@@DazdigoNo its not. For an element to be considired radioactive ALL of its isotopes have to be radioactive. Bismuth has no stable isotopes while Hydrogen got Protium(Hydrogen-1) and Deuterium(Hydrogen-2) which are both stable
This is true for everything beyond (I think) Dysprosium. Mathematically they shouldn't have stable isotopes, just that they're so stable, decay has not been observed
@@descentiumSamarium (62) and Europium (63) are predicted to also be unstable to alpha decay, and Tungsten (74) seems to be particularly "radioactive" in theory. It's also technically possible for literally every isotope with atomic mass ≥93 to decay via spontaneous fission. Zirconium, with atomic number 40, has "stable" isotopes below and above this line. While Niobium (41) only has ⁹³Nb, Molybdenum (42) sneaks in yet again with the stable isotope ⁹²Mo, which allows it to resist fission too. As far as I can tell, while we would be missing Iodine (53), humans and other life could in theory survive in a world where every possible decay mode has happened already, and nothing above Molybdenum exists.
It’s really well done, if I was handed this video by these guys, I would have a hard time not giving them 100% and also possibly letters of recommendation. The production level is good, it feels just like an excellent school project.
The style of this video is wacky in a good way. The constant switching between multiple people with a complete lack of acknowledgement is just so out of left field, I respect the shit out of it.
And it almost turned into a Donnybrook. Chemist: ITS A HYDROGEN ION!!! Physicist: NO!!! ITS A PROTON!!!! Luckily there were a couple of large botanists there to separate them before things escalated too much.
Summary: There is a valley of stability on a chart showing proton number vs. neutron number. The only 2 isotopes of technetium that fall in this range (for reasons) are Tc-97 and Tc-99. But, another law states that along an "isobar" of the same atomic weight drawn along the graph, no 2 adjacent elements along the isobar can both have stable isotopes. For this reason, Tc-97 and Tc-99 are unstable - they conflict with the adjacent elements. Same with promethium. And yes, I typed that all out. I hope it helps.
The higher neutron to proton count in high elements that LET them be stable, not what makes them unstable, the Protons are what push the nucleus apart so having neutrons present adds binding force without adding repulsive force. That's why the valley of stability bends down away from the line of equal protons and neutrons, and the statement 'atoms with more neutrons will decay by electron emmision' is incorrect because the valley of stability dose not follow the line of equality. What you ment to say is that isotopes below the valley of stability decay by electron emmission.
I remember my excitement when I arranged the known isotopes from a book from 1950s I found in the attic, and discovered that no stable isotopes are at the adiacent squares. I was 13 years old then. And then, I discovered that Mattauch did the same but more than half a century before me. What a blow!
The change of presenters keeps it interesting and entertaining, while also making it clear that it isn't one person that has done the work and research for this subject but rather a team. Great format.
All right then, let's rephrase the question ... Why do Molybdenum and have so many overlapping stable isotopes (so as to prevent Technetium from having any) ? It doesn't happen anywhere else on the periodic table.
This is still my question too. How come this scenario - where no element has a most stable immediate surroundings on its isobar - happen with technetium, and only technetium? Are there other sports that should be like this but aren't? That is another question: there is now more room for anomalies. 😋 Do all nuclides behave?
It has to do with odd numbers of protons being less stable than even numbers of protons. Most even numbered elements have far more stable isotopes than odd numbered elements, like tin has 10 stable isotopes while potassium (the odd-numbered element with the most isotopes) has only THREE. Technetium just got really unlucky.
@@MrSparkefrostie actually, fblock elements are situated at the bottom of the table (if you do not know what is that, then youll need to study quantum model of atom
I've usually seen it as just a gap in the table without a square there. I briefly thought they were suggesting that actinium had a stable isotope. The most stable isotope is 227Ac, which has a half-life of about 20 years. To put that into perspective, uranium-235 has a half-life of 700 MILLION years.
It's so strange seeing the title of this video after all these years... I asked myself this very question over 10 years ago regarding element 43 and also element 61. In my opinion they seem to be outliers, as if something to take note of or a hint from the universe about how decay and stability works, and no one had a satisfying answer for me other than "because of its half-life 🤓" You have done a great deed for life-long learners and people like me 😶🌫 I will nominate you for a Nobel Peace Prize for this
changes in speaker can be a useful trick to keep attention, but in this case it was too frequent and became tiresome to listen to. I couldn't personally continue the video. I think it's a good idea to decide natural break points, such as change speaker when there is a change of subtopic instead of mid sentence
These people fail to realise that there are multiple periodic tables. Each one was built organizing the elements based on selected characteristics. The one we most commonly use is based around electrons and the energy shells which is very useful for predicting chemical reactions. However, there are periodic tables that are arranged in fashions that would help understand the likelihood of any particular element being radioactive.
I really like the style of video where multiple share information with the viewer. It would be cool if certain people shared specific categories of information though (or if it was more obvious and I missed it haha). Not that it would have to be entirely strict or anything, but one person being "the history presenter" another being "the hypothesis presenter", and the final person being the "hypothesis scrutinizer" (for example) (probably per-video) would enable the viewer to use the current presenter as a shorthand/clue for what information they are receiving. It would be as if each person is an expert on the topic, but coming from a different domain or perspective.
What leads to the fact that the molybdenum and/or ruthenium isotopes 97 and 99 are more tightly bound than the corresponding technetium nuclei though? Or would it be a 5-hour video to explain 😄
43 seems to be somewhat of a 13 division-wise: just a number but so many factors align such that 12 is divisible by 1,2,3,4,6 and none are left for 13 (as opposed to e.g. 21, 25, 27 which have a few)
And God said, Let Technetium be radioactive..... MUHAHAHAHA cough cough.... Engineering Angel #7: Ummm But why? It doesn't make sense. They'll figure it out and we'll have to scrap another one. God: Look I make it up, and you figure out how to make it work. FWI, what do you think happened to the Engineering Angels 1 thru 6?
One thing I've always wondered is that when you have atoms with such a long half life, how is the half life determined? It seems like it should be impossible to empirically measure the half life by watching it decay l, which would mean we would need an alternate way to measure or even calculate the half life
I wish the teachers of Newfoundland in the 80s and 90s were half as educated as these young folks here! My teachers didn't understand the material they were teaching so nothing was ever put into terms that a gifted individual could actually learn anything from.
If I understood correctly, what they meant is that any isotope of Technetium that should be stable has another more stable neighbour with the same atomic mass which caused the technetium to decay, the reason why the other elements are fine having neighbour elements on both sides more stable is because they have other isotopes with no stable neighbour elements which allows them to have a non-radioactive isotope
I have been wondering this for years now and I kept looking sometimes, trying to find an answer for why this specific element it radioactive. Thanks for finally giving me an answer ^^
Are atoms like group of people, more protons and neutrons and they start to argue and split to smaller groups? Sometimes nucleus only kick out trouble makers.
Ok, could anyone please explain this to me? They took the number of protons (Z), the number of neutrons (N) and the atomic weight (A), and checked whether each of those is odd or even. Then they said that "each stable isotope falls into one of 4 categories", as in "each stable isotope is inside one of those 4, and unstable isotopes are outside these categories". But the other 4 combinations of "odds" and "evens" are impossible from the fact that A = Z + N Like you have radioactive Co-60 with even A, odd Z and odd N. And it is inside one of these 4 categories for which they claim to be for stable isotopes
I feel like this video doesn't really explain anything at all, the rule being used to justify Tc 97 and Tc 99 being unstable is just a consequence of the fact that they're unstable, it doesn't actually explain what physical phenomena causes the neighbouring Molybdenum and Ruthenium isotopes to be more stable than any Tc isotope (knowing that 2 very similar bricklaying isotopes can't both be stable only explains Tc being unstable if we take it on faith that Mo and Ru *must* be stable, when it would be equally valid for those Mo and Ru isotopes to be unstable and a Tc isotope to be the most stable point).
Thank you for the video but I found the swapping between multiple presenters to be off-putting and unnecessarily jarring. Each presenter did a fine job but the amalgam simply was not beneficial in my opinion. Peaceful Skies.
The jump cuts between presenters are a bit jarring. I think this is because each person has a slightly different way of delivering their lines. I think it'd work better if you either allowed each person to speak longer, or made each person's delivery a bit more cohesive. Line delivery in general was also a bit stiff and unnatural. Comes off a little like reading or regurgitating, which makes it easier to lose the viewer's attention.
The frequent changing of the host is so distracting I can barely pay attention to the presented informAtion. If the host was swapped maybe ⅓ or ¼ as often, I think it would work much better, and not chop up the flow.
Yeah well it is because of time turbulence and backflow and all forma of matter and eneger being some bastardized form of time, bro!! 🤣🤣🤣 -jk ...maybe...
perhaps the valley of stability only extends further under extreme conditions near or just beyond the event horizon? If time slows down for something near the event horizon perhaps that would allow novel conditions for the development of extremely large atoms?
Technically everything should be radioactive but the half life would be so inconceivably long that we would never be able to observe or detect any decay. Making it negligible and by our own standards "stable"
I had no idea Technitium was number 43, but looking at the image of the periodic table and seeing that one radioactive outlier I knew exactly what this was gonna be about
I would say the understanding of the atoms is not understood properly but close enough to explain things. guess i'm gonna have to get rid of my technICium bars
.... I do not have the education level on this topic to understand more than the most basic ideas and concepts this video and paper discuss... and that is okay because you made it easy to understand the main points even for me. Good work.
Technically bismuth is radioactive, but its half-life is longer than the universe’s estimated age
hahahah
Using this definition, even hydrogen is radioactive, aka tritium.
@@DazdigoNo its not. For an element to be considired radioactive ALL of its isotopes have to be radioactive. Bismuth has no stable isotopes while Hydrogen got Protium(Hydrogen-1) and Deuterium(Hydrogen-2) which are both stable
This is true for everything beyond (I think) Dysprosium. Mathematically they shouldn't have stable isotopes, just that they're so stable, decay has not been observed
@@descentiumSamarium (62) and Europium (63) are predicted to also be unstable to alpha decay, and Tungsten (74) seems to be particularly "radioactive" in theory.
It's also technically possible for literally every isotope with atomic mass ≥93 to decay via spontaneous fission.
Zirconium, with atomic number 40, has "stable" isotopes below and above this line. While Niobium (41) only has ⁹³Nb, Molybdenum (42) sneaks in yet again with the stable isotope ⁹²Mo, which allows it to resist fission too.
As far as I can tell, while we would be missing Iodine (53), humans and other life could in theory survive in a world where every possible decay mode has happened already, and nothing above Molybdenum exists.
UA-cam: Would you like to see what is likely a school project about a random radioactive element?
Me: ...
...
Sure, why not?
that's certainly what it feels like.
It’s really well done, if I was handed this video by these guys, I would have a hard time not giving them 100% and also possibly letters of recommendation. The production level is good, it feels just like an excellent school project.
@@ch1pnd413 Oh yeah, no disagreement here.
The channel description says they are 3 collage engineers so yep
How does this guy keep changing his face? Its crazy
Maybe he doesn't have a stable isotope either
because of science. that's why.
He's a time lord
Valar morghulis.
it's kenjaku
The style of this video is wacky in a good way. The constant switching between multiple people with a complete lack of acknowledgement is just so out of left field, I respect the shit out of it.
I got a strong "class project" vibe. :) Well done, in any event....
@@grnbrgThey actually are all students that go to the same university
Only now noticed there were more than 2 people in the video.
Plus the video still flows surprisingly well and is coherent thematically.
It feels like an intervention
My father would not tolerate nucleus talk at the dinner table. Electron energy level discussion was ok.
🤣
Can imagine how angry he was in cases if someone dare to mention quarks...
I guess you didn't have a stable nuclear family. But at least the chemistry among you guys was all right.
@@ericdew2021 True and as I always say....If you're not part of the solution.....you're part of the precipitate.
0:35 he’s mogging us
So basically molybdenum and ruthenium took all the stable isobars for themselves without leaving some for technetium
Greedy
LOOOOOL
Meaning a cold front coming in from the west.
Yeah pretty much, if a technetium isotope stabilizes we consider it transformed into either of these
Amazing how that basically is the case; when I first saw this comment I thought you were exaggerating.
Whole physics department joined in. With the chemists...
And it almost turned into a Donnybrook. Chemist: ITS A HYDROGEN ION!!! Physicist: NO!!! ITS A PROTON!!!!
Luckily there were a couple of large botanists there to separate them before things escalated too much.
@@drmodestoesq in organic chem we often refer to hydrogens as protons, due to NMR shenanagains 😎
@@drmodestoesq We also call them "Proton" in Germany since "Wasserstoffion" is a little more inconvenient to say.
@@Mulmgott I'm sympathetic. To the outside observer, the German language has a habit of creating 9 kilometre long words.
@@MulmgottEh, it isn't that bad to say.
‘Joseph M’ I love that they went “no way we’re pronouncing it right, better to initial”
interesting how the 2 outliars (43 and 61) have a prime number of protons
Outliers* they don't lie (speak falsehoods), they lie outside things
@@mr.cauliflower3536 my cat is more of an inliar, it doesn't go out much.
@@mr.cauliflower3536at least 36 people understood what OP was saying perfectly fine so i don't think there's any need for this prescriptive needling
@@eggsbox I just wanted to make sure they know how to spell it.
Yoooo
this was a school project wasn't it. Its just so good noone notices
no... I noticed.
Everyone noticed. Noone cares (aside from wanting confirmation)
It was painfully obvious, from their awkwardness to the fact 4 people are doing the video itself and the research paper at the end
Summary:
There is a valley of stability on a chart showing proton number vs. neutron number. The only 2 isotopes of technetium that fall in this range (for reasons) are Tc-97 and Tc-99. But, another law states that along an "isobar" of the same atomic weight drawn along the graph, no 2 adjacent elements along the isobar can both have stable isotopes. For this reason, Tc-97 and Tc-99 are unstable - they conflict with the adjacent elements. Same with promethium.
And yes, I typed that all out. I hope it helps.
Technetium, not promethium, in the second sentence, but otherwise well done.
@@The-Devils-Advocate Fixed!
@@NeptuneTranscripts nice
no 2 adjacent* elements in an isobar
@@G0ldbl4e fixed
Damn this is a really good video, it answers everything really well. idk why I couldn't see anyone else who had covered this
Its only Techneicly radioactive.
GET. OUT.
@@Mp57navy No no, he can stay, that was good.
@Mp57navy, let bro cook....
*....with atoms.*
Great video, even better jaw lines.
"The number of known radio-isotopes exploded"
Ironic
Ironic or simply causal?
@@drmodestoesqdramatic irony, a favorite of english poets and bards
The higher neutron to proton count in high elements that LET them be stable, not what makes them unstable, the Protons are what push the nucleus apart so having neutrons present adds binding force without adding repulsive force. That's why the valley of stability bends down away from the line of equal protons and neutrons, and the statement 'atoms with more neutrons will decay by electron emmision' is incorrect because the valley of stability dose not follow the line of equality. What you ment to say is that isotopes below the valley of stability decay by electron emmission.
This is a great video - nicely paced and advanced enough that someone with some scientific education could follow.
Very good production and educational value, good job!
I remember my excitement when I arranged the known isotopes from a book from 1950s I found in the attic, and discovered that no stable isotopes are at the adiacent squares. I was 13 years old then.
And then, I discovered that Mattauch did the same but more than half a century before me. What a blow!
Anything can be radioactive if you shove enough neutrons into the nucleus.
Or take enough away (except hydrogen, deuterium, and tritium)
0:40 bro might actually be Minecraft Steve
The change of presenters keeps it interesting and entertaining, while also making it clear that it isn't one person that has done the work and research for this subject but rather a team. Great format.
All right then, let's rephrase the question ...
Why do Molybdenum and have so many overlapping stable isotopes (so as to prevent Technetium from having any) ?
It doesn't happen anywhere else on the periodic table.
This is still my question too.
How come this scenario - where no element has a most stable immediate surroundings on its isobar - happen with technetium, and only technetium?
Are there other sports that should be like this but aren't? That is another question: there is now more room for anomalies. 😋 Do all nuclides behave?
Overall though: amazing video
It has to do with odd numbers of protons being less stable than even numbers of protons. Most even numbered elements have far more stable isotopes than odd numbered elements, like tin has 10 stable isotopes while potassium (the odd-numbered element with the most isotopes) has only THREE. Technetium just got really unlucky.
@@nielskorpel8860 Promethium is in a similar situation to technetium. They even mention it in the video.
42. That's the answer. It's the answer to everything. (Molybdenum is the 42nd element on the periodic table)
Technically it's possible for two adjecent isobars to both be stable if they're mass difference is less than the electron mass
This is some high quality stuff, well explained and illustrated, to the point
0:33 blud really said "⛏⬛"
let steve cook
Where can I get that skin? I can’t find it anywhere on the marketplace.
Yeah they used the Random button in character creation for all these people
Took me a sec💀
What?
0:04, looks like there is one non radioactive element on the bottom row? Nt sure if i am missing something
That is the repesentationof actinoid which is represented at the bottom of the table
@@anonymousperson5853 think I get it, it's to make sure the table isn't too wide, thank you
@@MrSparkefrostie actually, fblock elements are situated at the bottom of the table (if you do not know what is that, then youll need to study quantum model of atom
@@MrSparkefrostie also yeah, they do that for a less wide table
I've usually seen it as just a gap in the table without a square there. I briefly thought they were suggesting that actinium had a stable isotope. The most stable isotope is 227Ac, which has a half-life of about 20 years. To put that into perspective, uranium-235 has a half-life of 700 MILLION years.
A shame the algorithm swooped you up 2 years after you guys stopped making videos.
Nice video. I really liked that you showed that this was a collaboration. If feels more like science that way :)
Great explanation guys!!!
Just came across this channel for the first time. Love the tag-team format! Y'all made a subject that would otherwise be boring super entertaining!
What happened to this channel?
Paraguayan SpecOps took them out, RIP
Love your guys tag team style makes me feel like what would happen if you started a youtube channel with good friends
nobody cares about promethium
Cry me a liver….
@@Mr2ronronly me a criver
He did mention prometium 3:48
I mean, I do. I care about promethium.
This video deserves more views snd likes. Well done!
I didn't even realise this was a school project video it was so good lol, hope you guys won
You did not include Bismuth as beeing radioactive...
It's was out gathering nectar for the hive.
this is lovely
Am I the only one who thought the guy at 0:54 sounds a bit like Lenval Brown in Disco Elysium?
UA-cam promotes this video right now
It’s cause of Terrence Howard despite how much criticism he’s getting we got to give him props for getting people to look at science again
It's so strange seeing the title of this video after all these years... I asked myself this very question over 10 years ago regarding element 43 and also element 61. In my opinion they seem to be outliers, as if something to take note of or a hint from the universe about how decay and stability works, and no one had a satisfying answer for me other than "because of its half-life 🤓" You have done a great deed for life-long learners and people like me 😶🌫 I will nominate you for a Nobel Peace Prize for this
Oldest and youngest brother, affecting the mental state of the middle brother
"Technetium is not a hat" - xkcd
Really interesting video, glad it got recommended
this video was the first time i noticed promethium was also an outlier
changes in speaker can be a useful trick to keep attention, but in this case it was too frequent and became tiresome to listen to. I couldn't personally continue the video. I think it's a good idea to decide natural break points, such as change speaker when there is a change of subtopic instead of mid sentence
These people fail to realise that there are multiple periodic tables. Each one was built organizing the elements based on selected characteristics. The one we most commonly use is based around electrons and the energy shells which is very useful for predicting chemical reactions. However, there are periodic tables that are arranged in fashions that would help understand the likelihood of any particular element being radioactive.
I really like the style of video where multiple share information with the viewer.
It would be cool if certain people shared specific categories of information though (or if it was more obvious and I missed it haha).
Not that it would have to be entirely strict or anything, but one person being "the history presenter" another being "the hypothesis presenter", and the final person being the "hypothesis scrutinizer" (for example) (probably per-video) would enable the viewer to use the current presenter as a shorthand/clue for what information they are receiving.
It would be as if each person is an expert on the topic, but coming from a different domain or perspective.
The periodic table shows Lawrencium as having a stable isotope. Is that correct?
What leads to the fact that the molybdenum and/or ruthenium isotopes 97 and 99 are more tightly bound than the corresponding technetium nuclei though? Or would it be a 5-hour video to explain 😄
Good video. Though I can't help but feel it's high school class project coded
The host keeps decaying into other hosts. Weird.
43 seems to be somewhat of a 13 division-wise: just a number but so many factors align such that 12 is divisible by 1,2,3,4,6 and none are left for 13 (as opposed to e.g. 21, 25, 27 which have a few)
That is incredible, thank you!!!
Hey man. Great videos and even better channel. But please invest in a better mic.
The periodic table looks a little bit weird with Lanthanum and Actinium in both the main table and the f block
And God said, Let Technetium be radioactive..... MUHAHAHAHA cough cough....
Engineering Angel #7: Ummm But why? It doesn't make sense. They'll figure it out and we'll have to scrap another one.
God: Look I make it up, and you figure out how to make it work. FWI, what do you think happened to the Engineering Angels 1 thru 6?
Actinium isn't stable, it's marked as stable on your table.
And Bismuth was observed to alpha decay in 2003.
bismuth's half-life is longer than the age of the universe so i'd say it's pretty stable
One thing I've always wondered is that when you have atoms with such a long half life, how is the half life determined? It seems like it should be impossible to empirically measure the half life by watching it decay l, which would mean we would need an alternate way to measure or even calculate the half life
Mfs in 10¹⁰⁰⁰⁰⁰years from now needing to crate every element cuz they all decayed
Good video! I think it is also very useful to visualise a nucleus decaying across the table of nuclides to see where the nearby stable nuclei are.
I wish the teachers of Newfoundland in the 80s and 90s were half as educated as these young folks here! My teachers didn't understand the material they were teaching so nothing was ever put into terms that a gifted individual could actually learn anything from.
Everytime I find a great channel it's already dead =/
2:23 me leaving the apple store with iphone 15 pro in my mouth
I'm not sure I understood the answear. Aren't the elements before it just fine with having neighbor elements on both sides more stable?
If I understood correctly, what they meant is that any isotope of Technetium that should be stable has another more stable neighbour with the same atomic mass which caused the technetium to decay, the reason why the other elements are fine having neighbour elements on both sides more stable is because they have other isotopes with no stable neighbour elements which allows them to have a non-radioactive isotope
The natural followup question is "ok, so why is technetium the only element that runs into this purported logical consequence?"
He didn't feel stable we need to support num43✊️😔
is that steve from minecraft with a white hoodie??
I have been wondering this for years now and I kept looking sometimes, trying to find an answer for why this specific element it radioactive. Thanks for finally giving me an answer ^^
Actually, our science shouldn't think Element 43 isn't radioactive.
Are atoms like group of people, more protons and neutrons and they start to argue and split to smaller groups? Sometimes nucleus only kick out trouble makers.
Ok but why did the second guy swallow a shovel
which of you really understood what he was talking about, and which not?
5:30 how did we meassure a massdefect?
Gets recommended an interesting video. 😁
Sees that it was uploaded 2 years ago.💀💀💀
what does this mean
@@penguinscanfly5796 NO MORE NEW VIDEOS FROM THE UA-camR/CHANNEL.
In german school configuration of electrons was discussed
Neither should element 61 be.
This is the first video I saw from your channel, and i really liked the way the presenters take turns throughout the video:)
Ok, could anyone please explain this to me?
They took the number of protons (Z), the number of neutrons (N) and the atomic weight (A), and checked whether each of those is odd or even. Then they said that "each stable isotope falls into one of 4 categories", as in "each stable isotope is inside one of those 4, and unstable isotopes are outside these categories". But the other 4 combinations of "odds" and "evens" are impossible from the fact that A = Z + N
Like you have radioactive Co-60 with even A, odd Z and odd N. And it is inside one of these 4 categories for which they claim to be for stable isotopes
I feel like this video doesn't really explain anything at all, the rule being used to justify Tc 97 and Tc 99 being unstable is just a consequence of the fact that they're unstable, it doesn't actually explain what physical phenomena causes the neighbouring Molybdenum and Ruthenium isotopes to be more stable than any Tc isotope (knowing that 2 very similar bricklaying isotopes can't both be stable only explains Tc being unstable if we take it on faith that Mo and Ru *must* be stable, when it would be equally valid for those Mo and Ru isotopes to be unstable and a Tc isotope to be the most stable point).
Thank you for the video but I found the swapping between multiple presenters to be off-putting and unnecessarily jarring.
Each presenter did a fine job but the amalgam simply was not beneficial in my opinion.
Peaceful Skies.
Great video
TWO PEOPLE INSTEAD OF ONE? Oh this is gonna be a lot easier to watch. Why is this channel not more popular?
wait 3?? O: that's so many
The jump cuts between presenters are a bit jarring.
I think this is because each person has a slightly different way of delivering their lines.
I think it'd work better if you either allowed each person to speak longer, or made each person's delivery a bit more cohesive.
Line delivery in general was also a bit stiff and unnatural. Comes off a little like reading or regurgitating, which makes it easier to lose the viewer's attention.
The frequent changing of the host is so distracting I can barely pay attention to the presented informAtion.
If the host was swapped maybe ⅓ or ¼ as often, I think it would work much better, and not chop up the flow.
Yeah well it is because of time turbulence and backflow and all forma of matter and eneger being some bastardized form of time, bro!! 🤣🤣🤣 -jk ...maybe...
perhaps the valley of stability only extends further under extreme conditions near or just beyond the event horizon? If time slows down for something near the event horizon perhaps that would allow novel conditions for the development of extremely large atoms?
Technically everything should be radioactive but the half life would be so inconceivably long that we would never be able to observe or detect any decay. Making it negligible and by our own standards "stable"
I had no idea Technitium was number 43, but looking at the image of the periodic table and seeing that one radioactive outlier I knew exactly what this was gonna be about
There is also Promethium. It has an isotope 147 which decays down to Samarium, which is close to "magicity."
A good, clear explanation, and I like the overall style of the video.
I would say the understanding of the atoms is not understood properly but close enough to explain things. guess i'm gonna have to get rid of my technICium bars
Nice one guys.
This was phenomenally well made, and answered a question I've had for a long time
.... I do not have the education level on this topic to understand more than the most basic ideas and concepts this video and paper discuss... and that is okay because you made it easy to understand the main points even for me. Good work.
A very good video, but not fully well defined; simple antineutrino emission is also radioactive. Do you mean fissile?
Element 43 IS radioactive - anything you want to argue about how that shouldn't be is just wrong.
0:48 with that fancy accent I could listen to any topic! :))
As a materials scientist, I was following.... Until I wasn't, and got drowned by chemistry 😅
The real question is "Why aren't there more "island of instability" elements?"