# Talk:Isotopes of lithium

WikiProject Elements / Isotopes  (Rated List-class, Low-importance)
List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the quality scale.
Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

This article is part of Wikipedia:Wikiproject Isotopes. Please keep style and phrasings consistent across the set of pages. For later reference and improved reliability, data from all considered multiple sources is collected here. References are denoted by these letters:

• (A) G. Audi, O. Bersillon, J. Blachot, A.H. Wapstra. The Nubase2003 evaluation of nuclear and decay properties, Nuc. Phys. A 729, pp. 3-128 (2003). — Where this source indicates a speculative value, the # mark is also applied to values with weak assignment arguments from other sources, if grouped together. An asterisk after the A means that a comment of some importance may be available in the original.
• (B) National Nuclear Data Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory, information extracted from the NuDat 2.1 database. (Retrieved Sept. 2005, from the code of the popup boxes).
• (C) David R. Lide (ed.), Norman E. Holden in CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 85th Edition, online version. CRC Press. Boca Raton, Florida (2005). Section 11, Table of the Isotopes. — The CRC uses rounded numbers with implied uncertainties, where this concurs with the range of another source it is treated as exactly equal in this comparison.
• (D) More specific level data from reference B's Levels and Gammas database.
• (E) Same as B but excitation energy replaced with that from D.
  Z   N refs symbol   half-life                   spin              excitation energy
3   1 A   |Li-4    |91(9)E-24 s                |2-
3   1 B   |Li-4    |[6.03 MeV]                 |2-
3   1 C   |Li-4    |[6.0 MeV]                  |2-
3   2 A   |Li-5    |370(30)E-24 s              |3/2-
3   2 B   |Li-5    |[~1.5 MeV]                 |3/2-
3   2 C   |Li-5    |[1.2 MeV]                  |3/2-
3   3 ABC |Li-6    |STABLE                     |1+
3   4 ABC |Li-7    |STABLE                     |3/2-
3   5 A   |Li-8    |840.3(9) ms                |2+
3   5 BC  |Li-8    |838(6) ms                  |2+
3   6 ABC |Li-9    |178.3(4) ms                |3/2-
3   7 A   |Li-10   |2.0(5)E-21 s               |(1-,2-)
3   7 B   |Li-10   |[1.2(3) MeV]               |(1-,2-)
3   7 C   |Li-10   |[0.11(5) MeV]              |1+
3   8 A   |Li-11   |8.75(14) ms                |3/2-
3   8 B   |Li-11   |8.59(14) ms                |3/2-
3   8 C   |Li-11   |8.8 ms                     |3/2(-)
3   9 ABC |Li-12   |<10 ns                     |


Femto 15:30, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

## Separation method

The article states that large quantities of Lithium-6 has been produced for weapons, but it doesn't mention how lithium-6 enrichment is done. Does it use gas centrifuges like uranium, or does it do it more like deuterium?90.149.55.128 (talk) 19:58, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

## Talk

 This article was the subject of a previous vote for deletion. An archived record of the discussion can be found here. Redwolf24 (talk) 02:50, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Now, I understand why this page is being considered for deletion. However, take a look at the Isotopes of Hydrogen page. A majority of the information there could possibly be found in the main Hydrogen page. With some work, the Isotopes of Lithium page could have a fair amount of information. Nonetheless, if this page is deleted, I am quite alright with that, and I apologize. Enzo Aquarius 00:31, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

I don't see why this page was considered for deletion at all. Every element's page (other than a few of the very heaviest transuranic elements' pages, particularly the ones which have yet to acquire non-systematic names) has a corresponding "Isotopes of (element)" page. Even if the content isn't much, or some of it might be better off on the main Lithium page, it would introduce an unneeded inconsistency with the rest of the Isotopes category if it had been removed. Besides, I don't see the Isotopes pages for more obscure, less practically important elements (e.g., Isotopes of ytterbium) receiving similar treatment ... I'm surprised the vote for deletion was requested at all, and equally unsurprised that the only votes were for Redirect or Keep. Amarande 16:33, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

## Uh, Lithium-3?!

Wouldn't this be a triproton? And isn't that impossible? Reyk 22:45, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

No idea. The reference for the mass is Audi/Wapstra, and it is properly marked as systematic data here. Femto 16:05, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
OK then. Reyk 21:07, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

## Mergein Lithium-4 article

The Lithium-4 article is so tiny, and little referenced, I propose it is merged into this article. Lithium-4 would then be redirected here. Any objections? Rwendland 03:22, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Not from me. Femto 13:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

## Conflicting half-life values

At the top of the Lithium isotope article, I see a different half-life value than that which is displayed at the bottom. The chart says 9.1x10^-23s whereas the number at the top says 7.6x10-23. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.226.179.224 (talk) 04:41, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

## mean free path

The vacuum distillation section says that Li-6 has a greater mean free path (than Li-7). However, the mean free path (of an ideal gas) does not depend on the speed or mass of the particles.

${\displaystyle \lambda ={{kT} \over {{\sqrt {2}}\sigma p}}}$,

where k is the Boltzmann constant, T is temperature, σ is collision cross-section, p is pressure.

Since Li-6 is lighter, it most probably evaporates faster than Li-7 (since equal kinetic energy results in larger speed for Li-6, more Li-6 atoms are fast enough to escape), but it has nothing to do with mean free path. Szaszicska, from huwiki --22:56, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

## Nuclear binding energy

I just added this sentence to the isotopes section of the main Lithium article and to the intro. paragraph of this article: "Both natural isotopes have anomalously low nuclear binding energy per nucleon compared to the next lighter and heavier elements Helium and Beryllium, which means that alone among stable light elements, Lithium can produce net energy through nuclear fission."

The History section of the nuclear fission article says that the first entirely artificial fission was achieved by bombarding lithium with a proton beam. I suppose technically that would briefly transmute the Li-7 (which formed most of the target) to Be-8 before it decayed into two alpha particles, but there is still a fair case to be made that Lithium-7 was the first nucleus to be artificially split. Enon (talk) 16:51, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Seeing as how this fission reaction could be achieved was discovered by Cockcroft and Wilson in 1929, Why isn"t it considered as a way to achieve a commercial nuclear fission process?WFPM (talk) 23:31, 22 March 2010 (UTC) Also, if an amount of Li-7 is placed into a neutron flux chamber, will it result in any amount of production of helium gas (plus energy) which could be piped out of the chamber?WFPM (talk) 16:46, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

## Lithium enrichment details by using colex

recommended for reference and details infos, indeed, seriously, free for download document and e-book.pdf

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bbpc.19660700610/abstract?systemMessage=Wiley+Online+Library+will+be+disrupted+6+Aug+from+10-12+BST+for+monthly+maintenance

http://www.iaea.org/inis/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/19/035/19035202.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.79.52.18 (talk) 14:32, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

## Lithium-7

"The lithium that is left over from the production of (the desirable) lithium-6, which is enriched in lithium-7 and depleted in lithium-6, has been sold commercially, and some of it has been released into the environment."

Could somebody with a background in the matter take a look at this sentence to clarify the meaning? Something isn't right, to this layman's eyes at least.

What, precisely, is the antecedent of "which"? If it's "leftover lithium," then the clause seems to say that leftover lithium from the production of lithium-6 is enriched in lithium-7 and depleted in lithium-6. If it's "lithium-6," then the clause seems to say that Li-6 is enriched in Li-7 and depleted in Li-6.

There's probably a simple fix to clarify the meaning, but as written the sentence is a bit dizzying.Tito john (talk) 01:04, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

There is need of Li6 to produce Tritium and Li7 to use in PWRs ([1]) and in MSR (molten salt reactors). So, there is both market for Li6 (limited, linked with military applications) and Li7 (Russia produces, China produces and uses in MSR tests, and US buys). a5b (talk) 04:36, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Isotopes of lithium. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request>` on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot 14:15, 15 April 2017 (UTC)