The periodic table of the elements now officially has two new members, its heaviest ever. The new elements, 114 and 116 weigh 289 and 292 atomic mass units, respectively. By comparison, lead's atomic weight is 207.2.
These radioactive elements won't remain that heavy for long: they exist for under a second before they lose their alpha particles. Scientists once held hope that 114 would inhabit the mythical "island of stability" where ultra-heavy elements could exist for significant periods of time in large quantities, but an experiment in 2009 unfortunately found that was not the case.
When scientists can only create these elements for a fraction of a second, they often have to trace the products of their radioactive decay to determine what the original product was. Since space on the periodic table is the most prized real estate in science, the committees go through extensive review of the evidence before granting a new element a spot.
Elements 114 and 116 currently have placeholder names – ununquadium and ununhexium. Their Russian discoverers at Dubna Joint Institute for Nuclear Research have proposed to name 114 flerovium for Soviet nuclear physicist Georgy Flyorov and to name 116 moscovium after the region Moscow Oblast. These names seem a bit more self-congratulatory than the last (carefully chosen) element title, Copernicum, named for Copernicus, but time will tell whether they become official or not.
I am curious as to what the current theoretically highest element could be. Basically EVERYTHING past 94 (plutonium) is artificially made. Byproducts of nuclear fission. not to mention none of the elements past plutonium had any use what so ever. their are exceptions, like medical equipment and research, but that is the exception not the norm with 95-118.
Those heavy-weight elements are all unstable but if the theorized "island" is there, elements will be found that are not unstable (they don't decay) and they will be useful in many ways. I don't think I've ever heard of a theoretical but there may be one.
You have to remember that Thomas Edison didn't fail 1000 times at making the light bulb. He just figured out 1000 ways not to make a light bulb. While right now their results seem fruitless, the goal they're trying to achieve will most likely make up for the lack of fruits at this point.
I know that electrons have orbital shells, where there is a probability of finding the electron. Does anyone know if there is some kind of analogous structure in the nucleus? If so, would understanding how to optimally fill it be a key to producing a stable version of the atom?
"Thomas Edison didn't fail 1000 times at making the light bulb. He just figured out 1000 ways not to make a light bulb."
I'm pretty sure I did the same thing every time I took a dump in my life. I kept pushing and pushing, but no light bulb.
Oh well... I guess I'm just like Edison... finding ways to not do things. *feels so good about himself now*
Wow... you must be extremely bored to post a comment like you did. And so I'm curious... did you ever figure out the right way to dump a light bulb?
This brings up notions of a "Your momma so fat" joke...
Bored with people who are so pathetic that the only way they can feel adequate about their lame life is by claiming they actually accomplished anti-things... like, how "not to invent a light bulb" or how "not to go to the moon" or how "not to get laid" or how "not to get a job"...
Makes me think of that Simpsons episode where Homer and Lisa go to a New Age cello concert and the music is horrible. Homer complains, and Lisa tells him, "No, Dad, you're supposed to listen to the notes he's NOT playing!"
He replies, "Pft, I can do that at home for free."
Wow B.V. do a search on Thomas Edison and you'll find that he didn't find 1000 ways not to make a light bulb as you suggest. He found one practical way to make a light bulb. All I can say is wow...
Aren't we up to about 120 elements? Please tell me that this is just the fact that these two elements have officially been ushered into the element table, and that you aren't 7-8 elements behind (Ununoctium is my favorite super-element). ▲Bruno▲
wow REALY?!?! I have not heard from B.V. in a while and sure enough when I see him posting JUST LIKE ALWAYS negative and non-constructive at ALL!!!!
Was you father also a troll? or does it s skip a generation?
And Thomas Edison didn't fail 1000 times. He made 1000 different light bulbs. Some good, some not so good. but they ALL WORKED. they ALL produced lights. some for seconds, some for hours, and even days and months!!!
I think anyone can see that. only a negative person would see an experiment that didn't result in the best outcome as a failure. Then I guess 99.9% of all science is a failure in your eyes?
"And Thomas Edison didn't fail 1000 times. He made 1000 different light bulbs."
Yes, if by "he made" you mean "he paid a bunch of underprivileged black people to go through various permutations of filament/gas combinations copied from a Canadian patent until they found the most profitable combination of filament and gas which Edison then brought to market and sold."
Next you're gonna be telling me Henry Ford "made" all of those Model T's...
Furthermore, I'm not denying that Thomas Edison was an immensely successful businessman--I'm just sick and tired of people using the "he didn't fail 1000 times" cliche as an excuse to justify their own failures.
Oh I went to play basketball and I missed 99 of the 100 shots I took... but, I didn't fail... I just discovered 99 ways to NOT score any points *yay!*
It's exactly the kind of delusional B.S. attitude that is responsible for the under-achievements of the U.S.
You missed my point. The failures are equally important in science as the successes. To rule that out sets yourself up for even greater failure down the road. The fact that you missed the point shows us a lot about how you view yourself and others. It's true some people use that phrase in the wrong sense but I didn't so get off of your soap box and quit looking like an idiot.
I'm curious though, where do you live? If it's the United States, remember, it's people who understand the true meaning of Edison's statement that make this country great.
And I suppose that using your reasoning, you would say that you didn't make your meal. You simply paid a bunch of underprivileged workers to sift through various plants and animals to find the suitable ingredients for your meal. Then you simply paid others to put it on your table where you didn't do squat to put it together. While finally eating it? Yea your making a lot of sense...
True he had help. Whether they were underprivileged like you suggest, I don't know. But still, he was the driving force behind it so in my books and apparently the rest of the world, that means he made it.
I think there's something else behind your comments about achievement.
f3ck off BV, dumb sh#t troll
I know it's way late to leave a comment, but I agree with BV.