If you’ve ever studied a periodic table of the elements (see below), you’re probably already aware that this table reveals a great deal about the chemical properties of the atoms that make up our world.
But you may not realise that each square on the periodic table actually represents a family of isotopes — atoms which share the same name and chemical properties, but have different masses.
To understand what isotopes are and how we can use them, we need to take a closer look at the interior of an atom.

Building blocks of matter
An atom is composed of an incredibly dense core (called a nucleus) of protons and neutrons, surrounded by a diffuse cloud of electrons.
You can think of protons and neutrons as the same kind of particle with one key difference: the protons are positively charged, while neutrons carry no charge. This means protons can “feel” electric or magnetic fields, while neutrons cannot.
The electrons, which are much lighter than protons or neutrons, carry the same magnitude of charge as a proton but with the opposite sign, meaning that each atom that has equal numbers of protons and electrons is electrically neutral.
It is the electrons that determine the chemical behaviour of a particular element.
Isotopes of an element share the same number of protons but have different numbers of neutrons. Let’s use carbon as an example.
There are three isotopes of carbon found in nature – carbon-12, carbon-13, and carbon-14. All three have six protons, but their neutron numbers – 6, 7, and 8, respectively – all differ. This means that all three isotopes have different atomic masses (carbon-14 being the heaviest), but share the same atomic number (Z=6).
Chemically, all three are indistinguishable, because the number of electrons in each of these three isotopes is the same.
So different isotopes of the same element are identical, chemically speaking. But some isotopes have the ability to circumvent this rule by transforming into another element entirely.
Marching towards stability
This transformative ability some isotopes have has to do with the fact not all isotopes are stable, and is what led Frederick Soddy to his Nobel Prize-winning discovery of isotopes in 1913.
Some isotopes – such as carbon-12 – will happily continue to exist as carbon unless something extraordinary happens. Others – carbon-14, say – will at some point decay into a stable isotope nearby.
In this case, one of the neutrons in carbon-14 changes into a proton, forming nitrogen-14. During this process, which is known as beta decay, the nucleus emits radiation in the form of an electron and an antineutrino.

There are many factors that can cause a nucleus to decay. One of the most important is the ratio of protons to neutrons a particular nucleus has. If a nucleus has too many neutrons (the definition of “too many” depends on how heavy the nucleus is), there is a chance that it will decay towards stability.
The same is true if a nucleus has too many protons. This is one of the reasons why some isotopes of a given element are radioactive, while others are not.
From the bellies of stars
By now, you may be wondering how all these isotopes were created in the first place. As it turns out, this question is a complex one, but lends some truth to the adage that we are all made of star dust.
Some of the lighter isotopes were formed very early in the history of the universe, during the Big Bang. Others result from processes that happen within stars or as a result of chance collisions between highly energetic nuclei – known as cosmic rays – within our atmosphere.
Most naturally existing isotopes are the final (stable or long-lived) product resulting from a long series of nuclear reactions and decays.
In most of these cases, light nuclei have had to smash together with enough energy to allow the strong force – a glue-like bond that forms when protons and neutrons get close enough to touch – to overcome the electromagnetic force – which pushes protons apart. If the strong force wins out, the colliding nuclei bind together, or fuse, to form a heavier nucleus.
Our sun is a good example of this. One of its main sources of power is a series of fusion reactions and beta decay processes that transform hydrogen into helium.

Transforming knowledge into tools
Since the early 1900s, when the existence of isotopes was first realised, nuclear physicists and chemists have been seeking out ways to study how isotopes can be formed, how they decay, and how we might use them.
As it turns out, the nature of isotopes – their chemical uniformity, their nuclear distinctiveness – makes them useful for a wide range of applications in fields as diverse as medicine, archaeology, agriculture, power generation and mining.
If you have ever had a PET scan, you have benefited from a byproduct of the radioactive decay of certain isotopes (often called medical isotopes). We produce these medical isotopes using our knowledge of how nuclear reactions proceed, with the help of nuclear reactors or accelerators called cyclotrons.
But we have also found ways to make use of naturally occurring radioactive isotopes. Carbon dating, for example, makes use of the long-lived isotope carbon-14 to determine how old objects are.
Under normal circumstances, carbon-14 is produced in our atmosphere via cosmic ray reactions with nitrogen-14. It has a half-life of roughly 5,700 years, which means that half of a quantity of carbon-14 will have decayed away in that time period.

While a biological organism is alive, it takes in approximately one carbon-14 isotope for every trillion stable carbon-12 isotopes and the carbon-12 to carbon-14 ratio stays about the same while the organism lives. Once it dies, new intake of carbon stops.
This means the ratio of carbon-14 to carbon-12 changes in the remains of this organism over time.
If we extract carbon using chemical methods from a sample, we can then apply a method called accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) to separate out the individual carbon isotopes by weight.
AMS makes use of the fact that accelerated particles with the same charge but different masses follow separate paths through magnetic fields. By making use of these separate paths, we can determine isotope ratios with incredible accuracy.
As you can see from these examples, we apply our knowledge of isotopes in a variety of ways. We produce them, detect them, extract them, and study them with the dual purpose of understanding why the atomic nucleus behaves as it does, and how we can harness its power for our benefit.
Peter Sommerville
Scientist & Technologist
Thanks Elizabeth. A nice summary. As an "senior" chemist I appreciate what you have done. A simple but effective exposition.
Wade Macdonald
Technician
I concurr with your comments Peter...great article, well done!
Dale Bloom
Analyst
I would agree with the article being both informative and enjoyable to read.
I have a question regards the accuracy of C-14 testing.
Just how accurate is it, or does the accuracy still depend on the cost of the testing procedures and the equipment involved?
Elizabeth Williams
Research Fellow in Nuclear Physics at Australian National University
Dale, my research focuses on nuclear reactions, not AMS, so I'm not the best person to answer your question. I will ask around and see if I can get some current numbers for you from one of my colleagues who works in the field.
Dale Bloom
Analyst
Thanks Elizabeth
One of the most fascinating aspects of the atom would have to be the role of the neutrons. Current theories suggest that the neutrons enable the atom's protons to bunch together without repelling each other, because they have similar charge.
I believe it would be much appreciated by many if there could also be an article on current theories regards nucleons and electrons, such as what do they actually do, and how do they do it.
Alex Cannara
logged in via LinkedIn
Yes, Dale, neutrons assist nuclear stability, up to a point. But, surprisingly, there is no Neutronium atom -- a neutron by itself disappears in seconds to minutes, becoming a proton and an ejected electron.
Imagine protons & neutrons as coated with velcro. Bring one close to another and they stick -- the Strong Force (physicists when not understanding something give it a name and a "force").
So, we can fuse two Protons together if we get them aimed at each other, with about 4000 volts accelerating…
Read moreMark Amey
logged in via Facebook
Alex, this response should be an 'explainer' in it's own right.
Alex Cannara
logged in via LinkedIn
Thx Mark. Just having learned some details and having had to try to explain it to others, including politicians -- a great, humbling learning experience.
;]
By the way, there's one important little, teeny, minor fact about neutrons & fission reactors -- not all the neutrons pop out of a fissioned nucleus at once. Fortunately, one or two are "delayed" by milliseconds to seconds. Otherwise, a reactor could go "prompt critical" -- be a bomb.
Ma Nature has some helpful quirks. We just have to observe carefully.
Mark Amey
logged in via Facebook
Nice and succinct...now to get the teenager to read it!
Baron Pike
logged in via Facebook
According to the theories of physicist John A Wheeler, the behaviors of the electrons, for example, show that atoms and their changing molecular formations are operating with strategic purposes, a sign of an intelligence that universal systems have evolved to use. Few physicists have seemed willing to talk about this aspect of chemical behaviors since.
Alex Cannara
logged in via LinkedIn
And, we have worldwide radio-Isotope shortages...
www.nature.com/news/2009/090715/full/460312a.html
www.rsna.org/Publications/rsnanews/July-2010/isotope_feature.cfm
www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/04/02/BU9N1IOIF6.DTL
http://blogs.forbes.com/kirksorensen/ (isotope separation)
Canadian sources are reaching retirement in N. America. Fortunately, Brazil is looking ahead, as are other countries building new reactors...
Peter Hoberg
Physics
Elizabeth, Thank You for a factual and interesting article. It is very refreshing to see this type of article in the"Conversation" versus the so many articles, where folks are just pushing opinions, sometimes without facts or based on facts.
THANK YOU. You should be an inspiration to the other contributors.
Regards PGH