Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Science

Periodic Table To Welcome Two New Elements 157

Posted by Soulskill
from the spellchecker-database-grows-by-two dept.
adeelarshad82 writes "Chemistry's periodic table can soon welcome livermorium and flerovium, two newly named elements, which were announced Thursday (Dec. 1) by the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry. The new names will undergo a five-month public comment period before the official paperwork gets processed and they show up on the table. Three other new elements just recently finished this process, filling in the 110, 111 and 112 spots."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Periodic Table To Welcome Two New Elements

Comments Filter:
  • by idontgno (624372) on Friday December 02, 2011 @03:49PM (#38242868) Journal
    Atomic number 115 still hasn't been named (or confirmed, according to TFA), but I know what it should be named when the time comes. [ufopaedia.org]
  • by Red Flayer (890720) on Friday December 02, 2011 @03:55PM (#38242982) Journal
    Well, to be pedantic, it's not updated periodically -- that would imply that it gets updated on a regular basis with a predictable cycle. It's updated sporadically.

    To be more specific, the periodic table can be thought of as a fungus. The elements are the mycelia of the fungus, and once in a while the table produces fruiting bodies (like mushrooms) that will produce spores for the periodic table to reproduce. It is these fruiting bodies that are the new elements. The spores will be released from these new elements when moisture and temperature conditions are right -- and with luck, a given spore may land upon the wall of another elementary school classroom and become a new periodic table of the elements.
  • Re:Love potion? (Score:0, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 02, 2011 @04:21PM (#38243424)
    Yes, when you do it anally.
  • Re:Rejected again! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 02, 2011 @04:23PM (#38243458)

    I dunno, but they really should keep 111 as unununium. It just sounds too damn funny to discard.

  • by newcastlejon (1483695) on Friday December 02, 2011 @04:25PM (#38243490)

    Allow me, then.

    If you define an element as something that "cannot be broken down any further" you exclude anything that decays into lighter elements, such as uranium or radium. You also exclude substances that can be induced to break down through various means.

    However, it's not a problem if you refine the definition slightly: an element is that which cannot be broken down chemically. You can't turn an atom of X into a lighter atom of Y just by mixing chemicals together in a beaker (no offence, chemists, I'm just trying to illustrate a point). Fire X through a particle accelerator hard enough, though, and sometimes it breaks apart into smaller/lighter pieces when it hits something.

    Is that better?

How many Unix hacks does it take to change a light bulb? Let's see, can you use a shell script for that or does it need a C program?

Working...