![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
The phrase "The nuclear isomer Hf-178-m2 is also a source of energetic, 2.45 MeV gamma rays." is utterly wrong as this nucleus can never emit a gamma with energy more than 0.5 MeV with non-negligible probability. (source: http://ie.lbl.gov/toi/nuclide.asp?iZA=720778 ). Actual gamma energy is 12.7 and 309 KeV for transition from that long-living level with exitation energy of 2446.05 KeV and halflife of 31 years (because transition is done to nearby levels with exitation energies 2433.326 and 2136.513 KeV), and is in range from 89 to 574 KeV for transitions from other levels. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.21.179.36 ( talk • contribs) .
The deletion of a paragraph because of a concern for one sentence is excessive and so has been reverted. The Wiki policy WP:CON requires discussion on this page before established consensus is deleted. The particular paragraph involved has been the subject of the immediately preceding section of discussion and represented a consensus.
-- Drac2000 23:33, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks! I have added ref 1 for the remaining {{ cn}} (what you do, you give the first ref a name with the parameter name: "<ref name="name1">contents</ref>", If you reuse the ref, you can then add them with a "<ref name="name1" />". see meta:cite.php for more info). Could you check my work? I still believe the two sections about the cascade should be combined into a special section, I might give that a try later. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 16:05, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Here I try to discuss Dirk Beetstra's perceptive recommendation that a separate section be added to contain the peculiar aspects the isomer of Hf-178 offers at the nuclear level. Reference to the "history" tab for this article shows about 75 edits since May, 2006, but the discussion page shows little discussion for such extensive editing. There was extensive and highly "spirited" discussion, but it ended up archived over at the discussion for Induced gamma emission. Unhappily for the worthy element Hafnium, it has a nucleus designed to excite terrific (and justifiable) concern. At first this was described in a section of this page, but the concern was so great and the issue so complex that material spilled over into Nuclear isomer, Induced gamma emission and Induced_gamma_emission:_Hafnium_controversy. The thinking finally emerged that Hafnium was an element needing somewhat parallel treatment with other rather unremarkable elements, but the nucleus and its excitation of one of its isotopes (mass 178) gave the element a notability that needed to be remarked, but the explication could be made in adequate detail only in a separate page at Induced gamma emission(IGE). However, there again, IGE had a non-controversial history and level of interest. It just had the misfortune to act as an umbrella over the controversy over its application to the peculiar isomer of one isotope of Hafnium. A re-examination of the whole situation would be welcome, but very time-consuming; perhaps converging back to the present point. I recommend a read of the archived discussion over at Induced gamma emission.
-- Drac2000 16:33, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/27/technology/27chip.html
this article copies verbatim a portion of the start of the Wikipedia article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.41.195.84 ( talk) 11:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC).
Image:Sigilum Facultatis Naturalis.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 11:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
In view of the new economic significance of hafnium it would be good to see something on its abundance and accessibility in the Earth's crust and its market price. Lumos3 15:47, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
A todo list to get this to B-class
-- mav ( talk) 17:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
in the current version of the "History" section, it claims that Hafnium was discovered and then predicted by the Bohr theory of the atom. by itself that doesn't make sense.
my understanding of it, from Richard Rhodes' book on the atomic bomb, is that Bohr elaborated his theory of electron shells, connected that up with the periodic table, and predicted hafnium would be found around zirconium ores, at which point de Hevesy et al started looking for it, and then found it just before Bohr's Nobel acceptance speech. -- 98.217.8.46 ( talk) 14:19, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
By early 1923 several physicists and chemists, for example
Nils Bohr
[1] and Charles R. Bury
[2] suggested that element 72 should resemble zirconium and therefore is not part of the rare earth elements group. This suggestions where based on the the Bohr theories of the atom, the x-ray spectroscopy of Mosley and the chemical arguments of
Friedrich Paneth
[3]. Encouraged by these points and the reappearing claims of Urbain in 1922
[4] that element 72 is a rare earth element and already discovered by Urbain in 1911 motivated Coster and Hevesy searched for the new element in zirconium ores.
Intel and IBM unveil new chip technology Breakthrough, using new material, will allow processors to become smaller and more powerful. Anyone want to explain/expand/incorporate into the article? This is out of my league. / Blaxthos 15:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm no expert (or even educated on the subject) and am hesitant to try and incorporate into the article -- do we have any experts who would lend a hand? Thanks! / Blaxthos 21:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I removed the implication that Intel and IBM are partners; rather I think that they are competitors. At least, IBM's press release mentions AMD, not Intel. [2] If anyone can clarify further, please do. GeoGreg 22:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
IBM and Intel did their respective research separately but completed around the same time since the 45nm node size was where it was becoming attractive to replace replace the gate oxide as quantum tunneling had been an increasingly bigger problem as the number of atoms that make up gate oxide have been shrinking to increase gate capacitance. AMD (not Intel) did partnered with IBM in their research. Intel has uses hafnium-based dielectric for their 45nm chips for over a year now in its Penryn and Nehalem processors. AMD recently started with Phenom II and Shanghai Opteron processors. The main benefit of replacing the silicon dioxide gate dielectric that has been used for decades is it allows an increase in gate capacitance (ability to hold an electrical charge) without leakage effects (wastes power by creating heat. heat can damage the chip or require a more complex/costly cooling solutions). 209.30.228.224 ( talk) 03:32, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Why does this article have a photo of Dragon's Breath being performed? The connection that hafnium is somewhat pyrophoric, and that some other pyrophoric material is used for this is a bit of a stretch. Since hafnium itself isn't used in this context, the photo seems gratuitous and out of place. FellGleaming ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:39, 31 March 2010 (UTC).
Thanks to all who are recently contributing to making this page even better. -- Drac2000 13:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
The "Production" section mentions "fractionatal crystallization". Shouldn't it read "fractional crystallization"? -- Lontche ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:40, 12 January 2011 (UTC).
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Hf-crystal bar.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on November 2, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-11-02. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! — howcheng { chat} 18:39, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Hafnium pellets with a thin oxide layer.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on December 30, 2015. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2015-12-30. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich ( talk) 23:35, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Hafnium ebeam remelted.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on September 3, 2017. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2017-09-03. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich ( talk) 12:15, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
It is not true, that Hf doesn't occur as free element in the nature.
http://www.mindat.org/min-47058.html
Eudialytos ( talk) 16:29, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Hafnium. 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.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:42, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
The phrase "The nuclear isomer Hf-178-m2 is also a source of energetic, 2.45 MeV gamma rays." is utterly wrong as this nucleus can never emit a gamma with energy more than 0.5 MeV with non-negligible probability. (source: http://ie.lbl.gov/toi/nuclide.asp?iZA=720778 ). Actual gamma energy is 12.7 and 309 KeV for transition from that long-living level with exitation energy of 2446.05 KeV and halflife of 31 years (because transition is done to nearby levels with exitation energies 2433.326 and 2136.513 KeV), and is in range from 89 to 574 KeV for transitions from other levels. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.21.179.36 ( talk • contribs) .
The deletion of a paragraph because of a concern for one sentence is excessive and so has been reverted. The Wiki policy WP:CON requires discussion on this page before established consensus is deleted. The particular paragraph involved has been the subject of the immediately preceding section of discussion and represented a consensus.
-- Drac2000 23:33, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks! I have added ref 1 for the remaining {{ cn}} (what you do, you give the first ref a name with the parameter name: "<ref name="name1">contents</ref>", If you reuse the ref, you can then add them with a "<ref name="name1" />". see meta:cite.php for more info). Could you check my work? I still believe the two sections about the cascade should be combined into a special section, I might give that a try later. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 16:05, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Here I try to discuss Dirk Beetstra's perceptive recommendation that a separate section be added to contain the peculiar aspects the isomer of Hf-178 offers at the nuclear level. Reference to the "history" tab for this article shows about 75 edits since May, 2006, but the discussion page shows little discussion for such extensive editing. There was extensive and highly "spirited" discussion, but it ended up archived over at the discussion for Induced gamma emission. Unhappily for the worthy element Hafnium, it has a nucleus designed to excite terrific (and justifiable) concern. At first this was described in a section of this page, but the concern was so great and the issue so complex that material spilled over into Nuclear isomer, Induced gamma emission and Induced_gamma_emission:_Hafnium_controversy. The thinking finally emerged that Hafnium was an element needing somewhat parallel treatment with other rather unremarkable elements, but the nucleus and its excitation of one of its isotopes (mass 178) gave the element a notability that needed to be remarked, but the explication could be made in adequate detail only in a separate page at Induced gamma emission(IGE). However, there again, IGE had a non-controversial history and level of interest. It just had the misfortune to act as an umbrella over the controversy over its application to the peculiar isomer of one isotope of Hafnium. A re-examination of the whole situation would be welcome, but very time-consuming; perhaps converging back to the present point. I recommend a read of the archived discussion over at Induced gamma emission.
-- Drac2000 16:33, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/27/technology/27chip.html
this article copies verbatim a portion of the start of the Wikipedia article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.41.195.84 ( talk) 11:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC).
Image:Sigilum Facultatis Naturalis.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 11:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
In view of the new economic significance of hafnium it would be good to see something on its abundance and accessibility in the Earth's crust and its market price. Lumos3 15:47, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
A todo list to get this to B-class
-- mav ( talk) 17:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
in the current version of the "History" section, it claims that Hafnium was discovered and then predicted by the Bohr theory of the atom. by itself that doesn't make sense.
my understanding of it, from Richard Rhodes' book on the atomic bomb, is that Bohr elaborated his theory of electron shells, connected that up with the periodic table, and predicted hafnium would be found around zirconium ores, at which point de Hevesy et al started looking for it, and then found it just before Bohr's Nobel acceptance speech. -- 98.217.8.46 ( talk) 14:19, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
By early 1923 several physicists and chemists, for example
Nils Bohr
[1] and Charles R. Bury
[2] suggested that element 72 should resemble zirconium and therefore is not part of the rare earth elements group. This suggestions where based on the the Bohr theories of the atom, the x-ray spectroscopy of Mosley and the chemical arguments of
Friedrich Paneth
[3]. Encouraged by these points and the reappearing claims of Urbain in 1922
[4] that element 72 is a rare earth element and already discovered by Urbain in 1911 motivated Coster and Hevesy searched for the new element in zirconium ores.
Intel and IBM unveil new chip technology Breakthrough, using new material, will allow processors to become smaller and more powerful. Anyone want to explain/expand/incorporate into the article? This is out of my league. / Blaxthos 15:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm no expert (or even educated on the subject) and am hesitant to try and incorporate into the article -- do we have any experts who would lend a hand? Thanks! / Blaxthos 21:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I removed the implication that Intel and IBM are partners; rather I think that they are competitors. At least, IBM's press release mentions AMD, not Intel. [2] If anyone can clarify further, please do. GeoGreg 22:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
IBM and Intel did their respective research separately but completed around the same time since the 45nm node size was where it was becoming attractive to replace replace the gate oxide as quantum tunneling had been an increasingly bigger problem as the number of atoms that make up gate oxide have been shrinking to increase gate capacitance. AMD (not Intel) did partnered with IBM in their research. Intel has uses hafnium-based dielectric for their 45nm chips for over a year now in its Penryn and Nehalem processors. AMD recently started with Phenom II and Shanghai Opteron processors. The main benefit of replacing the silicon dioxide gate dielectric that has been used for decades is it allows an increase in gate capacitance (ability to hold an electrical charge) without leakage effects (wastes power by creating heat. heat can damage the chip or require a more complex/costly cooling solutions). 209.30.228.224 ( talk) 03:32, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Why does this article have a photo of Dragon's Breath being performed? The connection that hafnium is somewhat pyrophoric, and that some other pyrophoric material is used for this is a bit of a stretch. Since hafnium itself isn't used in this context, the photo seems gratuitous and out of place. FellGleaming ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:39, 31 March 2010 (UTC).
Thanks to all who are recently contributing to making this page even better. -- Drac2000 13:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
The "Production" section mentions "fractionatal crystallization". Shouldn't it read "fractional crystallization"? -- Lontche ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:40, 12 January 2011 (UTC).
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Hf-crystal bar.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on November 2, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-11-02. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! — howcheng { chat} 18:39, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Hafnium pellets with a thin oxide layer.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on December 30, 2015. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2015-12-30. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich ( talk) 23:35, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Hafnium ebeam remelted.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on September 3, 2017. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2017-09-03. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich ( talk) 12:15, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
It is not true, that Hf doesn't occur as free element in the nature.
http://www.mindat.org/min-47058.html
Eudialytos ( talk) 16:29, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Hafnium. 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.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:42, 27 October 2017 (UTC)