1964 Atomic mass table

Mattauch, J.; Thiele, W.; Wapstra, A.H.

doi:10.1016/0029-5582(65)90114-8

Cited by 757 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(14), the results yield an atomic weight of 24.30497 ± 0.00044 on th e unified scale (12C = 12). These c al- Bounds due to possible systematic error in isotopic composition of separated isotopes ± 0.0000045 ± 0.0000099 a The standard errors for the final results of both mass spectrometers were approximately the same so the results are averaged with equal weight.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 86%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Absolute isotopic abundance ratios and atomic weight of magnesium

Catanzaro

Murphy

Garner

et al. 1966

J. RES. NATL. BUR. STAN. SECT. A.

231

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Absolute values have been obtained for the isotopic abundance ratios of magnesium, using surface e mi ss ion mas s spectrometry. Samples of known isotopic composition, prepared from nearly pure se parated magnesium isotopes, we re used to calibrate the mass spectrometers. The resulting abso· lute valu es are 25Mg/24Mg = 0.12663 ± 0.00013 and 26Mg/24Mg = 0 .13932 ± 0.00026, yielding an atomic weight (I2C = 12) of 24.30497 ± 0.00044. The indicated uncertainties are. ove.-. all limits of error based on 95 percent confid e nce li mits for th e mean and allowances for effects of known sources of possible sys te matI c error.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…The measured biases were then used to obtain the absolute magnesium isotope ratios of a reference sampl e of magnesium metal. The atomic weight was then calculated using masses from Mattauch et al (14). ~ and chromium [5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Absolute isotopic abundance ratios and atomic weight of magnesium

Catanzaro

Murphy

Garner

et al. 1966

J. RES. NATL. BUR. STAN. SECT. A.

231

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 1966, Shields et al [136] redetermined the isotopic composition of Cr calibrating the mass spectrometers with carefully prepared gravimetric standards mixed from separated isotopes of Cr, of very high chemical and isotopic purity. The atomic weight calculated from this work using atomic masses from Mattauch et al [264] was A r (Cr) = 51.9961(3). In its 1967 report [3], CAWIA recommended "retaining the atomic weight of 51.996 but stating it without limit of error".…”

Section: N(mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…CAWIA also observed that this value was in excellent agreement with the value determined by calibrated mass spectrometry A r (Cl) = 35.4527(7), reported by Shields et al [130], who reported no evidence for natural variability. In an extensive discussion of the atomic weights of Ag, Br, and Cl in its 1967 report [3], CAWIA retained the 1961 atomic-weight value, but stated that it was based on the physical measurement by Shields et al [130] combined with the atomic mass data from Mattauch et al [264]. Following its 1967 discussion of Ag, Cl, and Br, which were important in the chemical determination of atomic weights of several other elements, CAWIA did not assign any new atomic-weight values defined purely on the basis of chemical measurements.…”

Section: S Sulfurmentioning

confidence: 99%

Atomic weights of the elements. Review 2000 (IUPAC Technical Report)

Laeter¹,

Böhlke²,

Bièvre³

et al. 2003

Pure and Applied Chemistry

927

554

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Republication or reproduction of this report or its storage and/or dissemination by electronic means is permitted without the need for formal IUPAC permission on condition that an acknowledgmentAbstract: A consistent set of internationally accepted atomic weights has long been an essential aim of the scientific community because of the relevance of these values to science and technology, as well as to trade and commerce subject to ethical, legal, and international standards. The standard atomic weights of the elements are regularly evaluated, recommended, and published in updated tables by the Commission on Atomic Weights and Isotopic Abundances (CAWIA) of the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC). These values are invariably associated with carefully evaluated uncertainties. Atomic weights were originally determined by mass ratio measurements coupled with an understanding of chemical stoichiometry, but are now based almost exclusively on knowledge of the isotopic composition (derived from isotope-abundance ratio measurements) and the atomic masses of the isotopes of the elements. Atomic weights and atomic masses are now scaled to a numerical value of exactly 12 for the mass of the carbon isotope of mass number 12. Technological advances in mass spectrometry and nuclear-reaction energies have enabled atomic masses to be determined with a relative uncertainty of better than 1 × 10 -7 . Isotope abundances for an increasing number of elements can be measured to better than 1 × 10 -3 . The excellent precision of such measurements led to the discovery that many elements, in different specimens, display significant variations in their isotope-abundance ratios, caused by a variety of natural and industrial physicochemical processes. While such variations increasingly place a constraint on the uncertainties with which some standard atomic weights can be stated, they provide numerous opportunities for investigating a range of important phenomena in physical, chemical, cosmological, biological, and industrial processes. This review reflects the current and increasing interest of science in the measured differences between source-specific and even sample-specific atomic weights. These relative comparisons can often be made with a smaller uncertainty than is achieved in the best calibrated "absolute" (= SI-traceable) atomic-weight determinations. Accurate determinations of the atomic weights of certain elements also influence the values of fundamental constants such as the Avogadro, Faraday, and universal gas constants. This review is in two parts: the first summarizes the development of the science of atomic-weight determinations during the 20 th century; the second summarizes the changes and variations that have been recognized in the values and uncertainties of atomic weights, on an element-by-element basis, in the latter part of the 20 th century.J. R. de LAETER et al.

show abstract

“…The ERRORR module (Ref. 56 Fe angular distribution uncertainties. It appears that an investment in further development of the processing tools now would yield substantial benefits, especially in terms of stimulating new work by data evaluators in this field.…”

Section: Work Remainingmentioning

confidence: 99%