I'm currently applying information theory to physics, and have begun considering the nature of isotopes, and in particular, how much information is contributed to the properties of an element by its subatomic components.
One initial conclusion I've reached is that there's a window of ionization for most materials within which the properties of the material don't change in any macroscopically meaningful way.
For example, if I rub a balloon on my sweater, I will change the local electrostatic charge of my sweater, but it won't change in appearance in any meaningful way. This is obviously also true of conductive wires, and everyday compounds and elements generally.
We can say, therefore, that electrons don't contribute much information to the properties of a typical substance, within some window of ionization.
My question is whether this is true of neutron isotopes, and in particular, Gold 197. I understand that this is a naturally occurring, stable isotope, and I'm wondering if it's any different than ordinary gold in terms of appearance, conductivity, etc.
As a general matter, it seems possible that neutron isotopes are actually not physically similar to their elements, since, for example, a given isotope might not be stable. This suggests that neutrons generally contribute more information to the behavior and properties of a substance than electrons.