Element 118 Discovered Again--for the First Time

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

After claims of its discovery were retracted in 2002, a new team of researchers says it has produced a few scant atoms of the heaviest element yet, called simply element 118 after the number of protons in its nucleus. The discovery came after months of relentlessly bombarding heavy atoms onto a radioactive target and searching for distinctive chains of radioactive decays, the group reports. Confirmation of the finding, however, will come only when other groups have reproduced it.

In chemistry, elements having certain numbers of electrons are particularly stable. These are the noble gases: helium, neon, argon, krypton, xenon and radon. Similarly, elements having certain so-called magic numbers of protons or neutrons should also be especially stable. Examples include lead and tin. Based on the magic number 114, researchers believe there also exists a group of relatively stable heavy elements, called the island of stability, having roughly that many protons each. Experiments performed at Russia's Dubna, the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, had already turned up signs of elements 113 through 116.

To go further, the group began blasting a target of radioactive californium 249 (98 protons, 115 neutrons) with a beam of calcium 48 ions (20 protons, 28 neutrons). The collisions should occasionally fuse the two different elements into a single atom of 118 protons and 143 neutrons, which would lie in the periodic table column directly below radon. Element 118 would then decay into element 116 and lighter elements by emitting a series of alpha particles, each of which contains two protons. But even an element reasonably close to a magic number becomes much less stable at the high temperatures created by the collisions, explains team member Kenton Moody of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, so the group had to search through an enormous number of events.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Finally, after a total of four months spent in 2002 and 2005, the researchers observed three events that looked like decays of element 118, which showed a half-life of a millisecond, they report in the October Physical Review C. The signatures match up with prior studies of the decay of element 116, bolstering the claim for the heavier element, Moody says. "We're being as careful as we can," he notes. Four years ago physicist Victor Ninov was fired from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory for falsifying the data behind a previously reported discovery of element 118. "We worried about this a lot," Moody reflects. "We do what we can to minimize the problem. There is no one person who's responsible for the data analysis."

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe