The qualitative explanation is nuclear pairing: is odd-odd (), while both and are even-even. At , moving from the odd-odd to either even-even branch lowers the pairing contribution to the atomic mass by
Two neighboring even-even nuclear isobars can therefore both be lower in mass than the intervening odd-odd member. The two possible directions are
However, the particular coefficients printed in this paper do not quantitatively reproduce both allowed directions. Let . Using every supplied term, rather than pairing alone, gives
Thus this parametrization would forbid the calcium beta-minus branch. The physical atomic mass differences are instead approximately to argon and to calcium, so both physical directions are allowed.[ref]
The valid interpretation is therefore pairing explains how both directions can be possible, but the supplied smooth mass formula is insufficient to establish both for this isotope. The semi-empirical mass formula has MeV-scale residual errors and omits nuclear shell closure corrections; has the especially stable shell closures. One must use measured masses or a model with those corrections for a quantitative proof, rather than changing the printed numbers silently.
The two processes are electron capture and beta-plus decay:
For neutral atomic masses, their available total energies obey
Hence electron capture has approximately more available energy. Electron-hole energies and nuclear recoil give smaller corrections for capture from a particular shell. With the physical mass difference, and the positron kinetic-energy budget is only about .
Electron capture dominates the argon-producing decays. Energetic advantage alone is not a universal theorem about branching fractions: electron density at the nucleus and nuclear transition matrix elements and selection rules also matter. In this case capture can populate the approximately excited argon level, whereas positron emission cannot; this is an additional reason the physical capture branch is much larger.[ref]