Talk:Isotope separation

message: "To date large-scale commercial isotope separation has occurred of only three elements."
Any source for this claim? I know of at least one other, Boron, as boron-10 is preferable to boron-11 as a neutron absorber for use as a reactor posion in nuclear fuel. 136.159.234.163 21:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To my knowledge, the world market for 13C is around 40 kg/year, more than half for medical use (see 13C breath test). Is this a large quantity? Some other elements are used also in kg/year quantities. Dolorpiedo (talk) 18:02, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which elements are separated at commercial levels 

message: I changed Centripetal to Centrifugal because:
1. Less confusion with the way things are named. 
2. The difference is basically only which way you are facing. 
3. The only reason I could see to use centripetal to begin with was intellectual snobbery.
=== Problem with dating.
The following statement from the article has a problem in that the Manhattan project was during WWII, which was definately not before 1936.
"The centrifugal separation of isotopes was first suggested by Aston and Lindemann[2] in 1919 but attempts to use the technology during the Manhattan project were unproductive and not until 1936 were the first successful experiments reported by Beams and Haynes[3] on isotopes of chlorine."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.167.89.139 (talk) 16:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Centripetal/ Centrifugal 

message: which will also require enriched uranium as a fuel describing plutonium production reactors. Ummm, sorry, that's complete and utter rubbish. For example, the UK, France, and North Korea (and probably others, I don't know the details) all produced their first plute bombs using natural uranium fueled, graphite moderated reactors. No isotopic separation required, that's the atraction of that technology. Andrewa (talk) 13:34, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed inaccurate text

message: just what theory of Charles Townes is being talked about in the intro?76.218.104.120 (talk) 04:41, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed it. The statement was unsourced, unclear, and most likely elaborating further about a field where isotope separation is not used, so undue in the lede of this article. — HHHIPPO 08:17, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: that's an improvement, but this is still below the quality of a B article.76.218.104.120 (talk) 13:28, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: cancel that, the intro colored my opinion. This article isn't so bad.76.218.104.120 (talk) 13:30, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: this is a B article?

message: Pb-208 has an even lower neutron capture cross section than natural lead, and other more subtle nuclear properties that have led to it being called the ultimate fast reactor coolant, and it's also interesting for other classes of reactor.
http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs-wm/28075.pdf has some details (but not that exact quote, that's from my father Keith Alder who was a nuclear engineer and very interested in lead coolants).
So when nuclear engineers speak of separated lead they generally mean lead enriched in Pb-208. Or rather, lead rich in Pb-208, since it's most easily obtained from Thorium ores (up to 90% Pb-208) which means it's neither enriched nor separated, strictly speaking.
The book Application of Stable Lead Isotope Pb-208 in Nuclear Power Engineering and its Acquisition Techniques  would be another good source. Andrewa (talk) 01:53, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separated lead 

message: There is perhaps room for fleshing out the types, might not matter after re-reading.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/intro/u-aerodynamic.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helikon_vortex_separation_process I see this is already mentioned here even though aerodynamic is lumped with centrifugal.
Idyllic press (talk) 23:01, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional methods perhaps 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Isotope separation. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061012173925/http://www.lanl.gov/orgs/pa/News/080801.html to http://www.lanl.gov/orgs/pa/News/080801.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050131211911/http://emsp.em.doe.gov/EMSPprojects1996_2002/completed/55103.pdf to http://emsp.em.doe.gov/EMSPprojects1996_2002/completed/55103.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:25, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Isotope separation. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160712230437/http://fas.org/nuke/intro/nuke/uranium.htm to https://fas.org/nuke/intro/nuke/uranium.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:49, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The section on chemical methods (and probably several other sections) need references.150.227.15.253 (talk) 10:56, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: In the chemical methods section, three constants of value 9.54 seems to have different ratios?  Gah4 (talk) 08:46, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  9.54