Return to Answer

The major mistake is considering a nucleus like if it were an elementary particle.

Compare a nucleus spin configuration to spin electronic configuration of atoms. In both cases, there are multiple fermions (nucleons or electrons) that can have various total spín configuration.

There are multiple known isotopes with known excited high spin nuclear isomers.

My favourite isotopes of tantalum show some of them have up to 7 isomers like $\ce{^{179}Ta}$, with spin 7/2, 9/2, 1/2, 21/2, 23/2, 25/2 and 37/2.

One of knowm metastable nuclear isomers is even naturally occuring and observationally stable: $\ce{^{180\mathrm{m}}Ta}$, even if the lower energy $\ce{^{180}Ta}$ is unstable and has the half-life about 8 hours, beta decaying to $\ce{^{180}Hf}$ or $\ce{^{180}W}$.

Military circles have been interested for some time in the metastable isomer hafnium-178m2 with the half-life 31 years. The supposed stimulated gamma emission would provide about 1/100 energy density, compared to nuclear fission, while bypassing nuclear weapon regulations, as seen in hafnium controversy.

The major mistake is considering a nucleus like if it were an elementary particle.

Compare a nucleus spin configuration to spin electronic configuration of atoms. In both cases, there are multiple fermions (nucleons or electrons) that can have various total spín configuration.

There are multiple known isotopes with known excited high spin nuclear isomers.

My favourite isotopes of tantalum show that some isotopes have up to 7 isomers like tantalum-179, with spin 7/2, 9/2, 1/2, 21/2, 23/2, 25/2 and 37/2.

One of known meta-stable nuclear isomers is even naturally occuring and observationally stable (due forbidden transition): tantalum-180m, even if the lower energy tantalum-180 is unstable and has the half-life about 8 hours, beta decaying to hafnium-180 (EC, 86%) or tungsten-180($\beta -$, 14%).

Military circles have been interested for some time in the metastable isomer hafnium-178m2 with the half-life 31 years. The supposed stimulated gamma emission would provide about 1/100 energy density, compared to nuclear fission, while bypassing nuclear weapon regulations, as seen in hafnium controversy.

The major mistake is considering nucleus like if it were an elementary particle.

Compare a nucleus spin configuration to spin electronic configuration of atoms. In both cases, there are multiple fermions (nucleons or electrons) that can have various total spín configuration.

There are multiple known isotopes with known excited high spin nuclear isomers.

My favourite isotopes of tantalum show some of them have up to 7 isomers like $\ce{^{179}Ta}$, with spin 7/2, 9/2, 1/2, 21/2, 23/2, 25/2 and 37/2.

Some of them are even observationally stable like $\ce{^{180\mathrm{m}}Ta}$, even if $\ce{^{180}Ta}$ has the half-life about 8 hours.

The major mistake is considering a nucleus like if it were an elementary particle.

Compare a nucleus spin configuration to spin electronic configuration of atoms. In both cases, there are multiple fermions (nucleons or electrons) that can have various total spín configuration.

There are multiple known isotopes with known excited high spin nuclear isomers.

My favourite isotopes of tantalum show some of them have up to 7 isomers like $\ce{^{179}Ta}$, with spin 7/2, 9/2, 1/2, 21/2, 23/2, 25/2 and 37/2.

One of knowm metastable nuclear isomers is even naturally occuring and observationally stable: $\ce{^{180\mathrm{m}}Ta}$, even if the lower energy $\ce{^{180}Ta}$ is unstable and has the half-life about 8 hours, beta decaying to $\ce{^{180}Hf}$ or $\ce{^{180}W}$.

Military circles have been interested for some time in the metastable isomer hafnium-178m2 with the half-life 31 years. The supposed stimulated gamma emission would provide about 1/100 energy density, compared to nuclear fission, while bypassing nuclear weapon regulations, as seen in hafnium controversy.

The major mistake is considering nucleus like if it were an elementary particle.

Compare a nucleus spin configuration to spin electronic configuration of atoms. In both cases, there are multiple fermions (nucleons or electrons) that can have various total spín configuration.

There are multiple known isotopes with known excited high spin nuclear isomers.

My favourite isotopes of tantalum show some of them have up to 7 isomers like $\ce{^{179}Ta}$, with spin 7/2, 9/2, 1/2, 21/2, 23/2, 25/2 and 37/2.

Some of them are even observationally stable like $\ce{^{180m}Ta}$, even if $\ce{^{180}Ta}$ has the half-life about 8 hours.

The major mistake is considering nucleus like if it were an elementary particle.

Compare a nucleus spin configuration to spin electronic configuration of atoms. In both cases, there are multiple fermions (nucleons or electrons) that can have various total spín configuration.

There are multiple known isotopes with known excited high spin nuclear isomers.

My favourite isotopes of tantalum show some of them have up to 7 isomers like $\ce{^{179}Ta}$, with spin 7/2, 9/2, 1/2, 21/2, 23/2, 25/2 and 37/2.

Some of them are even observationally stable like $\ce{^{180\mathrm{m}}Ta}$, even if $\ce{^{180}Ta}$ has the half-life about 8 hours.