In 1934, Irene Joliot-Curie created the first artificial radioactive isotope-phosphouus-30?

The change in properties was the result of the nuclei of the aluminum atoms acquiring additional protons from the helium nuclei. The chemical element, and thus the majority of the properties of an atom, is determined by the number of protons in the nucleus.

Finally, that's what I was looking for! Thanks op of this question.

"If the total amount of mass-energy is limited, and the amount of usable energy is decreasing, then the universe cannot have existed forever, otherwise it would already have exhausted all usable energy the heat death of the universe." Mass-energy may be limited, and the amount of USABLE energy may be decreasing, but that does not necessarily signify the end of the universe caused by the lack of energy to do work. The amount of energy remains the same. Total equilibrium of energy or "heat" in the universe does not mean the energy ceases to exist. It means that all things that require work as a function of energy to exist can no longer exist. However, the total amount of mass-energy will remain the same. You can state will absolute assurance that the universe has a beginning, only if you have absolute proof that the universe has an end. "The universe requires a cause because it had a beginning" Can we be absolutely sure that the universe had a beginning? If it has no end it has no beginning. Therefore it could have always existed. If "God" does not need a cause because He always existed, then why would a universe need a cause if it has always existed? How can we not be sure that the universe will not exist eternally in a state of equilibrium? What if the universe was not created for the purpose of human beings? "Also, the universe cannot be self-caused nothing can create itself, because that would mean that it existed before it came into existence, which is a logical absurdity." I agree with you there. Of course, a cause cannot be caused by itself. This is valid logic. On the other hand I do have one ponderous thought about time and God. If he caused the universes' beginning, he is a cause. Therefore, would he not be able to produce both cause and effects at His will? Time, like you've stated, "Einstein's general relativity, which has much experimental support, shows that time is linked to matter and space.", is a rate of change. However, I believe that time is a product of any type of change. Or cause and effect. Therefore, would God not be living in his own time? Whether it be constantly varying in speed or not. As he is acting or changing time passes as an effect. Time will not exist only when absolutely nothing exists, including God. However, I am not stating with for a fact that there is not a beginning to the universe. I am simply using logic to seek the truth. However, like all humans I make mistakes because I do not know everything. I am simply using my understanding of what I "know" to produce logical explanations. Maybe there is information out there that proves the universe did begin at a certain instant and that all things in it followed. This is a very interesting question. I like that you used logic to support your argument. That is how it should be done. And don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to disprove you here. I want the same thing you want. The truth. I have questions and I am simply trying to find the answer.