Lounge of Tomorrow

Lounge of Tomorrow (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/index.php)
-   Egg Head (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/forumdisplay.php?f=13)
-   -   Super Heavy New Element (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/showthread.php?t=9619)

Alex 06-12-2009 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman (Post 287057)
Besides, isn't it "cheating" to CREATE a new element? Why should it be in the Periodic Table if it does not exist in the natural universe?

I don't know if it is "cheating" but any new elements we create at this point are essentially irrelevant to practical chemistry. That's not true of all the ones previously created though. Everything from 99 pretty much have half-lives too low to be of practical use.

The search, however, is not necessarily so irrelevant. There are schools of thought (mostly cast by the wayside now but not completely discarded) that there may be "islands of stability" out there, and allow for creation of high weight atoms that are stable enough to have practical implications beyond theoretical physics and chemistry.

Moonliner 06-12-2009 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pirate Bill (Post 287059)
Why don't we just get back to the basic 4 elements: air, earth, fire, and water.

Certainly legions of table memorizing students would flock to your cause...

Ghoulish Delight 06-12-2009 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman (Post 287057)
I guess this makes me some sort of Luddite, but I disdain new additions to the periodic table in the same way I insist Pluto is still a planet,

The difference being that "planet" is not a hard-definable word. There's no distinct line between chuncks of rock in space vs. planet. Whereas an element is an element is an element. An atom with 112 protons in its nucleus IS the 112th element. There's no debate about how it's defined, only about whether they have been created and what the exact properties are.

innerSpaceman 06-12-2009 12:11 PM

Were other elements in the periodic table created? I admit I don't know. But from what I remember of high school chemistry, the elements on the table existed in nature - though many were exceedingly rare.

Alex 06-12-2009 12:17 PM

93 through 113 have all been created. 112 was just certified, 113 hasn't yet been (only 8 atoms have been reported created).

93, Neptunium, is entirely man made but has some industrial uses and the stablest isotope has a half life of a couple million years. You've probably heard of 94 - plutonium.

And it isn't so much that these high weight atoms don't occur in nature as that they don't survive long enough to be observed.

innerSpaceman 06-12-2009 12:18 PM

Well, then I acknowledge only the first 93. :p

Capt Jack 06-12-2009 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blueerica (Post 287061)
Hey now, they weren't called Earth, Wind & Fire... & Water.

Do you remember... the 21st night of September?

water was sorta the Pete Best of the elements of R&B/Funk. it was there initially, but the relationship sorta evaporated due to conflict with fire and wind.

earth was unmoved by it all

:p

Kevy Baby 06-12-2009 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pirate Bill (Post 287059)
Why don't we just get back to the basic 4 elements: air, earth, fire, and water.

I honor those four elements frequently.

But for non-scientific reasons.

Strangler Lewis 06-12-2009 02:01 PM

I honor the fifth element.

Moonliner 06-12-2009 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strangler Lewis (Post 287107)
I honor the fifth element.

She's hot. Best costume design ever.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:54 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.