Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-17T02:20:35.020Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Disputed Discovery Of Element 43: A Reexamination Of An Elegant Early Use Of Wavelength-Dispersive X-Ray Microanalysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2020

John T. Armstrong
Affiliation:
Surface and Microanalysis Science Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD20899
P. H. M. Van Assche
Affiliation:
Physics Department, KULeuven, B-3001Leuven, Belgium
Get access

Extract

Typical modern histories of the discovery of the chemical elements report that element 43 was discovered in Italy in 1937 by Perrier and Segre. According to these accounts, the discovery was made by chemical separation in a sample of deuteron-bombarded molybdenum, supplied by E. Lawrence, and thus represent the first discovery of an element produced artificially and is the reason for the name “technetium” (Tc) chosen by the investigators. Some accounts might note in passing that the existence of element 43 was predicted in the early part of the 20th century on the basis of the periodic table, and that the element was reported as discovered in natural samples by x-ray emission spectroscopy in 1925 and called “masurium” (Ma). These reports, however, invariably call this discovery erroneous and sometimes refer to the investigators (typically left unnamed) as “deluded”.

The original reported discovery of “masurium” was made in an exhaustive investigation of some thousand mineral separates of Nb-Mo-U-rich phases involving early elegant use of wavelengthdispersive x-ray microanalysis.

Type
Quantitative X-Ray Microanalysis
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Perrier, C. and Segre, E., J. Chem. Phys. 5 (1937) 712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Noddack, W., Tacke, I., and Berg, O., Naturwissen. 13 (1925) 567.Google Scholar
3.Van Assche, P., Nucl. Phys.. A480 (1988) 205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Berg, O., Zeitschr. f. techn. Physik 12 (1925) 599.Google Scholar
5.Herrmann, G., Nucl. Phys. A505 (1989) 352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Keller, C., Chemiker-Zeit. 112(1988)373.Google Scholar
7.Kuroda, P., Origin of the Chemical Elements (1982) Springer Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
8.Kenna, B. T. and Kuroda, P. K., J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem. 23 (1961) 142; 26 (1964) 493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Hagemann, R., et al., The Ohio Phenomenon IAEA, Vienna (1975) 415.Google Scholar
10.Fiori, C. E. et al., Desk Top Spectrum Analyzer v. 2.5, NIST-NIH Std. Ref. Database, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD; Newbury, D. E., Swyt, C. R.,Myklebust, R L., Anal. Chem. 67 (1995) 1866.Google Scholar