Discovery of the Copper Isotopes
K. Garofali, M. Thoennessen∗
National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory and
Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University,
East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
Abstract
Twenty-six copper isotopes have so far been observed; the discovery of these isotopes is discussed. For each isotope a
brief summary of the first refereed publication, including the production and identification method, is presented.
∗ Corresponding
author.
Email address: [email protected] (M. Thoennessen)
Preprint submitted to Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables
April 29, 2010
Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2. Discovery of
55−80
2
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
2.1.
55,56
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
2.2.
57
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
2.3.
58
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
2.4.
59,60
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
2.5.
61
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
2.6.
62
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
2.7.
63
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
2.8.
64
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
2.9.
65
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
2.10.
66
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
2.11.
67
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
2.12.
68
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
2.13.
69
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
2.14.
70
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
2.15.
71−73
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
2.16.
74
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
2.17.
75
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
2.18.
76,77
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
2.19.
78,79
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
2.20.
80
Cu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
3. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9
Explanation of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Table
1.
Discovery of Copper Isotopes. See page 11 for Explanation of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1. Introduction
The discovery of the copper isotopes is discussed as part of the series of the discovery of isotopes which began with
the cerium isotopes in 2009 [1]. The purpose of this series is to document and summarize the discovery of the isotopes.
Guidelines for assigning credit for discovery are (1) clear identification, either through decay-curves and relationships
to other known isotopes, particle or γ-ray spectra, or unique mass and Z-identification, and (2) publication of the
discovery in a refereed journal. The authors and year of the first publication, the laboratory where the isotopes were
produced as well as the production and identification methods are discussed. When appropriate, references to conference
2
proceedings, internal reports, and theses are included. When a discovery includes a half-life measurement the measured
value is compared to the currently adopted value taken from the NUBASE evaluation [2] which is based on the ENSDF
database [3].
2. Discovery of
55−80
Cu
Twentysix copper isotopes from A = 55 − 80 have been discovered so far; these include 2 stable, 9 proton-rich and 15
neutron-rich isotopes. According to the HFB-14 model [4],
92
Cu should be the last odd-odd particle stable neutron-rich
nucleus while the odd-even particle stable neutron-rich nuclei should continue through
rich long-lived cobalt isotope because
54
103
Cu.
55
Cu is the most proton-
Cu has been shown to be unbound with an upper half-life limit of 75 ns [5].
About 18 isotopes have yet to be discovered corresponding to 41% of all possible copper isotopes.
Figure 1 summarizes the year of first discovery for all copper isotopes identified by the method of discovery. The
range of isotopes predicted to exist is indicated on the right side of the figure. The radioactive copper isotopes were
produced using deep-inelastic reactions (DI), heavy-ion fusion-evaporation (FE), light-particle reactions (LP), neutroninduced fission (NF), charged-particle induced fission (CPF), photo nuclear reactions (PN), spallation (SP), and projectile
fragmentation of fission (PF). The stable isotope was identified using mass spectroscopy (MS). Heavy ions are all nuclei
with an atomic mass larger than A=4 [6]. Light particles also include neutrons produced by accelerators. In the following,
the discovery of each copper isotope is discussed in detail.
2.1.
55,56
Cu
The 1987 paper “Direct Observation of New Proton Rich Nuclei in the Region 23≤Z≤29 Using A 55A·MeV
Beam”, reported the first observation of
55
Cu and
56
Cu by Pougheon et al. [7]. The fragmentation of a 55 A·MeV
58
Ni
58
Ni
beam at GANIL on nickel and aluminum targets was used to produce proton-rich isotopes which were separated with
the LISE spectrometer. Energy loss, time of flight, and magnetic rigidity measurements were made. “The spectra show
evidence for
2.2.
57
56
Cu and
55
Cu (1420 and 75 events respectively).”
Cu
Vieira et al. reported the observation of excited states of
Beta-Delayed Proton Precursor Series to
57
Cu in 1976 in the paper “Extension of the Tz = −3/2
Zn” [8]. The Berkeley 88-in. cyclotron accelerated
MeV which then bombarded calcium targets and
57
57
57
20
Ne beams to 62 and 70
Zn was produced in the fusion-evaporation reaction
40
Ca(20 Ne,3n).
Cu was then populated by β-decay and delayed protons were measured with a semiconducting counter telescope. “The
groups observed at 4.65 MeV and 1.95 MeV can be assigned to the isospin-forbidden proton decay of the lowest T=3/2
state of
2.3.
58
58
57
Cu to the ground state and the first excited state of
56
Ni, respectively.”
Cu
Cu was measured by Martin and Breckon in 1952 as described in “The New Radioactive Isotopes Vanadium 46,
Manganese 50, Cobalt 54” [9]. Nickel foils were bombarded with 15 MeV protons from the McGill cyclotron and 58 Cu was
formed in (p,n) charge-exchange reactions. Activation measurements were performed with a pneumatic target extractor
and a scintillation counter. “Analysis of the photographs gave the mean values of 0.873 sec. and 3.04 sec. respectively for
3
110
100
Mass Number (A)
90
Fusion Evaporation Reactions (FE)
Light Particle Reactions (LP)
Mass Spectroscopy (MS)
Neutron Fission (NF)
Photo Nuclear Reactions (PN)
Spallation (SP)
Deep Inelastic (DI)
Projectile Fission or Fragmentation (PF)
Charged Particle Fission (CPF)
Undiscovered, predicted to be bound
80
70
60
50
1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Year Discovered
Fig. 1: Copper isotopes as a function of time when they were discovered. The different production methods are indicated. The solid black
squares on the right hand side of the plot are isotopes predicted to be bound by the HFB-14 model.
4
the half lives of Sc41 and Cu58 .” This value for the half-life agrees with the presently accepted value of 3.204(7) s. The
measurement of 58 Cu was not considered a new discovery and only used as a check of the method and a data compilation
was quoted [10]. However, this compilation only referred to a private communication. Previous reports of half-lives of
80(2) s [11], 81(2) s [12], and 10 min [13] could not be confirmed. The first two half-lives most likely corresponded to
59
Cu.
2.4.
59,60
Cu
Leith et al. reported the discoveries of
59
Cu and
60
Cu in the 1947 paper “Radioactivity of Cu60 ” [13]. Protons
from 5 to 15 MeV from the Berkeley 37-in. frequency-modulated cyclotron bombarded separated
58
Ni and
60
Ni targets.
Activities were measured with an ionization chamber and Ryerson-Lindemann electrometer. “The 81-second and 7.9minute positron activities produced by proton bombardment of Ni, observed by Delsasso, et al., and tentatively assigned
to either Cu58 or Cu60 , correspond to 81-second and 10-minute activities after bombarding Ni58 with protons in the
37-in. cyclotron. These are tentatively assigned to Cu59 and Cu58 , respectively, on the basis of threshold and excitation
considerations.” This 81 s half-life for
for
58
59
Cu agrees with the currently accepted value of 81.5(5), however, the half-life
Cu was not verified. “Chemical separation of normal nickel targets after bombardment with 15-Mev and 6-Mev
protons into Cu, Ni, and Co fractions, accomplished within one hour, showed in each case that more than 99 percent of
the 24.6-minute activity followed the Cu-separation chemistry. Mass separation in a calutron accomplished within one
hour of the proton bombardment, showed without question that this activity belonged to Cu60 .” This half-life is part of
the weighted average that comprises the currently accepted value of 23.7(4) min. The previous tentative assignments of
7.9 min to
2.5.
61
60
Cu [11, 12] could not be confirmed.
Cu
In 1937 Ridenour and Henderson discovered
61
Cu, which they outlined in their paper “Artificial Radioactivity Pro-
duced by Alpha-Particles” [14]. Alpha particles accelerated to 9 MeV by the Princeton cyclotron bombarded nickel
targets and
61
Cu was produced in the reaction
58
Ni(α,p). The positron emissions were measured through their absorp-
tion in aluminum and the element assignment was achieved by chemical separation. “The half life of Cu61 is 3.4±0.1
hours; both the half-life and the upper limit of the beta-ray spectrum agree with the values determined by Thornton
for the same radioelement obtained in the bombardment of Ni with deuterons.” This half-life agrees with the presently
accepted value of 3.333(5) h. In the quoted paper by Thornton, no mass assignment for the measured half-life was made
[15].
2.6.
62
Cu
Heyn published his discovery of
62
Cu in the 1936 paper “Evidence for the Expulsion of Two Neutrons from Copper
and Zinc by One Fast Neutron” [16]. Fast neutrons produced in the Li + 2 H reaction bombarded a copper target at
the X-Ray Research Laboratory in Eindhoven, Netherlands. Decay curves were measured following chemical separation.
“An investigation of the particles emitted by copper (10.5-minute period) by means of magnetic deflection in vacuo
and a Geiger-Müller counter proved these to be positrons... From these data we may infer that the following reactions
take place with fast neutrons:
63
Cu + 1 n →62 Cu + 2 1 n,
62
Cu →62 Ni + e+ .” The measured half-life of 10.5(5) min is
consistent with the current value of 9.673(8) min. A previous report of a stable 62 Cu isotope [17] could not be confirmed.
5
2.7.
63
Cu
In the paper entitled “The Mass-spectrum of Copper” Aston published the discovery of
63
Cu in 1923 [18]. Mass
spectra were taken with cuprous chloride in the accelerated anode method. “The lines are faint, but their evidence is
conclusive since they appear at the expected positions 63 and 65 and have the intensity ratio, about 2.5 to 1, predicted
from the chemical atomic weight 63.57.”
2.8.
64
Cu
Van Voorhis reported the discovery of
64
Cu in the 1936 paper “The Artificial Radioactivity of Copper, a Branch
Reaction” [19]. Copper targets were bombarded with 5 to 6 MeV deuterons accelerated with the Berkeley “magnetic
resonance accelerator or cyclotron.” The activities were measured with a pressure ionization chamber and FP-54 Pliotron.
The upper boundaries of energy were studied, as well as absorption curves for the positron and electron activities that
were analyzed from data taken in an ionization chamber. “...the half-life of both positron and electron activities was
found to be exactly the same, a more exact measurement giving the value 12.8±0.1 hours.” This half-life measurement
is in accordance with the accepted value of 12.701(2) h. A previous report of a stable
64
Cu isotope [17] could not be
confirmed.
2.9.
65
Cu
In the paper entitled “The Mass-spectrum of Copper” Aston published the discovery of
65
Cu in 1923 [18]. Mass
spectra were taken with cuprous chloride in the accelerated anode method. “The lines are faint, but their evidence is
conclusive since they appear at the expected positions 63 and 65 and have the intensity ratio, about 2.5 to 1, predicted
from the chemical atomic weight 63.57.”
2.10.
66
Cu
In 1937 Chang et al. described the observation of 66 Cu in “Radioactivity Produced by Gamma Rays and Neutrons of
High Energy” [20]. Deuterons accelerated by a voltage of 520 kV were used to produce neutrons: “In gallium bombarded
with neutrons from lithium + deuterons and boron + deuterons a new radioactivity decaying with a half-period of about
5 min. and having an intensity similar to that of the 60 min. period has been found. As this period seems to be identical
with one of the periods produced in copper by neutron capture, it is probably due to
reaction:
66
31 Ga
66
Cu, formed according to the
4
+ 10 n →66
29 Cu + 2 He.” This half-life agrees with the currently accepted value of 5.120(14) min. The
neutron capture measurement on copper mentioned in the quote refers to a paper by Amaldi et al. who had reported the
5 min half-life without a mass assignment [21]. In 1936 Van Voorhis had suggested that this half-life would correspond
to
66
Cu based on his measurement of
2.11.
67
64
Cu. A previous report of a stable
66
Cu isotope [17] could not be confirmed.
Cu
The discovery of 67 Cu was reported by Goeckermann and Perlman in the 1948 publication “Characteristics of Bismuth
Fission with High Energy Particles” [22]. 200 MeV deuterons from the 184-in Berkeley cyclotron were used to produced
fragments from the fission of bismuth. “The following is a list of bismuth fission products which were identified in
the present studies (references are given for isotopes which only recently appeared in the literature or which have been
hitherto unreported): Ca45 , Fe59 , Ni66 , Cu67 ...” The half-life of
6
67
Cu is given in a footnote: “A 56-hr. β − -emitter
tentatively assigned to Cu67 on the basis of the mode of disintegration and half-life.” This half-life is close to the
currently adopted value of 61.83(12) h. Less than a month later Hopkins et al. published the observation of
67
Cu
independently [23].
2.12.
68
68
Cu
Cu was observed by Flammersfeld in 1953 and reported in “68 Cu, ein neues Kupfer-Isotop mit T = 32 sec Halb-
wertszeit” [24]. Fast neutrons produced by the bombardment of 1.4 MeV deuterons on lithium irradiated zinc targets
and the activity was measured with 100 µ Geiger-Müller counters. “Bei der Bestrahlung von Zink mit energiereichen
Neutronen (Li + D-Neutronen, ED = 1.4 MeV) tritt eine neue Halbwertszeit on T = 32±2 sec auf...” [The irradiation of
zinc with energetic neutrons (Li + D-neutrons, Ed = 1.4 MeV) results in a new half-life of T = 32±2 s...] This half-life
is included in the current average value of 31.1(15) s.
2.13.
69
Cu
Van Klinken et al. published the discovery of
69
Cu in the 1966 paper “Decay of a New Isotope: Cu69 ” [25].
Bremsstrahlung from the 70-MeV Iowa State synchrotron irradiated enriched
70
Zn targets. Beta- and gamma-ray
spectra were recorded to identify 69 Cu produced in photo-nuclear reactions. “The half-life of Cu69 was first measured by
following the decay rate for different parts of the beta-ray spectrum and for prominent lines in the NaI(Tl) gamma-ray
spectrum. Our estimate from these data is T1/2 = 2.8±0.3 min.” This half-life is part of the weighted average for the
accepted value of 2.85(15) min.
2.14.
70
Cu
In 1971
70
Cu was first observed by Taff et al. in “The Decays of
70a
Cu,
3
70b
Cu and
67
Ni” [26]. Enriched
70
Zn
4
metal bead was bombarded with 14-MeV neutrons produced in the reaction He(d,n) He from the Oak Ridge CockcroftWalton cascade generator.
70
Cu was produced in the (n,p) charge exchange reaction and identified by β- and γ-ray were
measuremensts with plastic, Na(Tl) scintillators and Ge(Li) detectors. “Three activities with half-lives of 5±1 s, 42±3 s
and 18±4 s, have been assigned to two ismers of 70 Cu [from 70 Zn(n,p)], and to 67 Ni [from 70 Zn(n,α)], respectively.” The
5±1 s half-life corresponds to an isomer and the 42±3 s half-life is consistent with the presently accepted value for the
ground state of 44.5(2) s.
2.15.
71−73
Cu
Runte et al. reported the discovery of 71 Cu,
72
Cu, and 73 Cu in 1983: “Decay Studies of Neutron-Rich Products from
76
Ge Induced Multinucleon Transfer Reactions Including the New Isotopes 62 Mn, 63 Fe, and 71,72,73 Cu” [27]. A 9 MeV/u
76
Ge beam from the GSI UNILAC accelerator was used to bombard a natural W target. Deep inelastic reaction were
produced in a graphite catcher inside a FEBIAD-E ion source and the copper isotopes were identified with an on-line
mass separator. “In addition to the known nuclides of the elements chromium through germanium with A=56-75, we
identified the decays of
62
Mn,
63
Fe, and
71,72,73
Cu, of which only
63
Fe was known from direct particle-identification
measurements to be bound.” The following half-lives were obtained for 71−73 Cu, respectively: 19.5(16), 6.6(1) and 3.9(3)
s. The value for
71
Cu is the currently accepted half-life. The half-life measurement for
accepted value of 6.63(3) s. The half-life given for
73
72
Cu is in agreement with the
Cu is used in the calculation of the weighted average of the currently
accepted value of 4.2(3) s.
7
74
2.16.
Cu
In the 1987 paper “Identification of the New-Neutron Rich Isotopes 70−74 Ni and 74−77 Cu in Thermal Neutron Fission
of
235
U” Armbruster et al. described the discovy of
fragments from thermal neutron induced fission of
235
74
Cu [28]. At the Institut Laue-Langevin in Grenoble, France,
U were analyzed in the LOHENGRIN recoil separator. “Events
associated with different elements are well enough separated to show unambiguously the occurrence of the isotopes
70−74
Ni and
2.17.
75
74−77
Cu among other isotopes already known.”
Cu
Reeder et al. announced the discovery of
235
Fragments from neutron-induced fission of
75
Cu in 1985 as described in “Delayed neutron precursor
75
Cu” [29].
U were extracted from a FEBIAD ion source at Brookhaven and 75 Cu was
separated and identified with the TRISTAN on-line isotope separator facility. “A new delayed neutron precursor with
a half-life of 1.3±0.1 s has been observed at mass 75... Mass formula and fission yield predictions indicate that
75
Cu is
the most likely precursor.” This half-life is consistent with the presently adopted value of 1.224(3) s.
2.18.
76,77
Cu
In the 1987 paper “Identification of the New-Neutron Rich Isotopes 70−74 Ni and 74−77 Cu in Thermal Neutron Fission
of
235
U” Armbruster et al. described the discovery of
76
Cu and
France, fragments from thermal neutron induced fission of
235
77
Cu [28]. At the Institut Laue-Langevin in Grenoble,
U were analyzed in the LOHENGRIN recoil separator.
“Events associated with different elements are well enough separated to show unambiguously the occurrence of the
isotopes
2.19.
70−74
78,79
Ni and
74−77
Cu among other isotopes already known.”
Cu
The discoveries of
“waiting-point” nuclei
78
Cu and
79
29 Cu50
79
and
Cu were reported by Kratz et al. in “Neutron-rich isotopes around the r -process
80
30 Zn50 ”
in 1991 [30]. A
238
UC-graphite target was irradiated with 600 MeV protons
from the CERN synchro-cyclotron and the fragments were separated and identified with the CERN ISOLDE on-line
mass separator. The observation of
78
Cu was not considered new quoting a previous conference proceeding [31] and the
measured half-life is only listed in a table as 342(11) ms. “As an example, [the figure] shows a typical multiscaling curve
for A = 79, after subtraction of the 2.85 s
79
Ga component. Clearly, two short-lived βdn activities are seen,
T1/2 ' 1 s and the new N = 50 ‘waiting-point’ nucleus
188 ± 25 ms were obtained for
78
Cu and
79
79
79
Zn with
Cu with T1/2 = (188±25) ms.” Half-lives of 342 ± 11 ms and
Cu, respectively. The half-life measured for
average for the currently accepted value of 335(11) ms and the half-life obtained for
79
78
Cu is included in the weighted
Cu corresponds to the presently
accepted value.
2.20.
80
Cu
In 1995 Engelmann et al. reported the discovery of
Evidence for the Doubly Magic Nucleus
78
28 Ni”
[32].
synchrotron SIS at GSI to an energy of 750 A-MeV.
80
80
238
Cu in “Production and Identification of Heavy Ni Isotopes:
U ions were accelerated in the UNILAC and the heavy-ion
Cu was produced by projectile fission, separated in-flight by the
FRS and identified event-by-event by measuring magnetic rigidity, energy loss and time of flight. “For a total dose of
1013 U ions delivered in 132 h on the target three events can be assigned to the isotope
8
78
Ni. Other new nuclei,
77
Ni,
73,74,75
of
80
Co and 80 Cu can be identified, the low count rate requires a background-free measurement.” A total of four events
Cu were observed.
3. Summary
The discoveries of the known copper isotopes have been compiled and the methods of their production discussed.
The predicted proton dripline has been reached and it might be possible to observed two additional long-lived isotopes
beyond the proton dripline. The identification of the proton rich isotopes has been difficult. The half-lives of
66
61
Cu and
Cu had been measured initially without a firm mass assignment. The first half-lives of measurements of 58 Cu and 60 Cu
were incorrect and the half-life of
59
Cu was at first assigned to
58
Cu. In addition,
62
Cu,
64
Cu and
66
Cu were initially
incorrectly identified as stable isotopes.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under grant No. PHY06-06007 (NSCL).
References
[1] G. Q. Ginepro, J. Snyder, M. Thoennessen, At. Data. Nucl. Data. Tables 95 (2009) 805.
[2] G. Audi, O. Bersillon, J. Blachot, A. H. Wapstra, Nucl. Phys. A 729 (2003) 3.
[3] ENSDF, Evaluated Nuclear Structure Data File, maintained by the National Nuclear Data Center at Brookhaven
National Laboratory, published in Nuclear Data Sheets (Academic Press, Elsevier Science).
[4] S. Goriely, M. Samyn, J. M. Pearson, Phys. Rev. C 75 (2007) 064312.
[5] B. Blank, S. Andriamonje, R. D. Moral, J. P. Dufour, A. Fleury, T. Josso, M. S. Pravikoff, S. Czajkowski, Z. Janas,
A. Piechaczek, E. Roeckl, K.-H. Schmidt, K. Sümmerer, W. Trinder, M. Weber, T. Brohm, A. Grewe, E. Hanelt,
A. Heinz, A. Jonghans, C. Röhl, S. Steinhäuser, B. Voss, M. Pfützner, Phys. Rev. C 50 (1994) 2398.
[6] H. A. Grunder, F. Selph, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Sci. 27 (1977) 353.
[7] F. Pougheon, J. C. Jacmart, E. Quiniou, R. Anne, D. Bazin, V. Borrel, J. Galin, D. Guerreau, D. GuillemaudMueller, A. C. Mueller, E. Roeckl, M. G. Saint-Laurent, C. Detraz, Z. Phys. A 327 (1987) 17.
[8] D. J. Vieira, D. F. Sherman, M. S. Zisman, R. A. Gough, J. Cerny, Phys. Lett. B 60 (1976) 261.
[9] W. M. Martin, S. W. Breckon, Can. J. Phys. 30 (1952) 643.
[10] National Bureau of Standards (U.S.), Nuclear Data, Circ. 499, N.B.S., Washington 1950.
[11] L. Ridenour, L. A. Delsasso, M. G. White, R. Sherr, Phys. Rev. 53 (1938) 770.
[12] L. A. Delsasso, L. Ridenour, R. Sherr, M. G. White, Phys. Rev. 55 (1939) 113.
[13] C. E. Leith, A. Bratenahl, B. J. Moyer, Phys. Rev. 72 (1947) 732.
[14] L. N. Ridenour, W. J. Henderson, Phys. Rev. 52 (1937) 889.
[15] F. R. Thorton, Phys. Rev. 51 (1937) 893.
9
[16] F. A. Heyn, Nature 138 (1936) 723.
[17] A. J. Dempster, Nature 112 (1923) 7.
[18] F. W. Aston, Nature 112 (1923) 162.
[19] S. N. V. Voorhis, Phys. Rev. 50 (1936) 895.
[20] W. Y. Chang, M. Goldhaber, R. Sagane, Nature 139 (1937) 962.
[21] E. Amaldi, O. D’Agostino, F. Rasetti, E. Segre, Proc. Roy. Soc. A 149 (1935) 522.
[22] R. H. Goeckermann, I. Perlman, Phys. Rev. 73 (1948) 1127.
[23] H. H. Hopkins Jr., B. B. Cunningham, Phys. Rev. 73 (1948) 1406.
[24] A. Flammersfeld, Z. Naturforsch. 8a (1953) 274.
[25] J. V. Klinken, A. J. . Bureau, G. W. Eakins, R. J. Hanson, Phys. Rev. 150 (1966) 886.
[26] L. M. Taff, B. K. S. Koene, J. van Klinken, Nucl. Phys. A 164 (1971) 565.
[27] E. Runte, W.-D. Schmidt-Ott, P. Tidemand-Petersson, R. Kirchner, O. Klepper, W. Kurcewicz, E. Roeckl, N. Kaffrell, P. Peuser, K. Rykaczewski, M. Bernas, P. Dessagne, M. Langevin, Nucl. Phys. A 399 (1983) 163.
[28] P. Armbruster, M. Bernas, J. P. . Bocquet, R. Brissot, H. R. Faust, P. Roussel, Europhys. Lett. 4 (1987) 793.
[29] P. L. Reeder, R. A. Warner, R. M. Liebsch, R. L. Gill, A. Piotrowski, Phys. Rev. C 31 (1985) 1029.
[30] K.-L. Kratz, H. Gabelmann, P. Moller, B. Pfeiffer, H. L. Ravn, A. Wohr, the ISOLDE Collaboration, Z. Phys. A
340 (1991) 419.
[31] E. Lund, B. Ekström, B. Fogelberg, G. Rudstam, AIP Conf. Proc. 164 (1988) 578.
[32] C. Engelmann, F. Ameil, P. Armbruster, M. Bernas, S. Czajkowski, P. Dessagne, C. Donzaud, H. Geissel, A. Heinz,
Z. Janas, C. Kozhuharov, C. Miehé, G. Münzenberg, M. Pfützner, C. Röhl, W. Schwab, C. Stéphan, K. Sümmerer,
L. Tassan-Got, B. Voss, Z. Phys. A 352 (1995) 351.
10
Explanation of Tables
Table 1. Discovery of copper isotopes
Isotope
Copper isotope
Author
First author of refereed publication
Journal
Journal of publication
Ref.
Reference
Method
Production method used in the discovery:
FE: Fusion Evaporation
LP: Light-Particle Reactions (including neutrons)
MS: Mass Spectroscopy
SP: Spallation
PN: Photo Nuclear Reactions
PF: Projectile Fission or Fragmentation
NF: Neutron Induced Fission
DI: Deep Inelastic Reactions
CPF: Charged-Particle Induced Fission
Laboratory
Laboratory where the experiment was performed
Country
Country of laboratory
Year
Year of discovery
11
Table 1
Discovery of Copper Isotopes. See page 11 for Explanation of Tables
Isotope
55 Cu
56 Cu
57 Cu
58 Cu
59 Cu
60 Cu
61 Cu
62 Cu
63 Cu
64 Cu
65 Cu
66 Cu
67 Cu
68 Cu
69 Cu
70 Cu
71 Cu
72 Cu
73 Cu
74 Cu
75 Cu
76 Cu
77 Cu
78 Cu
79 Cu
80 Cu
Author
Journal
Ref.
Method
Laboratory
Country
Year
F. Pougheon
F. Pougheon
D.J. Vieira
W.M. Martin
C.E. Leith
C.E. Leith
L.N. Ridenour
F.A. Heyn
F.W. Aston
S.N. Van Voorhis
F.W. Aston
W.Y. Chang
R.H. Goeckermann
A. Flammersfeld
J. van Klinken
L.M. Taff
E. Runte
E. Runte
E. Runte
P. Armbruster
P.L. Reeder
P. Armbruster
P. Armbruster
K.-L. Kratz
K.-L. Kratz
Ch. Engelmann
Z. Phys. A
Z. Phys. A
Phys. Lett. B
Can. J. Phys.
Phys. Rev.
Phys. Rev.
Phys. Rev.
Nature
Nature
Phys. Rev.
Nature
Nature
Phys. Rev.
Z. Naturforsch.
Phys. Rev.
Nucl. Phys. A
Nucl. Phys. A
Nucl. Phys. A
Nucl. Phys. A
Europhys. Lett.
Phys. Rev. C
Europhys. Lett.
Europhys. Lett.
Z. Phys. A
Z. Phys. A
Z. Phys. A
[7]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[13]
[13]
[14]
[16]
[18]
[19]
[18]
[20]
[22]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[27]
[27]
[28]
[29]
[28]
[28]
[30]
[30]
[32]
PF
PF
FE
LP
LP
LP
LP
LP
MS
LP
MS
LP
CPF
LP
PN
LP
DI
DI
DI
NF
NF
NF
NF
SP
SP
PF
GANIL
GANIL
Berkeley
McGill
Berkeley
Berkeley
Princeton
Eindhoven
Cambridge
Berkeley
Cambridge
Cambridge
Berkeley
Mainz
Iowa State
Oak Ridge
Darmstadt
Darmstadt
Darmstadt
Grenoble
Brookhaven
Grenoble
Grenoble
CERN
CERN
Darmstadt
France
France
USA
Canada
USA
USA
USA
Netherlands
UK
USA
UK
UK
USA
Germany
USA
USA
Germany
Germany
Germany
France
USA
France
France
Switzerland
Switzerland
Germany
1987
1987
1976
1952
1947
1947
1937
1936
1923
1936
1923
1937
1948
1953
1966
1971
1983
1983
1983
1987
1985
1987
1987
1991
1991
1995
12