Notices
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Why does periodic table end at 118?

  1. #1 Why does periodic table end at 118? 
    Forum Sophomore somfooleishfool's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    196
    why could there not be an atom with atomic number of 119?
    just found the therietical particle of 119 on google so ill change my question a bit.

    What would ultimatly prevent there from being higher and higher atomic mass particles? could we one day have the technology to synthesise something with 1000 atomic number or is there some limitation?


    Last edited by somfooleishfool; August 6th, 2011 at 01:14 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,294
    The only limitation is the ability to produce and record the existence of a new element then be able to write out a viable scientific report that can be published in a peer-reviewed publication.


    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Ph.D. Nevyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    880
    I think because the higher atomic numbers get more unstable so don't exist for a very long time making it hard to prove their existance
    Come see some of my art work at http://nevyn-pendragon.deviantart.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Bachelors Degree x(x-y)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    462
    Indeed, it is due to the severe instability of the last few elements on the periodic table- they exist for less than a millisecond and are only formed in high energy events such as nuclear explosions. There is still little controversy over the existence and properties of the last few elements such as Uuo (Ununoctium), element 118.
    "Nature doesn't care what we call it, she just does it anyway" - R. Feynman
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Professor Wild Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,140
    Well, I don't think anything has been synthesized past 113 or 114, and they don't exist in nature... that we know of. Thing is, the current set of election configurations we understand end at 118. If you want to theorize what the next set of electron orbits are, have at it.

    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,294
    Actually elements 113-118 have been synthesized in very small quantities already.
    Last edited by Paleoichneum; August 7th, 2011 at 05:45 PM. Reason: spelling
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    Neutronium, theoretical state of matter wherein all particles are compressed into neutrons. What is upper limit in size to this arguably gigantic nucleus?
    Some stellar mass equivalent to x? Thanks in advance.
    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,255
    Quote Originally Posted by The Finger Prince View Post
    Neutronium, theoretical state of matter wherein all particles are compressed into neutrons. What is upper limit in size to this arguably gigantic nucleus?
    Some stellar mass equivalent to x? Thanks in advance.
    A neutron star cannot really be said to be atomic, since there is no nuclear charge and no orbiting electrons.
    "The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or repair." ~ Douglas Adams
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Professor Wild Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,140
    Quote Originally Posted by The Finger Prince View Post
    Neutronium, theoretical state of matter wherein all particles are compressed into neutrons. What is upper limit in size to this arguably gigantic nucleus?
    Some stellar mass equivalent to x? Thanks in advance.
    Wasn't that science fiction, the fuel that propelled the Jupiter II? I know it was theorized in the early 1900's before we understood things as we do today. Never heard of it used since the Jupiter II though.

    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •