5 ms·

The recipe for oganesson is pretty amazing. Shoot calcium at californium target for four months to make an atom of it. Repeat as necessary (but remember it has

The recipe for oganesson is pretty amazing. Shoot calcium at californium target for four months to make an atom of it. Repeat as necessary (but remember it has a half-life of under 1 millisecond). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oganesson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oganesson

acchow 10y ago
"Because of the very small fusion reaction probability (the fusion cross section is ~0.3–0.6 pb or (3–6)×10−41 m2) the experiment took four months and involved a beam dose of 4×1019 calcium ions that had to be shot at the californium target to produce the first recorded event believed to be the synthesis of oganesson.[9] Nevertheless, researchers are highly confident that the results are not a false positive, since the chance that the detections were random events was estimated to be less than one part in 100000." Wow.
- nerdponx 10y ago
  I wonder how much it cost to make that atom
  - kakarot 10y ago
    Atomic scientists get excited over the littlest things...
  - mathattack 10y ago
    On a per pound basis?
    - acchow 10y ago
      I don't think we could produce a pound of this (that exists contemporaneously)
      - djsumdog 10y ago
        pounds? Come on, we're scientists and engineers here (well some of us). Grams .. or in this case, nanograms or picograms .. possibly attograms.
        semi-extrinsic 10y ago
        A single oganesson atom weighs 294 u, or 0.488 zeptograms. That's 0.000488 attograms.
        mathattack 10y ago
        ok, I'll settle for a metric ton!
    - nerdponx 10y ago
      More like "per atom" since they only made one atom.
- mathattack 10y ago
  When social sciences try to use the mathematical tools of physical sciences, I wish they would use the same measure of statistical significance: "the chance that the detections were random events was estimated to be less than one part in 100000"
  - schoen 10y ago
    It does make their results seem unconvincing in comparison... but can you supply them with 4×10¹⁹ research subjects to experiment on?
  - will_pseudonym 10y ago
    I think that the larger problem with social science is that they conduct experiments under extremely specific conditions and then attempt to generalize to populations where those same conditions aren't present at all. And I'm not talking about the media's interpretation and broadcast of the findings. I'm talking about the papers themselves.
    - Ntrails 10y ago
      It's also pretty hard/expensive to get 10000 people involved in a long term experiment. So they tend to get tens of people and extrapolate from there. I don't think it's that they're lazy or incompetent - it's just hard to have the sort of scale required for the levels of certainty you can get from firing a bazillion calcium ions at something for months.
      - jdavis703 10y ago
        Why can't they do fewer studies but with larger sizes then? Do you then run into a problem of idled researchers?
        nonbel 10y ago
        There is a sick culture that thinks being the "idea person" is the most important part of research, and that "idea people" should be in charge of implementing their ideas. A lot of issues stem from that.
wmeredith 10y ago
If ever something deserved the title of unobtainium...
- enraged_camel 10y ago
  Totallyuptochancium
  - huhtenberg 10y ago
    Hardobtanium
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
threeseed 10y ago
Well technically it could take a second or a decade to make. It's up to chance. We should be greateful the research team didn't decide to stop at the 3 month, 29 day mark.
TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago
Of what value is a substance that has a half life of 1 ms?
- xorxornop 10y ago
  It's not, really - but the techniques used in its nucleosynthesis probably are. Incidentally, if the compound itself does in the end turn out to be useful, it'll be for the same reason - it'd likely be used as some intermediate in a wider-scope reaction. As is the case for many, many (almost all, realistically) otherwise-"useless" chemicals.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago
    Righto, that helps, thank you.
- evanb 10y ago
  Its properties also help constrain nuclear physics at high A and Z, which is needed for understanding astrophysical nucleosynthesis and hunts for the island of stability.
- kolinko 10y ago
  If I'm not mistaken, one of the reasons for doing this is figuring out if there is an island of stability somewhere there - a heavy element that somehow remains stable for an extended periods of time. And there is only one way to figure this out.
  - semi-extrinsic 10y ago
    Note that it's not just "maybe there is randomly some new heavy element that's stable out there". We see definite hints in the behaviour of known heavy elements, and in our best models of nuclear physics, that point towards a possible island of stability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_of_stability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_of_stability
pif 10y ago
> but remember it has a half-life of under 1 millisecond You say that as if it was short! Do you realize W and Z bosons have half-lives of the order of 10^-25 seconds? ;-)

acchow 10y ago

"Because of the very small fusion reaction probability (the fusion cross section is ~0.3–0.6 pb or (3–6)×10−41 m2) the experiment took four months and involved a beam dose of 4×1019 calcium ions that had to be shot at the californium target to produce the first recorded event believed to be the synthesis of oganesson.[9] Nevertheless, researchers are highly confident that the results are not a false positive, since the chance that the detections were random events was estimated to be less than one part in 100000." Wow.

nerdponx 10y ago
I wonder how much it cost to make that atom
- kakarot 10y ago
  Atomic scientists get excited over the littlest things...
- mathattack 10y ago
  On a per pound basis?
  - acchow 10y ago
    I don't think we could produce a pound of this (that exists contemporaneously)
    - djsumdog 10y ago
      pounds? Come on, we're scientists and engineers here (well some of us). Grams .. or in this case, nanograms or picograms .. possibly attograms.
      - semi-extrinsic 10y ago
        A single oganesson atom weighs 294 u, or 0.488 zeptograms. That's 0.000488 attograms.
      - mathattack 10y ago
        ok, I'll settle for a metric ton!
  - nerdponx 10y ago
    More like "per atom" since they only made one atom.
mathattack 10y ago
When social sciences try to use the mathematical tools of physical sciences, I wish they would use the same measure of statistical significance: "the chance that the detections were random events was estimated to be less than one part in 100000"
- schoen 10y ago
  It does make their results seem unconvincing in comparison... but can you supply them with 4×10¹⁹ research subjects to experiment on?
- will_pseudonym 10y ago
  I think that the larger problem with social science is that they conduct experiments under extremely specific conditions and then attempt to generalize to populations where those same conditions aren't present at all. And I'm not talking about the media's interpretation and broadcast of the findings. I'm talking about the papers themselves.
  - Ntrails 10y ago
    It's also pretty hard/expensive to get 10000 people involved in a long term experiment. So they tend to get tens of people and extrapolate from there. I don't think it's that they're lazy or incompetent - it's just hard to have the sort of scale required for the levels of certainty you can get from firing a bazillion calcium ions at something for months.
    - jdavis703 10y ago
      Why can't they do fewer studies but with larger sizes then? Do you then run into a problem of idled researchers?
      - nonbel 10y ago
        There is a sick culture that thinks being the "idea person" is the most important part of research, and that "idea people" should be in charge of implementing their ideas. A lot of issues stem from that.

wmeredith 10y ago

If ever something deserved the title of unobtainium...

enraged_camel 10y ago
Totallyuptochancium
- huhtenberg 10y ago
  Hardobtanium
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

threeseed 10y ago

Well technically it could take a second or a decade to make. It's up to chance. We should be greateful the research team didn't decide to stop at the 3 month, 29 day mark.

TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago

Of what value is a substance that has a half life of 1 ms?

xorxornop 10y ago
It's not, really - but the techniques used in its nucleosynthesis probably are. Incidentally, if the compound itself does in the end turn out to be useful, it'll be for the same reason - it'd likely be used as some intermediate in a wider-scope reaction. As is the case for many, many (almost all, realistically) otherwise-"useless" chemicals.
- TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago
  Righto, that helps, thank you.
evanb 10y ago
Its properties also help constrain nuclear physics at high A and Z, which is needed for understanding astrophysical nucleosynthesis and hunts for the island of stability.
kolinko 10y ago
If I'm not mistaken, one of the reasons for doing this is figuring out if there is an island of stability somewhere there - a heavy element that somehow remains stable for an extended periods of time. And there is only one way to figure this out.
- semi-extrinsic 10y ago
  Note that it's not just "maybe there is randomly some new heavy element that's stable out there". We see definite hints in the behaviour of known heavy elements, and in our best models of nuclear physics, that point towards a possible island of stability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_of_stability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_of_stability

pif 10y ago

> but remember it has a half-life of under 1 millisecond You say that as if it was short! Do you realize W and Z bosons have half-lives of the order of 10^-25 seconds? ;-)