Talk:Fissile material

message: The article needs clean-up?? It looks fine to me now, and especially since the main concern re: "fissile" is in stuff that you can manufacture in large quantities, like we can do for U-233, U-235, and Pu-239.
Does anyone know of any more isotopes?? 74.249.92.92 (talk) 06:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it does. It fails to list all fissile isotopes. Since there aren't that many of them, listing them all isn't hard. I could edit it if I would be reasonably sure I'm getting it right, but I don't.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.132.186.34 (talk) 12:48, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean-up ? 

message: “Several … isotopes are known to be fissile, all of them having … odd atomic mass numbers. These include: … Curium-244[2]”
I do not know the subject enough to relate oddness to fissilitude and, therefore, to fix the article. Oddly, my degree is in physics; I recall no rule postulating that only odd-weighing isotopes be fissile (no implication that there is no such rule).  The reference [2] mentioning 244Cu as a fissile material is but a safety instruction, and it is OK for such documents to err on the “safe” side, so this reference is not convincing enough to me for a blank-minded edit.
::—  11:57, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now, the article is stating that the "rule" for even N and odd # of neutrons is an "in general" rule - in other words, a "rule of thumb". I known as an engineer (M.S. Georgia Tech) that rules of thumb do tend to have exceptions - and sometimes, lots of them... 74.249.92.92 (talk) 06:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Also, considerations of fissibility for higher-order or hard-to-make actinides are not too relevent here, because they are impossible to collect large amounts of for making nuclear reactors and bombs.74.249.92.92 (talk) 06:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Heavier actinides do accumulate in nuclear reactors, many are long-term radioactive waste hazards, and fission is the only way of destroying them. Look at Curium#Nuclear fuel cycle.--JWB (talk) 07:41, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  How is 244 an odd number??? :-) 

message: Neptunium-237 can sustain a chain reaction with fast neutrons, but rarely fissions with slow neutrons. Does this mean it is fissile or not? This also contradicts a sentence in the article stating that all fissile materials can sustain a chain reaction with both fast and slow neutrons. --JWB (talk) 05:16, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Np-237 

message: hello all,
Did anyone notice that Jeopardy had a question last week relating the most important criteria in selecting U-235 was that it had an odd number of neutrons???
That whole section of the article is CONFUSING and, like someone said above, sounds way to much like a rule of thumb.  
I am doing some research to try and clarify this point.  Right now, from reading "Introduction to Nuclear Engineering" By J.R. Lamarsh (Prentice hall 3rd Edition) I can find no equivalent explanation for fissile behaviour and odd number of neutrons.  He relates it solely to the number of neutrons per fission relased in a fuel mixture and the ratio of absorption to fission cross sections (See equation 3.51).  of course, the underlying physics could still deal with # of nuetrons which is the point I am still researching.
In any case one line that DEFINITELY should be changed is the line about " More generally, elements with an even number of protons and an even number of neutrons, and located near a well-known curve in nuclear physics of atomic number vs. atomic mass number are more stable than others - and hence, less likely to undergo fission"
The well known line in nuclear physics is not a even to even neutron/ proton line... the line is # neutrons = # protons.  As the Mass of the nuclei increases the "stable line" deviates further and further away from this line... regardless of if you have even or odd number of neutrons.  what the line indicates is that as mass increases you need much more neutrons per proton in order to maintain stability.  (i.e. you need the nuclear force to overcome the electromagnetic repulsion of the positeveloy charged protons).  This includes isotopes with both even and odd numbers of neutrons thus it is not clear to me what point the article is trying to make.  Do you mean closer to the line relative to isotopes of the same element?
Anyway, thank you.  Sorry for the spelling...
A.L. Daley  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.75.48.150 (talk) 12:30, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Selecting would have been from available isotopes in quantity.  Even Z actinides have longer half life, which is why we have them.  Odd Z odd N actinides are also fissile, but not available in quantity.  So, only EO isotopes are reasonable for use in reactors or bombs. Gah4 (talk) 01:34, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  The whole "odd Vs. Even" section 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
*Support the addition of some noun.  The current title is far too enigmatic.  —  AjaxSmack  18:07, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Release two or more neutrons on average per neutron capture  On average, it just needs to be enough above one to sustain the chain reaction. It doesn't seem that two is so special, though. At least some have to release two or more for the average to be above one. Gah4 (talk) 14:56, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:38, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: Is the Ronen fissile rule actually useful?   Looking at Uranium, for example, it tells me U-225 and U-229 are fissile but those are too light and not even included in the discussion of fissile isotopes. It gives us isotopes that are too light and unstable to be useful. 98.183.98.6 (talk) 19:47, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ronen Rule