Neptunium
Background and early claims

When the first periodic table of the elements was published by Dmitri Mendeleev in the early 1870s, it showed a " — " in place after uranium similar to several other places for then-undiscovered elements. Other subsequent tables of known elements, including a 1913 publication of the known radioactive isotopes by Kasimir Fajans, also show an empty place after uranium, element 92.

Up to and after the discovery of the final component of the atomic nucleus, the neutron in 1932, most scientists did not seriously consider the possibility of elements heavier than uranium. While nuclear theory at the time did not explicitly prohibit their existence, there was little evidence to suggest that they did. However, the discovery of induced radioactivity by Irène and Frédéric Joliot-Curie in late 1933 opened up an entirely new method of researching the elements and inspired a small group of Italian scientists led by Enrico Fermi to begin a series of experiments involving neutron bombardment. Although the Joliot-Curies' experiment involved bombarding a sample of Al with alpha particles to produce the radioactive P, Fermi realized that using neutrons, which have no electrical charge, would most likely produce even better results than the positively charged alpha particles. Accordingly, in March 1934 he began systematically subjecting all of the then-known elements to neutron bombardment to determine whether others could also be induced to radioactivity.

After several months of work, Fermi's group had tentatively determined that lighter elements would disperse the energy of the captured neutron by emitting a proton or alpha particle and heavier elements would generally accomplish the same by emitting a gamma ray. This latter behavior would later result in the beta decay of a neutron into a proton, thus moving the resulting isotope one place up the periodic table. When Fermi's team bombarded uranium, they observed this behavior as well, which strongly suggested that the resulting isotope had an atomic number of 93. Fermi was initially reluctant to publicize such a claim, but after his team observed several unknown half-lives in the uranium bombardment products that did not match those of any known isotope, he published a paper entitled Possible Production of Elements of Atomic Number Higher than 92 in June 1934. For element 93, he proposed the name ausenium (atomic symbol Ao) after the Greek name Ausonia for Italy.

Several theoretical objections to the claims of Fermi's paper were quickly raised; in particular, the exact process that took place when an atom captured a neutron was not well understood at the time. This and Fermi's accidental discovery three months later that nuclear reactions could be induced by slow neutrons cast further doubt in the minds of many scientists, notably Aristid von Grosse and Ida Noddack, that the experiment was creating element 93. While von Grosse's claim that Fermi was actually producing protactinium (element 91) was quickly tested and disproved, Noddack's proposal that the uranium had been shattered into two or more much smaller fragments was simply ignored by most because existing nuclear theory did not include a way for this to be possible. Fermi and his team maintained that they were in fact synthesizing a new element, but the issue remained unresolved for several years.

Although the many different and unknown radioactive half-lives in the experiment's results showed that several nuclear reactions were occurring, Fermi's group could not prove that element 93 was being produced unless they could isolate it chemically. They and many other scientists attempted to accomplish this, including Otto Hahn and Lise Meitner who were among the best radiochemists in the world at the time and supporters of Fermi's claim, but they all failed. Much later, it was determined that the main reason for this failure was because the predictions of element 93's chemical properties were based on a periodic table which lacked the actinide series. This arrangement placed protactinium below tantalum, uranium below tungsten, and further suggested that element 93, at that point referred to as eka-rhenium, should be similar to the group 7 elements, including manganese and rhenium. Thorium, protactinium, and uranium, with their dominant oxidation states of +4, +5, and +6 respectively, fooled scientists into thinking they belonged below hafnium, tantalum, and tungsten, rather than below the lanthanide series, which was at the time viewed as a fluke, and whose members all have dominant +3 states; neptunium, on the other hand, has a much rarer, more unstable +7 state, with +4 and +5 being the most stable. Upon finding that plutonium and the other transuranic elements also have dominant +3 and +4 states, along with the discovery of the f-block, the actinide series was firmly established.

While the question of whether Fermi's experiment had produced element 93 was stalemated, two additional claims of the discovery of the element appeared, although unlike Fermi, they both claimed to have observed it in nature. The first of these claims was by Czech engineer Odolen Koblic in 1934 when he extracted a small amount of material from the wash water of heated pitchblende. He proposed the name bohemium for the element, but after being analyzed it turned out that the sample was a mixture of tungsten and vanadium. The other claim, in 1938 by Romanian physicist Horia Hulubei and French chemist Yvette Cauchois, claimed to have discovered the new element via spectroscopy in minerals. They named their element sequanium, but the claim was discounted because the prevailing theory at the time was that if it existed at all, element 93 would not exist naturally. However, as neptunium does in fact occur in nature in trace amounts, as demonstrated when it was found in uranium ore in 1952, it is possible that Hulubei and Cauchois did in fact observe neptunium.

Although by 1938 some scientists, including Niels Bohr, were still reluctant to accept that Fermi had actually produced a new element, he was nevertheless awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in November 1938 "for his demonstrations of the existence of new radioactive elements produced by neutron irradiation, and for his related discovery of nuclear reactions brought about by slow neutrons". A month later, the almost totally unexpected discovery of nuclear fission by Hahn, Meitner, and Otto Frisch put an end to the possibility that Fermi had discovered element 93 because most of the unknown half-lives that had been observed by Fermi's team were rapidly identified as those of fission products.

Perhaps the closest of all attempts to produce the missing element 93 was that conducted by the Japanese physicist Yoshio Nishina working with chemist Kenjiro Kimura in 1940, just before the outbreak of the Pacific War in 1941: they bombarded U with fast neutrons. However, while slow neutrons tend to induce neutron capture through a (n, γ) reaction, fast neutrons tend to induce a "knock-out" (n, 2n) reaction, where one neutron is added and two more are removed, resulting in the net loss of a neutron. Nishina and Kimura, having tested this technique on Th and successfully produced the known Th and its long-lived beta decay daughter Pa (both occurring in the natural decay chain of U), therefore correctly assigned the new 6.75-day half-life activity they observed to the new isotope U. They confirmed that this isotope was also a beta emitter and must hence decay to the unknown nuclide 93. They attempted to isolate this nuclide by carrying it with its supposed lighter congener rhenium, but no beta or alpha decay was observed from the rhenium-containing fraction: Nishina and Kimura thus correctly speculated that the half-life of 93, like that of Pa, was very long and hence its activity would be so weak as to be unmeasurable by their equipment, thus concluding the last and closest unsuccessful search for transuranic elements.
change_case:capital_word_frequency[10]