronic shell occupation. To a person who understands how to read the periodic table,
an enormous amount of elementary properties can be discerned – for example, which
element might bond with which other elements and in what ratios to form chemical
compounds, which elements are metallic and which are not. The first periodic table was
constructed in 1869 by Dmitri Mendeleev. Other scientists had noticed repeating patterns
or periodicity in the various known elements (at that time only 63 elements were known),
but Mendeleev was the first to boldly use his table to predict the existence of as yet
unknown elements and actually leave spaces in his chart for them. Several elements (Ga
and Ge for example) where found in subsequent years, based on his predictions of their
expected masses and chemical properties, cementing the form and usefulness of the
periodic table. UNESCO declared 2019 the International Year of the Periodic Table in
honor of the 150th anniversary of the first periodic table.

Fig. 8-1. The Periodic Table. Reference https://iupac.org/what-we-do/periodic-table-of-elements/

Each element is uniquely defined by proton number, Z. Changing the number of

neutrons, N, does not changes the chemical properties significantly, but can make a
major difference in the nuclear properties. This arrangement showing the number of
neutrons and protons can be displayed in a chart of nuclides, which also conveys

8-1
 Chapter 8—The Search for “Heavy” Elements

important nuclear properties such as half-life and decay modes. The uppermost end of the
chart of nuclides as known in 2019 is shown in Fig. 8-2. Elements through oganesson
(Og, Z = 118) have been discovered, confirmed1, and named (see Table 8-1).

16 6

16 4 14 9

3 75 20 6

1 27 27 41 20

3 2 3 75 20 6

4 1 28 38 41 20

2 3 75 20 6

1 38 20

3 75 6

3 75 6

3 75 6

Fig. 8-2. The uppermost part of the chart of nuclides in June 2018. The color of the boxes indicates decay
mode and text in the boxes indicate half-life and decay energies, The red numbers are the total number of
atoms of that particular isotope that have been produced worldwide by June 2018. The grey shaded
background is the magnitude of the shell corrections in a nuclear model and indicate one possible location
for the next doubly magic “Island of Stability” or region of enhanced stablility near Z = 114 and N = 184.

When a nucleus captures a neutron, it often tries to correct for its neutron excess
by beta decay, turning a neutron into a proton and thus creating an atom with atomic
number Z increased by one unit. This commonly observed phenomenon suggests a way to
create new elements of increased atomic number and thus to create ever more massive
elements that are not found on Earth. Most of these elements are radioactive, with very
short half-lives. However, theories of nuclear structure predict that at a certain atomic
number, which is currently beyond present experimental limits, new long-lived nuclei can
be created.

The most massive naturally occurring element on Earth is uranium (U), with a
nucleus of 92 protons. In 1934, scientists started the search for more massive elements
with 93 or more protons. They succeeded in 1940 when neptunium (Np, Z = 93) was
synthesized at the University of California, Berkeley. Edwin McMillan and Philip
Abelson observed Np while studying fission products produced in the bombardment of

1
Oganesson has only been produced at the Flerov Laboratory of Nuclear Reactions in Dubna, Russia.

8-2
 Chapter 8—The Search for “Heavy” Elements

238
U with thermal neutrons. They found a radioactive reaction product that was not a
fission product. This product was formed by the capture of a neutron to produce 239U,
which subsequently b- decayed to 239Np via the reaction
239
U + 1n ® 239U (23.5 min) ® 239Np (2.36 d),
where the half life of the nucleus is indicated in the parenthesis. McMillan and Abelson
chemically separated this new element, Np, from the interfering fission products and
chemically identified it as neptunium. Since this breakthrough discovery, scientists from
all over the world have been trying to discover ever more massive artificially produced
elements.

Plutonium (Pu, Z = 94) was discovered in 1941 by bombarding a uranium target

with deuterons (a hydrogen nucleus with one proton and one neutron) in the 60-Inch
Cyclotron at Berkeley. Glenn Seaborg, Arthur Wahl and Joseph Kennedy chemically
separated neptunium from the target and detected alpha particles from the plutonium
daughter nuclei, as:
238
U + 2H ® 2 1n + 238Np (2.1 d) ® 238Pu (88 yr).
They chemically identified the isotope 238Pu. Then, joined by Emilio Segre, they identified
239
Pu and showed that it was fissionable with thermal neutrons.

Once 239Pu was discovered, there was the potential for using it as a new target to
produce more massive elements because of its long half-life of 24,100 years. Because its
half life is so long, scientists can keep the target for a long number of years.

In 1944 a 239Pu target was bombarded with alpha particles at the 60-Inch
Cyclotron to produce curium (Cm, Z = 96) through the following nuclear reaction
239
Pu (24,110 yr) + 4He ® 242Cm (162.8 d) + 1n.
After bombardment the material was sent to the Metallurgical Laboratory at The
University of Chicago for chemical separation and identification of the new element. The
element 242Cm decays to 238Pu by emitting alpha particles. The identification of curium
was possible because the alpha decay of the daughter nucleus, 238Pu, was already known
and could be used as a signature for the identification of the curium precursor.

The discovery of americium (Am, Z = 95) soon followed when a 239Pu target was
bombarded with thermal neutrons in a nuclear reactor. Plutonium captured several
neutrons and ultimately became americium (241Am):
239
Pu (24,110 yr) + 1n ® 240Pu (6,564 yr) + 1n ® 241Pu (14.4 yr)
and
241
Pu (14.4 yr) ® 241Am (432.7 yr) + 1n ® 242Am (16.0 h) ® 242Cm (162.8 d).
Americium was chemically separated from plutonium and further identified by observing
its beta decay to the known 242Cm isotope.

Once americium and curium were found and isolated in macroscopic amounts,
they were used as targets to produce more massive elements through particle

8-3
 Chapter 8—The Search for “Heavy” Elements

bombardments. Berkelium (Bk, Z = 97) was produced by bombarding milligram

quantities of americium with helium ions,
241
Am (432.7 yr) + 4He ® 243
Bk (4.5 h) + 2 1n.
Rapid chemical techniques were developed in order to separate and identify this new
short-lived element. Likewise, californium (Cf, Z = 98) was produced in a helium
bombardment of a target made of microgram amounts of curium by
242
Cm (162.8 d) + 4He ® 245
Cf (45 min) + 1n.
The identification of this element was accomplished with only the 5000 atoms produced
in this experiment. The next two elements, einsteinium (Es, Z = 99) and fermium (Fm, Z
= 100), were unexpectedly found in the debris from the “Mike” thermonuclear explosion
that took place in the Pacific Ocean in 1952. Debris from the explosion was collected and
analyzed at several laboratories, and the new elements were discovered in chemical
separations of the material. Scientists explained the production of einsteinium and
fermium through multiple neutron captures by the uranium used in the thermonuclear
device followed by several successive beta decays, which ultimately resulted in atoms
with atomic numbers 99 and 100.

The last three elements in the actinide series are mendelevium (Md, Z = 101),
nobelium (No, Z = 102) and lawrencium (Lr, Z = 103). Mendelevium was truly a unique
discovery because the new element was produced and identified virtually one atom at a
time. Einsteinium was bombarded with helium ions to produce mendelevium through:
253
Es (20.5 d) + 4He ® 256
Md (78.1 min) + 1n.
The production of mendelevium was estimated to be only a few atoms per experiment.
The reaction products from the bombardment were collected on thin gold foils that were
dissolved in an acid solution, and then chemically treated in order to separate and identify
the Md atoms. This is commonly called the recoil method, and is used when small
numbers of atoms are produced.

The discovery of nobelium was controversial. A team of scientists from several

different laboratories claimed discovery in 1957. However, scientists from the United
States and the Soviet Union could not confirm their findings. The original claim was
proven to be false; the product that was thought to be nobelium was actually something
completely different. Nobelium was finally produced and positively identified in 1958
through the following reaction:
246
Cm (4730 yr) + 12C ® 254
No (55 s) + 4 1n.
The first identification of lawrencium was made at the Berkeley Laboratory’s
Heavy Ion Linear Accelerator (HILAC) in 1961. Several targets of californium isotopes
were bombarded with beams of boron. The reaction products were collected on a Mylar
tape and moved past a series of alpha detectors. The element lawrencium was identified
on the basis of the known alpha decays of its descendant nuclei.

By observing the decay chain of their descendant nuclei, scientists discovered

elements 104 through 118. Only a few atoms of these new elements were produced in

8-4
 Chapter 8—The Search for “Heavy” Elements

each experiment. The atoms were isolated from the target and beam material by using a
particle separator, which separates atoms, based on their different masses. The atoms
were then allowed to decay and the subsequent alpha particle decay products from the
descendant nuclei were correlated to identify the unknown parent nucleus. The heaviest
The decay chains used to identify Og and Sg are shown in Fig. 8-3. Different
combinations of targets and projectiles were used in accelerators to produce these
elements (see Table 8-2).

Fig. 8-3. The decay chain for identifying Og(118) and the decay chain for Sg(112) from the Nuclear Wall
Chart.

There are two methods for producing new elements. First, cold-fusion reactions
typically use more symmetric beam and target nuclei to produce a compound nucleus.
Secondly, hot-fusion reactions use a more asymmetric beam and target nuclei to produce
a compound nucleus with generally higher excitation energy. Both of these types of
reactions utilize doubly magic nuclei, as either target or projectile in anattempt to
increase the stability of the compound nucleus. Cold-fusion reactions have produced
elements 104-112 and hot-fusion reactions have produced elements 113-118. Element
113 has also been produced with a cold-fusion reaction.

Rutherfordium (104), dubnium (105), and seaborgium (106) were synthesized and
identified at Berkeley. Bohrium (107), hassium (108), and meitnerium (109) were
synthesized and identified in the early 1980s at the Gesellschaft für
Schwerionenforschung (GSI) laboratory near Darmstadt, Germany via cold-fusion
nuclear reactions.

The decade of the 1990’s brought three more new elements to the periodic table,
elements named darmstadtium (110), roentgenium (111) and copernicium (112), all
produced first via cold-fusion reactions at GSI (see Table 8-2). The half-lives of the
produced isotopes were all in the milliseconds to microseconds range, and the production

8-5
 Chapter 8—The Search for “Heavy” Elements

rates continued to plummet.

In 1998, the Dubna/LLNL collaboration began to investigate superheavy element

production using the hot-fusion reaction of beams of 48Ca with various actinide targets, in
an attempt to reach the Island of Stability long predicted to be at Z = 114 and N = 184.
The first reaction was 48Ca + 244Pu à 292114* and yielded element 114, now named
flerovium. While the cross-sections for production of superheavy elements via cold-
fusion reactions continued to plummet, those for hot-fusion reactions were unusually
high, around a picobarn (see Fig. 8-4).

Fig. 8-4. Comparison of production rates of nuclei between cold-fusion reactions (left) and hot-fusion
reactions (right). Red lines indicate one picobarn cross-sections.

During the decade of 2000-2010, six new chemical elements were produced by the
Dubna/LLNL collaboration (and later collaborators from ORNL and Vanderbilt
University), and one element, element 113 (nihonium), was also produced via heroic
experiments at RIKEN laboratory in Japan using the cold-fusion reaction 70Zn + 209Bi.
Hot-fusion reactions produced flerovium (114), livermorium (116), moscovium (115) and
nihonium (113), oganesson (118) and finally tennessine (117). These elements were
confirmed by other laboratories and accepted by the IUPAC, thus completing the seventh
row or period of the periodic table.
It should be noted that the half-lives of some isotopes produced via these reactions
are significantly longer than those of prior isotopes produced via cold-fusion reactions.
Using Cn isotopes as an example, 285Cn (t1/2 = 29 s) lives nearly 5 orders of magnitude
longer than 277Cn (t1/2 = 0.69 ms). This, combined with increased production rates,
provides strong evidence that the newly produced isotopes exist on the shores of the
Island of Stability, near the N = 184 and Z = 114 closed shells. Theorists now predict a
region of enhanced stability centered around Z = 114, 120, 124 or 126, perhaps a broader
region of isotopes with longer half-lives. The heaviest produced isotopes are still 7
neutrons short of N = 184.

There have been multiple attempts, by multiple laboratories, to produce elements

119 and 120 using different hot-fusion reactions. Because targets of Es and Fm cannot be

8-6
 Chapter 8—The Search for “Heavy” Elements

made due to small amounts of target material exisiting on the planet at any given time,
beams of 48Ca cannot be used, and any advantage obtained using a doubly magic nucleus
as beam is lost. Nevertheless, attempts to produce the next elements have been made, and
have even captured the imagination of the public at large.

The popular TV show, “The Big Bang Theory” even had several story lines where
the genius character, Sheldon Cooper, postulated the production of element 120 using
various reactions (see Fig. 8-5). All of the reactions on the whiteboard have been tried,
with no success so far, except for the reaction containing Md as a target because a target
of Md cannot be made due to scarcity of the material.

Weare in a time period where development of better equipment is occuring to

continue the searches for new superheavy elements. The Super Heavy Element Factory
(SHEF) in Dubna, Russia is currently nearing completion and will be dedicated to super
heavy element research.

Figure 8-5. Season 7 (2013) – “The Romance Resonance” of the popular TV series “The Big Bang Theory”
in which various nuclear reactions are suggested to produce element 120. From top to bottom, the reactions
258
Md + 40K, 244Pu + 58Fe, 248Cm + 54Cr and 238U + Ni are suggested. All of these reactions have been
attempted, except for the 258Md reaction because a target cannot be constructed of this scarce material.

Traditionally, the discoverers of a new element chose its name, and then the
International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) officially approves it. Table
8-1 lists the currently approved IUPAC names.

8-7
 Chapter 8—The Search for “Heavy” Elements

Table 8-1. “Heavy” element names that are approved by IUPAC.

Element IUPAC Symbol
Number Proposal
101 Mendelevium Md
102 Nobelium No
103 Lawrencium Lr
104 Rutherfordium Rf
105 Dubnium Db
106 Seaborgium Sg
107 Bohrium Bh
108 Hassium Hs
109 Meitnerium Mt
110 Darmstadtium Ds
111 Roentgenium Rg
112 Copernicium Cn
113 Nihonium Nh
114 Flerovium Fl
115 Moscovium Mc
116 Livermorium Lv
117 Tennessine Ts
118 Oganesson Og

New experimental techniques and apparatus have been developed for scientists to
extend the periodic table to even more massive elements. A more efficient particle
separator uses magnetic fields to separate atoms based on their mass and charge. This
equipment can detect nuclides with low production rates and extremely short half-lives.
The present limits for discovering new elements are based on the low production rates
and short half-lives. The hope is that new development in detection equipment will
increase the sensitivity for detecting fewer atoms (or even a single atom) with very short
half-lives.

As can be seen from the prior discussion, a variety of techniques have been used
to synthesize new chemical elements. Modern “nuclear alchemists” working on the
synthesis of superheavy elements “transmute” one element into another by using particle
accelerators to smash one element into another. The currently preferred method of
producing new elements is fusion-evaporation reactions. This process uses the fusion of
two nuclei to form a compound nucleus which then emits few or several neutrons and
produces the brand new element.

It has been possible to study the chemical properties on the macroscopic scale for
elements as massive as einsteinium (99) and on the tracer scale for elements as massive
as seaborgium (106). The elements beyond the actinides in the Periodic Table are termed
the “transactinides” and are shown in a Modern Periodic Table, Fig. 8-1, in their expected
places. The yields of the most massive elements produced in bombardments of target
nuclei with “heavy” ions become extremely small with increasing atomic number,

8-8
 Chapter 8—The Search for “Heavy” Elements

dropping to as little as one atom per week of bombardment for elements as massive as
atomic number 112. The production of one isotope of element 113 with cold fusion
reactions was at a production rate of about one atom per half-year. The half-lives
decrease into the millisecond and the microsecond range so that identification of the new
nuclei becomes increasingly difficult. Their half-lives would be impossibly short were it
not for the presence of closed shells of nucleons to increase the nuclear stability.

8-9
 Chapter 8—The Search for “Heavy” Elements

Table 8-2. Summary of the reactions and methods used in the discovery of the actinide and transactinide
elements. See Chapter 7 for an explanation of the reaction notation.

Element Production Reaction(s)1 Method of Discovery Year

neptunium (Np) 238
U(n,b-)239Np Chemical Separation 1940
238 2 238
plutonium (Pu) U( H,2n) Np Chemical Separation 1941
238
Np(b-)238Pu
239
curium (Cm) Pu(4He,n)242Cm Chemical Separation 1944
239
americium (Am) Pu(n,g)240Pu Chemical Separation 1945
240
Pu(n,g)241Pu
241
Pu(b-)241Am
241
berkelium (Bk) Am(4He,2n)243Bk Chemical Separation 1949
242
californium (Cf) Cm(4He,n)245Cf Chemical Separation 1950
einsteinium (Es) 238
U(15n,7b-)253Es Chemical Separation2 1952
fermium (Fm) 238
U(17n,8b-)255Fm Chemical Separation2 1953
253
mendelevium (Md) Es(4He,n)256Md Recoil Method, Chemical 1955
Separation
246
nobelium (No) Cm(12C,4n)254No Recoil Method, Chemical 1958
Separation
lawrencium (Lr) 249/250/251/252
Cf(10/11B,xn)258Lr Direct a Counting3 1961
249
rutherfordium (Rf) Cf(12C,4n)257Rf Parent-Daughter 1969
249
Cf(13C,3n)259Rf a Correlation
249
dubnium (Db) Cf(15N,4n)260Db Parent-Daughter 1970
a Correlation
249
seaborgium (Sg) Cf(18O,4n)263Sg Parent-Daughter- 1974
Granddaughter
a Correlation
209
bohrium (Bh) Bi(54Cr,n)262Bh Velocity Separator4 1981
208
hassium (Hs) Pb(58Fe,n)265Hs Velocity Separator4 1984
209
meitnerium (Mt) Bi(58Fe,n)266Mt Velocity Separator4 1982
209
darmstadtium (Ds) Bi(59Co,n)267Ds Mass Separator 1991
208
Pb(62,64Ni,n)269,271Ds Velocity Separator4,5 1994
244
Pu(34S,5n)273Ds Recoil Separator 1995
209
Roentgenium (Rg) Bi(64Ni,n)272Rg Velocity Separator4 1994
208
Copernicium (Cn) Pb(70Zn,n)277Cn Velocity Separator 1996
243
Nihonium (Nh) Am(48Ca,3n)288Mc Gas-filled Separator6 2003
237
Np(48Ca,3n)282Nh
209
Bi(70Zn,n)278Nh
244
Flerovium (Fl) Pu(48Ca,3n)289Fl Gas-filled Separator7 1999
243
Moscovium (Mc) Am(48Ca,3n)288Mc Gas-filled Separator7 2003
248
Livermorium (Lv) Cm(48Ca,3n)293Lv Gas-filled Separator7 2000
249
Tennessine (Ts) Bk(48Ca,3n)294Ts Gas-filled Separator7 2010
249
Oganesson (Og) Cf(48Ca,3n)294Og Gas-filled Separator7 2002

8-10
 Chapter 8—The Search for “Heavy” Elements

1
When more than one reaction is given, it means that a sequence of reactions was necessary to discover the
element, or multiple reactions were used to produce different isotopes.
2
The Es and Fm reactions were not done in a laboratory setting; multiple neutron captures, followed by
successive beta decays were the result of a thermonuclear explosion.
3
A mixture of four Cf isotopes was bombarded simultaneously with a beam containing 10B and 11B. The
symbol “xn” means that different numbers of neutrons were emitted, depending on the actual combination
of target and beam used to produce Lr.
4
A velocity separator is used to separate reaction products based on the fact that reaction products of
different masses will be emitted with different velocities.
5
At GSI two different reactions were used to produce two different isotopes of element Ds.
6
Nh was first produced with the 48Ca + 243Am reaction as a decay product of element 115, and then also
with the 70Zn reaction over the course of many years of beam time.
7
Production of these elements was by a variety of cross-bombardment reactions and at various beam
energies so excitation functions could be determined. Lighter elements are also decay products of heavier
elements.

It has been possible to study the chemical properties of rutherfordium, hahnium

and seaborgium using the advanced techniques of one-atom-at-a-time chemistry. These
experiments show that these properties generally are consistent with those expected on
the basis of extrapolation from those of their lower-mass homologues in the Periodic
Table, hafnium, tantalum, and tungsten. Recent studies have shown that the properties of
bohrium (107) and hassium (108) are the homologues of rhenium and osmium. Some
initial chemical studies of Cn (Z = 112) and Fl (Z = 114) have been performed which
indicate that Cn is likely a homologue of Hg. So far the studies have been inconclusive
on Fl. However, the chemical properties cannot be determined reliably in detail from
trends exhibited by the lighter homologues, because of the important role played by
relativistic effects (the fact that some electrons are moving at velocities near the speed of
light) in these more massive elements. Elements higher than hassium are placed in their
expected place in the Periodic Table.
Just how many elements are there? Eventually, it will not be possible to add
another proton to the nucleus even with the addition of many neutrons The repulsion of
the protons will be so high, that no number of neutrons could keep the nucleus together.
Because of the complex interplay between the nucleons, via the short-range attractive
strong nuclear force and the longer range repulsive Coulomb force, forces that are poorly
understood, it is extremely difficult to predict at what proton number the nucleus will
rapidly fall apart. Additionally, as the nucleus becomes more massive, the orbiting
electrons become more relatavistic, and at some point the innermost electrons will
actually spend the majority of the time inside the nucleus. This will increase the
probability of “forced” beta-decay, where a proton is converted into a neutron, and will
also preclude any increase in the number of protons in the nucleus. This effect has been
estimated with the best relatavistic calculations, by P. Pyykkö, to occur at Z = 172, and
the resultant periodic table is shown in Fig. 8-6. It is exciting to consider that perhaps a
third of the elements in the periodic table have yet to be discovered.

8-11
 Chapter 8—The Search for “Heavy” Elements

Figure 8-6. Periodic table extrapolated to element 172 using the best relatavistic calculations to predict
chemical behavior beyond the known 118 elements.

Books and Articles:

G. T. Seaborg and W. D. Loveland, The Elements Beyond Uranium, John Wiley and
Sons, Inc., New York (1990).

D C. Hoffman, Chemistry of the Heaviest Elements, Radiochemica Acta 72, 1 (1996).

M. Schädel et al., Chemical Properties of Element 106 (seaborgium), Nature 388, 55

(1977).

P. J. Karol et al., On the Discovery of elements 110-112, Pure Appl. Chem., 73, 959-967
(2001).

M.A. Stoyer, “Superheavy elements”, McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science and

Technology, 11th Edition, (2012).

L. Öhrström and J. Reedijk, “Names and symbols of the elements with atomic numbers
113, 115, 117 and 118” Pure Appl. Chem. 88, 1225 (2016).

S. Hofmann, “New Elements – Approaching Z = 114” Rep. Prog. Phys. 61, 639 (1998).

8-12
 Chapter 8—The Search for “Heavy” Elements

Yu. Ts. Oganessian, “Heaviest nuclei from 48Ca-induced reactions” J. Phys. G: Nucl.
Part. Phys. 34, R165 (2007).

Vladimir Utyonkov, Yuri Oganessian, Sergey Dmitriev, Mikhail Itkis, Kenton Moody,
Mark Stoyer, Dawn Shaughnessy, James Roberto, Krzysztof Rykaczewski, Joseph
Hamilton, et al., “The Discovery of Elements 113-118”, Eur. Phys. J. 131, 06003 (2016);
and related articles in Nobel Symposium 160.

P. Pyykkö, “A suggested periodic table up to Z ≤ 172, based on Dirac-Fock calculations

on atoms and ions” Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 13, 161 (2011).

Special edition of Nucl. Phys. A, see for example Yu. Ts. Oganessian and V. K.
Utyonkov, “Superheavy nuclei from 48Ca-induced reactions” Nucl. Phys. A 944, 62
(2015) and related articles.

Sigurd Hofmann, “Synthesis and properties of isotopes of the transactinides” Radiochim.

Acta (2019); https://doi.org/10.1515/ract-2019-3104.

8-13