maddog Posted January 11, 2005 Report Posted January 11, 2005 Anybody aware of what two new elments discovered in 2004 ? I learned about it on theScience channel. I am curious. I learned they were able to do this by banging someAmericium isotope with Calcium nucleus. Also mentioned is that a stable island around aZ ~ 130 or so. Neat stuff! :Alien: Maddog Quote
Tim_Lou Posted January 12, 2005 Report Posted January 12, 2005 Do you mean element 115 and 113?new from this website: http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/2/1/1 Im a bit skeptical though:"Although the team is confident of its results, it agrees that the new elements will require independent confirmation before finally being accepted. The discoveries will be subject to close scrutiny, especially given the recent scandal over element 118. In 2002, the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab in the US sacked a physicist after it found that he had fabricated data purporting to show the existence of this element. Claims that the element had been discovered were subsequently withdrawn."it might have been another made up report... but who knows. Quote
maddog Posted January 12, 2005 Author Report Posted January 12, 2005 Thanks, Tim -- I didn't know which elements they were. I'm going hunting for more info.I have not been aware of any new element beyon 105. How long have I had my head inthe sand.... :) Re: Element 115 and 113 do we know if a new orbital is required beyond the F shell ? Ihave to look at a periodic table. Also how many neutrons beyond 115, huh ? Curious. ...especially given the recent scandal over element 118. In 2002, the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab in the US sacked a physicist after it found that he had fabricated data purporting to show the existence of this element. Claims that the element had been discovered were subsequently withdrawn." I didn't know stuff like that have been going on. Pfshaw, Phshaw!! :) Maddog Quote
ImZ Posted January 12, 2005 Report Posted January 12, 2005 What about element 110....is it discovered yet? Quote
Tormod Posted January 12, 2005 Report Posted January 12, 2005 What about element 110....is it discovered yet? http://pearl1.lanl.gov/periodic/elements/110.html November 9, 1994 at 4:39 pm, the first atom with atomic number 110 was detected at the Gesellschaft fur Schwerionenforschung (GSI) in Darmstadt, in Germany. For the last ten years, this element has been the subject of an intense search by many laboratories world-wide. Quote
maddog Posted January 12, 2005 Author Report Posted January 12, 2005 I found a neat website on all the new developments. webelements.com :) I see that were 118 to be found (and not faked) that it would completed that valence shell. I am still curious what the next orbital would look like ...? Hmmm. :) Maddog Quote
BlameTheEx Posted January 13, 2005 Report Posted January 13, 2005 What is the fascination of elements that have a half life of milliseconds? They can have no commercial use and their properties don't lead to any useful breakthroughs in understanding. Quote
maddog Posted January 14, 2005 Author Report Posted January 14, 2005 What is the fascination of elements that have a half life of milliseconds? They can have no commercial use and their properties don't lead to any useful breakthroughs in understanding. Totally NOT TRUE. Try pushing a few atoms past .9c. Second, nobody has considered thepossibility of creating such short time element in a cooling vessel. Third not all transuranicelements are thought to have such short half-life. The prevailing theory (maybe a hope) isthat there is a stable island of elements with half-life measure in years instead of the usual microseconds time frame. :) Maddog ps: Fourth, somepeople just gotta' know for no good reason. :) Quote
Tim_Lou Posted January 14, 2005 Report Posted January 14, 2005 at least that we have a idea that a certain element exists...... if it exists, there would probably be some stable isotopes of that elements that have longer half lives. Quote
BlameTheEx Posted January 14, 2005 Report Posted January 14, 2005 Totally NOT TRUE. Try pushing a few atoms past .9c. Do you really expect to time dilate atoms into usefulness? So milliseconds are stretched to 10's of milliseconds. But to what end? Second, nobody has considered the possibility of creating such short time element in a cooling vessel. And if they do, to what end? half life is not affected by temperature. Third not all transuranic elements are thought to have such short half-life. The prevailing theory (maybe a hope) is that there is a stable island of elements with half-life measure in years instead of the usual microseconds time frame. A hope that is vanishingly small. If they could exist, we would have them by now at least that we have a idea that a certain element exists...... if it exists, there would probably be some stable isotopes of that elements that have longer half lives.My apologies for not making my meaning clear. The most stable isotopes have half lives of milliseconds. The rest are worse! Quote
Tim_Lou Posted January 14, 2005 Report Posted January 14, 2005 Not really: Uut = Ununtrium, element 113284113Uut --> 279111Uuu + 42He (1196 milliseconds) 1196 milliseconds! which is 1.196 seconds.from http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/Uut/key.html Quote
Tim_Lou Posted January 14, 2005 Report Posted January 14, 2005 at least their half-lives are higher than that of muons:2.2 microseconds :hihi: wait... its measured in microseconds.... so it would be 2.2 * 10^ -3 millisecondsfrom http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon charged pions' are even worse!2.6 × 10−5 millisecondsfrom http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pion Quote
BlameTheEx Posted January 17, 2005 Report Posted January 17, 2005 Not really: Uut = Ununtrium, element 113284113Uut --> 279111Uuu + 42He (1196 milliseconds) 1196 milliseconds! which is 1.196 seconds.from http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/Uut/key.html Wow! More than a second! But still, where are the commercial properties? It is far too short lived to be used in chemistry. Too short lived to be used as a nuclear fuel. The only real benefit is to increase our understanding of how atoms are put together, but we already have good knowledge of many, and it still hasn't helped much. I am going to be a heretic here (but then ain't I always?). I think particle physics has got just about all the useful data it is going to get. What we need is not more exotic atoms, or higher energy particles, but somebody bright enough to put all the clues together and come up with a solution. There are computers powerful enough to deduce the properties of particles and atoms IF they were programed with a complete and accurate description of the fundamental forces involved. Something binds protons and neutrons together to form atoms. I see no reason why that binding force should be any more complicated, in terms of its fundamental nature, than gravity or electromagnetism. It is just complex in operation. Quote
Tim_Lou Posted January 17, 2005 Report Posted January 17, 2005 yeah, there is no commerical purpose... the amount of element produced is so limited. anyway, it will be cool to see a new period on the periodic table... in period 8th, the electrons might fill the sublevel s, then.... will period 8 have p sublevel? or is the electron gonna fill the f, d or....hmmm, the answer will come once the scientists hit period 8 :hihi: Quote
maddog Posted January 17, 2005 Author Report Posted January 17, 2005 Do you really expect to time dilate atoms into usefulness? So milliseconds are stretched to 10's of milliseconds. But to what end? Muons are create from upper atmosphere by cosmic rays. If it wern't for time dilation theywould get farther than 684 or feet ! Can this be comercially harnessed. If I knew, I'd bedoing it. If you don't consider, then nothing will get discovered. A hope that is vanishingly small. If they could exist, we would have them by now You seem to have out of date info or your looking at the glass half empty. I just read howthey are creating these new round discoveries. The scientist are speaking about an islandaround 130. Of course I must admit that many years earlier when 105 was found, it wasthought that the island would be around 118. Still have to look, don't we ? :hihi: Maddog Quote
maddog Posted January 17, 2005 Author Report Posted January 17, 2005 Not really: Uut = Ununtrium, element 113284113Uut --> 279111Uuu + 42He (1196 milliseconds) 1196 milliseconds! which is 1.196 seconds.from http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/Uut/key.html I noticed those names on the website. Can't they come up with better temporary namingconvention ? :hihi: Maddog Quote
Tim_Lou Posted January 18, 2005 Report Posted January 18, 2005 it has to go through the IUPAC first.website: http://www.iupac.org/index_to.html I agree, these names are in fact weird... hard to memorize. They should just assign them like A, B, C, Aa, Ab, Ac... but the problem is that some european countries might not want em in english. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.