Slashdot Mirror


Periodic Table Gets a New, Unnamed Element

koavf writes "More than a decade after experiments first produced a single atom of 'super-heavy' element 112, a team of German scientists has been credited with its discovery, but it has yet to be named. The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry has temporarily named the element ununbium, as 'ununbi' means 'one one two' in Latin; but the team now has the task of proposing its official name." Slashdotium? Taconium? Man, I shoulda gone into science so I could have named something sweet that kids have to memorize in classes.

461 comments

  1. It's so obvious by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 5, Funny

    Colbertium

    1. Re:It's so obvious by Fast+Thick+Pants · · Score: 3, Funny

      Rhymes with Barium? That'll be a boon for Tom Lehrer...

    2. Re:It's so obvious by Hinhule · · Score: 1

      Made a post on the colbertnation boards about it yesterday, apparently I now have Hero status.

      http://forum.colbertnation.com/tcr/board/message?board.id=Stephen&thread.id=3108

    3. Re:It's so obvious by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I'd think you replied to the wrong post, except you quoted the post you did reply to, so I'm just going to suggest you put the crack pipe down and go and find yourself a good psychiatrist.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:It's so obvious by kimvette · · Score: 4, Funny

      I disagree.

      It is an unstable, short-lived element. I vote cowboynealium!

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    5. Re:It's so obvious by wagebo · · Score: 1

      He might be refering to the fact that Obama is aka Barry Soetoro.

    6. Re:It's so obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Xenium, you insensitive clod!

    7. Re:It's so obvious by QuantumRiff · · Score: 1

      In honor of another famous German scientist named Hofmann I propose: LSDium

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    8. Re:It's so obvious by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Colbertium

      Which, fortunately, beat Xemunium. Those whacky scientist-o-logists!

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    9. Re:It's so obvious by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      Tom Lehrer is God?

      Hmm, at least that explains the pornographic stained glass windows...

    10. Re:It's so obvious by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 2, Funny

      On top of that, it's a heavy element as well. Cowboynealium is perfect.

      --
      Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
    11. Re:It's so obvious by vandit2k6 · · Score: 1

      I want to laugh but this really brings tears into my eyes. I just hope you're wrong.

      --
      Its nice to be important but its more important to be nice
    12. Re:It's so obvious by should_be_linear · · Score: 1

      Why Obamium? More like AlGoreium (hint: way too heavy).

      --
      839*929
    13. Re:It's so obvious by piquadratCH · · Score: 1

      In honor of another famous German scientist named Hofmann I propose: LSDium

      That guy was from Switzerland.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Hofmann

    14. Re:It's so obvious by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the offensive odor!

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    15. Re:It's so obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He was a swiss, you ignorant clod!

    16. Re:It's so obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, *I'm* the troll for suggesting that the colbert nation is culurally bankrupt.

    17. Re:It's so obvious by chaboud · · Score: 1

      It's beautiful. It highlights how stupid open online polls are, and how they shouldn't ever be used to name anything important. If people stopped using open online polls for naming, Colbert wouldn't have his name on a bunch of things.

      We've known this for a while (as slashdotters), but it's high time that people get a repeated and obvious lesson.

    18. Re:It's so obvious by conspirator57 · · Score: 1, Funny

      if you go with Gore, the next thing you know, he'll have invented "elements". it'll get way out of hand.

      --
      "If still these truths be held to be
      Self evident."
      -Edna St. Vincent Millay
    19. Re:It's so obvious by Yeti7226 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Unobtainuim (it ook 12 years just to get one atom of the stuff)

    20. Re:It's so obvious by conspirator57 · · Score: 1

      troll, huh? was it also troll when i griped about W naming National Airport after Regan or the CIA HQ after his dad?

      i think not. i just don't like naming stuff (especially publicly owned stuff) after people who aren't dead.

      --
      "If still these truths be held to be
      Self evident."
      -Edna St. Vincent Millay
    21. Re:It's so obvious by Requiem18th · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? The Colbert module in the ISS? Get over that, Colbert is as good a name for a station module as any.

      --
      But... the future refused to change.
    22. Re:It's so obvious by Rip+Dick · · Score: 1

      ...naming National Airport after Regan...

      You're right. Brian Regan's comedy is pretty hilarious, but I don't think it warrants such a dedication, either.

    23. Re:It's so obvious by drodal · · Score: 1

      :P
      get a sense of humor......

    24. Re:It's so obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to see where you meant to reply to :)

    25. Re:It's so obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      culurally bankrupt

      Oh, the irony . . .

    26. Re:It's so obvious by Thinboy00 · · Score: 1

      You get "Hero" status for starting a thread and getting two replies? (That's a rhetorical question; I did RTFColbertnationBoard and he is marked as "Hero")

      --
      $ make available
    27. Re:It's so obvious by Doctor+Jimmy · · Score: 1

      My thoughts exactly!

    28. Re:It's so obvious by Kidbro · · Score: 3, Funny

      It is an unstable, short-lived element

      Windowsium?

    29. Re:It's so obvious by mrmeval · · Score: 1

      Scrotium

      --
      I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
    30. Re:It's so obvious by chaboud · · Score: 1

      I thought it was a toilet, but, either way, my point is that what Colbert is doing is brilliant. Anonymous online polls with such simple measures as cookies to reduce fraud are just silly.

      Anything put up to re-vote friendly public vote should suffer the humorous indignity of being named after Colbert.

    31. Re:It's so obvious by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 4, Funny

      That'll be a boon for Tom Lehrer...

      First you get your mod points spent

      Then you name the element

      Which the trolls will then lament

      Then you rant then you rant then you rant

      Then for real fun

      Use a good pun

      Give it real class! Name it TommyLeherium!

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    32. Re:It's so obvious by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      His name was Hoffmann, and there is a company for chemical cleaning stuff named after him here in Germany.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    33. Re:It's so obvious by metaforest · · Score: 1

      More to the point Hofmannium..... And he was Swiss not German

    34. Re:It's so obvious by ipayne · · Score: 1

      ... an unstable, long-lived element

      Windowsium

      fixed that for you

    35. Re:It's so obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe these are too long lived ... but ...

      OctoMelium!

      TomCruisium!

      LiLolium!

    36. Re:It's so obvious by treeves · · Score: 1

      Are you not familiar with the Tom Lehrer song from many years ago naming all the elements on the periodic table, to the tune of the Major-General's song from The Pirates of Penzance by Gilbert and Sullivan?
      It's a hoot, especially for chemistry geeks. I heard it first (actually, only) on Dr. Demento's radio show.

      I wouldn't have said this new element is unnamed, though. I'm sure it's got a pre-made name like ununununnium or the like.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    37. Re:It's so obvious by treeves · · Score: 1

      Here are the lyrics:

      There's antimony, arsenic, aluminum, selenium
      And hydrogen and oxygen and nitrogen and rhenium
      And nickel, neodymium, neptunium, germanium
      And iron, americium, ruthenium, uranium
      Europium, zirconium, lutetium, vanadium
      And lanthanum and osmium and astatine and radium
      And gold and protactinium and indium and gallium
      And iodine and thorium and thulium and thallium

      / D - - - / A7 - - - / D - - - / A - E7 A /
              / A7 - - Dm / C7 - - F / A7 - - Dm / Bb7 - - A7 - - - - /

      There's yttrium, ytterbium, actinium, rubidium
      And boron, gadolinium, niobium, iridium
      And strontium and silicon and silver and samarium
      And bismuth, bromine, lithium, beryllium, and barium

      / D - - - / A7 - - - / D A7 D A7 / D G DA7 D /

      Isn't that interesting? [Laughter] I knew you would. I hope you're
      all taking notes, because there's going to be a short quiz next period

      There's holmium and helium and hafnium and erbium
      And phosphorus and francium and fluorine and terbium
      And manganese and mercury, molybdenum, magnesium
      Dysprosium and scandium and cerium and cesium
      And lead, praseodymium, and platinum, plutonium
      Palladium, promethium, potassium, polonium
      And tantalum, technetium, titanium, tellurium
      And cadmium and calcium and chromium and curium

      There's sulfur, californium, and fermium, berkelium
      And also mendelevium, einsteinium, nobelium
      And argon, krypton, neon, radon, xenon, zinc, and rhodium
      And chlorine, carbon, cobalt, copper, tungsten, tin, and sodium

      These are the only ones of which
      The news has come to Ha'vard
      And there may be many others
      But they haven't been discavard

      / D A7 / / D G / DA7 D /

      [Alternate ending:]

      Lawrencium and Hahnium and lastly Rutherfordium
      If there are any others, I'm afraid I haven't heardium

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    38. Re:It's so obvious by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I know the song well, but I'm at a loss to understand how you get from a Tom Leher reference to a rant about atheism.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    39. Re:It's so obvious by treeves · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I missed that post, as it was at -1.
      Never mind.
      Maybe someone who didn't know about the song became informed.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    40. Re:It's so obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ubuntium

  2. Colbertium by saddino · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Bank on it...

    1. Re:Colbertium by oodaloop · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, I hope they're smart enough not to have an open ballot. It would be Colbertium for sure.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    2. Re:Colbertium by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      Bear in mind that a German team might ballot Germans rather than Americans. I think Colbert has rather less mindshare East of the Atlantic. If I had to make a guess I'd plump for Emergencium, as a play on the European emergency telephone number.

    3. Re:Colbertium by Chris_Jefferson · · Score: 1

      Surely Mootium?

      --
      Combination - fun iPhone puzzling
    4. Re:Colbertium by nicolas.kassis · · Score: 1

      do not underestimate the ability of Colbertians to get what they want.

    5. Re:Colbertium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anoniumous?

    6. Re:Colbertium by cashman73 · · Score: 1

      No, the Space Station module was named Tranquility, after the first moon landing spot. NASA named the new treadmill for the ISS after Stephen Colbert -- Combined Operational Load Bearing External Resistance Treadmill.

    7. Re:Colbertium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL that makes it even funnier, a treadmill. Still shouldn't stop his egomania j/k =)

    8. Re:Colbertium by metaforest · · Score: 1

      Not bad....

      I had momentarily considered Danzigium and the provocative 'Nazium'

      How about....

      Hasselhoffnium?

  3. Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator by b1t+r0t · · Score: 2, Funny
    --

    --
    "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
    "Open source is evil." - Microsoft
    1. Re:Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator by intjgeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They should auction the right to name it off to the highest bidder. Use the proceeds for further research or donate it to charity..etc..

      --
      -- INTJ Geek Blog http://www.intjgeek.com
    2. Re:Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      They should auction the right to name it off to the highest bidder. Use the proceeds for further research or donate it to charity..etc..

      Screw that. Do you really want an element called Microsoftium?

    3. Re:Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator by nausea_malvarma · · Score: 1

      Yeah right. "Pepsi Presents: Flavorium" Will never fit on the periodic table.

    4. Re:Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a great idea.

    5. Re:Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They should auction the right to name it off to the highest bidder.

      Sexdotcomium ?

    6. Re:Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator by intjgeek · · Score: 1

      I have setup en ebay auction for this. I don't know if it will work because the scientists have agreed to nothing, but if we get a big enough bid maybe they will consider it. http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220432828283

      --
      -- INTJ Geek Blog http://www.intjgeek.com
    7. Re:Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator by howlingfrog · · Score: 1

      That creature has stolen the space modulator!

      --
      The original Howling Frog is a fictional character and has no UID.
    8. Re:Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator by Tribbin · · Score: 1

      So in the future 'intel inside' might have a double meaning.

      --
      If you mod this up, your slashdot background will turn into a beautiful sunset!
    9. Re:Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator by niktemadur · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the possibility of egotastic self-promoters winning the bid and making a mockery of the process.
      "At a press conference today, it was announced that Periodic Table element PuffDaddium now wishes to be referred to as PDiddium".

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    10. Re:Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator by lavaface · · Score: 1
    11. Re:Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator by Phil06 · · Score: 1

      Fellatium

      --
      "...and yet, I blame society" Duke - Repo Man
  4. Best name ever by splatacaster · · Score: 5, Funny

    Unobtainium

    1. Re:Best name ever by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 4, Funny

      Except they did, so you'd have to name it Obtainedium.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    2. Re:Best name ever by troll8901 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Unobtainium

      ... also known as element 404.

    3. Re:Best name ever by wooferhound · · Score: 1

      After all , they have only ever produced a single atom of the stuff, so it is pretty much Unobtainable.
      I hope they saved it for later research.

      --
      We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
    4. Re:Best name ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      503 Joke temporarily unavailable

    5. Re:Best name ever by Robin47 · · Score: 1

      One atom away in fact...

    6. Re:Best name ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... also known as element 404.

      It cuts grease real good, too.

    7. Re:Best name ever by ctrl-alt-canc · · Score: 1

      But they just obtained it, isn't it ?!? I would second administratium , but they found too much protons

    8. Re:Best name ever by dmesg0 · · Score: 1

      So it should be Ununobtainium (which is very close to the current name)

    9. Re:Best name ever by OrangeTimer · · Score: 1

      I agree. I too take my cues on science from the holy grail of science films... The Core.

  5. Interesting Fact by Lord+Byron+II · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The natural abbreviation for Plutonium is Pl, which was free since Platinum uses Pt. One of the discoverers, Glenn Seaborg, thought it would be funny to submit it with the abbreviation Pu. He figured the joke would be noticed and the abbreviation changed, but it never happened.

    1. Re:Interesting Fact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [citation needed]

    2. Re:Interesting Fact by leshii · · Score: 5, Informative

      ^ As one article puts it, referring to information Seaborg gave in a talk: "The obvious choice for the symbol would have been Pl, but facetiously, Seaborg suggested Pu, like the words a child would exclaim, 'Pee-yoo!' when smelling something bad. Seaborg thought that he would receive a great deal of flak over that suggestion, but the naming committee accepted the symbol without a word." Clark, David L.; Hobart, David E. (2000). "Reflections on the Legacy of a Legend: Glenn T. Seaborg, 1912â"1999" (PDF). Los Alamos Science 26: 56â"61, on 57. Retrieved on 2009-02-15 http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/lanl/pubs/00818011.pdf

    3. Re:Interesting Fact by Deadstick · · Score: 4, Funny

      In the early days of nuke research, a number of physicists picked up dosages of plutonium that worried the AEC, so it instituted a program of measuring the Pu content of their urine once a year ad infinitum and monitoring for health effects. Those people refer to themselves as the IPPU Club...

      rj

    4. Re:Interesting Fact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I'm not sure "Pl" would be such a good choice for plutonium since platinum also start with pl. What you want is something natural and unambiguous. Pu is awesome.

    5. Re:Interesting Fact by niktemadur · · Score: 1

      Glenn Seaborg thought it would be funny to submit it with the abbreviation Pu.

      Ah yes, Mr Seaborg. My nephew's Periodic Table is autographed by the man!
      Here's a nice little tidbit for y'all, Seaborg is the only man whose work address is fully composed by names of elements from the Periodic Table:
      Seaborgium
      Lawrencium
      Berkelium
      Californium
      Americium

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    6. Re:Interesting Fact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the natural abbreviation for Aquarium?

    7. Re:Interesting Fact by oatworm · · Score: 1

      Pi, in homage to the original Latin name of one of the more obvious substances that frequently bonded with Aquarium: "Piscis".

  6. assuming a trend by spyrochaete · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Due to the atomic number 112 I recommend Fibonaccium, after the Fibonacci sequence which adds the 2 preceding numbers to find the next in sequence.

    1. Re:assuming a trend by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      But then what will they name element 11235?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:assuming a trend by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 4, Funny

      reallyfuckingheavium

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    3. Re:assuming a trend by CosmeticLobotamy · · Score: 1

      Imnotcarryingityoucarryitum.

    4. Re:assuming a trend by MoldySpore · · Score: 1

      But then what will they name Element 123?

      --

      "I hope you know how very lucky you are to know me, because I am so incredibly incredible."

    5. Re:assuming a trend by winkydink · · Score: 2, Funny

      too long. How about Hernium?

      --

      "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

    6. Re:assuming a trend by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 1

      Sequencium

      --
      Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
    7. Re:assuming a trend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is the best suggestion I've read.

    8. Re:assuming a trend by Abstrackt · · Score: 5, Funny

      yourmomium?

      --
      They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
    9. Re:assuming a trend by revealingheart · · Score: 1

      Or, 112 should be Additium. Then, 113 would be Bogofnium, and 114 Nontotientum!

      (Who thought 114 could be such a boring number? That'll keep the namers busy.)

    10. Re:assuming a trend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lickmyballsium

    11. Re:assuming a trend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cliffskium could work ... it's pretty dense, after all.

    12. Re:assuming a trend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RFH

      Doesn't roll of the tongue as well as BFG, but it works.

    13. Re:assuming a trend by niktemadur · · Score: 1

      By that point, it'll be more like
      reallyreallyreallyfuckingheavium(andthistimewereallymeanitforsure)

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    14. Re:assuming a trend by arndawg · · Score: 1

      yourmomspasswordium

    15. Re:assuming a trend by metaforest · · Score: 1

      That has some potential...

      How about....

      Rushnium?

  7. Good News Everyone! by strength_of_10_men · · Score: 5, Funny

    They've found the Jumbonium that I've misplaced!

    1. Re:Good News Everyone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that some sort of word play on Jim Bunion or did The Onion put you up to this ?

    2. Re:Good News Everyone! by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      Re:Good News Everyone! (Score:0, Redundant) by Megane (129182)

      The Redundant mods are going to be flying all over this thread today.

      I smell karma burning. Hope you anticipated that :-P

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
  8. Good news everybody! by Bozzio · · Score: 0, Redundant

    We could name it Jumbonium!

    --
    I just pooped your party.
    1. Re:Good news everybody! by bb5ch39t · · Score: 1

      What about Obeseium?

    2. Re:Good news everybody! by pwfffff · · Score: 1

      Good News Everyone! (Score:1)
      by strength_of_10_men (967050) on Thursday June 11, @09:46AM (#28293783)
      They've found the Jumbonium that I've misplaced!

      ---

      Good news everybody! (Score:2)
      by Bozzio (183974) on Thursday June 11, @09:46AM (#28293793)
      We could name it Jumbonium!

      ---

      Scary...

    3. Re:Good news everybody! by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      But be careful to keep Jumbonium off the tracks.

      rj

    4. Re:Good news everybody! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but only because Americium is already taken?

    5. Re:Good news everybody! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, snap! Zing!

    6. Re:Good news everybody! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who modded this redundant? I submitted it less than a minute after the original. So, it should be pretty obvious that the original wasn't there when I clicked "reply."

      Sit ubu, sit. Bad mod.

    7. Re:Good news everybody! by Bozzio · · Score: 1

      Please refer to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D1cap6yETA

      So, yes, I got it wrong. You get the point, though.

      --
      I just pooped your party.
  9. Bushonium by elrous0 · · Score: 0, Troll

    In honor of the U.S. President who did so much to advance our respect for science.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Bushonium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Dubyum?

    2. Re:Bushonium by Experiment+626 · · Score: 1

      During Bush's administration, I would have taken that as sarcasm. But after Obama's gutting the space budget, honoring Bush's scientific enlightenment is starting to sound like a good idea.

    3. Re:Bushonium by petrus4 · · Score: 1

      During Bush's administration, I would have taken that as sarcasm. But after Obama's gutting the space budget, honoring Bush's scientific enlightenment is starting to sound like a good idea.

      The problem with a space program is that, in practical terms, it just isn't really very useful, at least not at this point in time. Truthfully we're not really anywhere near technologically ready for one, anywayz. As I've written before, the contemporary space shuttle(s) are around the spacefaring equivalent of travelling on water, by putting one leg on either side of a hollow log. On water in a terrestrial environment, that's ok, (as long as you're in calm sea, which also doesn't contain sharks) but in space it doesn't work quite so well.

      We need to develop better propulsion technology first, (or at least stop murdering scientists who try) and we also need to realise that terraforming our own planet is going to need to come first, before we think about giving it a shot on Mars. Given the current corporate attitude, even if we had the technology, industry would start creating pollution there even while the terraforming process was underway.

    4. Re:Bushonium by c6gunner · · Score: 2, Interesting

      (or at least stop murdering [waterfuelcell.org] scientists who try)

      I was with you, right up until I clicked that link. Seeing as how you're apparently a proponent of perpetual motion, I hereby demand that you surrender all rights to comment on future science-based discussions.

    5. Re:Bushonium by nicolas.kassis · · Score: 1

      And the money for this development comes from where?

    6. Re:Bushonium by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      It has a very short nuculear half-life.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    7. Re:Bushonium by realnrh · · Score: 1

      More accurate would be Dumdum.

      --
      Long? What do you mean the signature at the bottom of every comment I post on Slashdot is too lo
    8. Re:Bushonium by niktemadur · · Score: 1

      After Obama's gutting the space budget, honoring Bush's scientific enlightenment is starting to sound like a good idea.

      Oh boy, here I go on an offtopic rant, but:
      Stem cell research, anyone? I don't mean to be facetious and there's nothing I love more than space research and exploration, but there's no comparison here.

      Whereas Bush pulled the plug on much scientific activity due to a misguided sense of faith, Obama is trying to be pragmatic about it while being handed an ideology-driven mess of historic proportions. I can't wrap my head around trying to balance the national budget as corrupt and incompetent crony corporations are collapsing and being bailed out, the inherited foreign policy is a bottomless money pit and economists like Paul Krugman are warning that the economic stimulus is too small.

      Look at this fucked up graph and ask yourself where does the money come from. This is not Obama doing things that displease me on a gut level, this is Obama dealing with a clusterfuck many of us witnessed with horror during eight eternal years. Add to this the current weak-spined Democrat-led Congress (where much of the national budget is formulated) caving in to demands of a loud minority of ignorant Republicans left over from the electoral massacre of 2008... it doesn't look good, does it, doctor?

      Things were FUBAR long before Obama arrived on the scene, give the man time. The silver lining for the NASA debacle (let's face it, a broken system since the waning days of the Apollo project) is that it may rise from the ashes as a faster, leaner and meaner entity, or a new one altogether! Birthing pains, phasing out the bloated old political Space Shuttle (lots of employees, alas), making circumstances flexible enough (finally!) for a flotilla of smaller and cheaper spaceships able to take off and land horizontally, with technology that exists on the shelves (scramjet, etc). Once the painful transition is made, the industry (and employment) will bloom into levels never before seen.

      To wrap my rant in a nutshell, I deeply hope that besides pragmatism, Obama also has long term vision here, as opposed to giving priority to the social/political bottom line on a trimester by trimester basis.

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    9. Re:Bushonium by petrus4 · · Score: 1

      I was with you, right up until I clicked that link. Seeing as how you're apparently a proponent of perpetual motion, I hereby demand that you surrender all rights to comment on future science-based discussions.

      LOL.

      Oxyhydrogen generation isn't perpetual motion. I haven't heard of anyone using it who claims that it is limitless. Water is limited, carbon steel is limited, current is certainly limited, and you need all of those.

      Hydrogen can, however, make a fairly powerful bang when channeled in the right way. Then again, however, given that you're so much more scientifically oriented than me, you'd know that. ;)

    10. Re:Bushonium by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Oxyhydrogen generation isn't perpetual motion

      Well, that's true enough. What makes it perpetual motion is that numbnuts claimed that he could get more energy out of his mixture than he put into creating it from water. Look, I'll only explain this to you once, so pay attention:

      Splitting apart a water molecule requires energy. The amount of energy isn't important for the example, so we'll refer to it as X. When you burn the resultant hydrogen gas, the hydrogen atoms recombine with oxygen atoms to form water, which release Y amount of energy. Since the molecules you started with are exactly the same as the molecules you ended up with, the amount of energy released can not exceed the amount of energy you started with. X can only ever be equal to Y, never greater. In practice, X is always less than Y, because of the inefficiencies in the conversion process - both the splitting and the recombining of the water molecules results in waste heat, light, and/or noise being generated by your apparatus.

      Now using some catalysts allows you to reduce (or eliminate) the amount of electrical energy required to split the molecules, but the extra energy has to come from somewhere. That's why all such catalysts are used up in the conversion process - because the total energy value of the system can not increase. In other words, the catalyst which you are using is giving up it's own energy to the water molecules in order to split them, and in the process is turning into a lower-energy substance. In that case, the real fuel in your system is the catalyst because it requires replenishment - water/hydrogen would just be the medium used to deliver the energy to your engine. And where do you get the catalyst from? You either make it - which, again, requires more energy than what you'll get out of the system - or you dig it out of the ground - which makes it a limited resource, and in which case you have to do a cost/benefit analysis to determine whether the system is cost-effective. Stanley Meyer did none of the above - he just said "Look, I can make energy from water!", and hundreds of gullible and uneducated individuals believed him.

      Clear as mud?

      Hydrogen can, however, make a fairly powerful bang when channeled in the right way

      I believe the word you're looking for is "ignited". Channeling is what mediums claim to do.

      Yes, hydrogen can "make a powerful bang", but that has nothing to do with the fact that Stanley Mayer was either a lunatic or a fraud, and that the "invention" he created not only failed to work as advertised but COULD not work without violating the laws of thermodynamics. Interestingly enough, he was even ordered to pay out $20,000 to people he scammed, after his "invention" was examined by experts and the evidence presented in a court of law. You'd have to be pretty damn ignorant in order to continue believing his claims. Also, if you seriously believe the conspiracy theories surrounding his death, you've probably got a screw loose yourself.

    11. Re:Bushonium by petrus4 · · Score: 1

      Splitting apart a water molecule requires energy. The amount of energy isn't important for the example, so we'll refer to it as X.

      From the analysis of his device that I read, what he specifically claimed was that he'd found a way to replicate hydrogen atoms.

      He may well have been a lunatic, a fraud, or both. It's just odd (and a little coincidental) that he winds up dying only a few years after he's also claimed that he was offered $10 billion to sit on his work and not do anything further with it, don't you think?

      Assuming hypothetically that someone did kill him, if he was simply a loony, why would they bother? Wouldn't that just make him look more credible in the eyes of impressionable people like me?

    12. Re:Bushonium by metaforest · · Score: 1

      Ohhh

      How about

      Sarcasium?

    13. Re:Bushonium by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      From the analysis of his device that I read, what he specifically claimed was that he'd found a way to replicate hydrogen atoms.

      And you find that to be MORE plausible? Are you insane?

      He may well have been a lunatic, a fraud, or both.

      There's no "may" involved - he was without any doubt at least one of the above.

      It's just odd (and a little coincidental) that he winds up dying only a few years after he's also claimed that he was offered $10 billion to sit on his work and not do anything further with it, don't you think?

      Oh yeah, that happens all the time. Just yesterday I was offered 15 quintillion dollars to cover up my discovery of anti-gravity technology using magnets, mangoes, and custard. You think maybe I should be watching out for assassination attempts?

  10. I vote for Stuff.` by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

    Or maybe etherium.
    uberium.
      SteveJobbsium.
    Linuxium
    novaium
    or just stuff.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:I vote for Stuff.` by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

      How about dilithium...so we can hear scotty say it loud and proud?

    2. Re:I vote for Stuff.` by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 1

      If it tastes good, it should be called 'Yumium'.

    3. Re:I vote for Stuff.` by metaforest · · Score: 1

      you missed a beat:

      Yumyumium?

  11. Old school. by lanes · · Score: 5, Funny

    Upsidaisium. Or wonderflonium.

    1. Re:Old school. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wonderflonium! Do not bounce!

  12. Bolognium by jameskojiro · · Score: 1

    Such a crappy element.

    Or maybe how about Moronium

    --
    Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
    1. Re:Bolognium by Sique · · Score: 1

      What has Bologna to do with the element? It was created in Darmstadt, but Darmstadtium (110), Hassium (108, Hassia is the state where Darmstadt is located) and Germanium (32) are all taken.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
  13. Good News Everyone! by Bob+Loblaw · · Score: 1

    The new element will be named Jumbonion, of course.

  14. Nobody is Going to Chance a Vote by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 2, Funny

    We've just received word that the Oval Office has mandated the new element be called "Obamanium." That whole voting thing is so-o-o-o-o-o 2008 Democratic Republic...

    1. Re:Nobody is Going to Chance a Vote by Ezrymyrh · · Score: 0

      But it will only have a half life of 4 years, then decay into republiconium. Unless enriched with lots of H.O.P.E. then it slows the decay by 1/2.

      --
      The love of good Whiskey,Woman,Weed is all i need.
    2. Re:Nobody is Going to Chance a Vote by drodal · · Score: 1

      someone mod this down as offensive.....

  15. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why dont you say what you really mean?

  16. Just give up by dmomo · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's going to be something like: BankofAmericaElementium

    1. Re:Just give up by barocco · · Score: 1

      I'm just curious, but what happens if we allow corporate sponsorship in exchange of naming scientific discoveries they'd like?

    2. Re:Just give up by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

      It's going to be something like: BankofAmericaElementium

      Bah, if the corporate interests get to name it, then it's obviously going to be Aureipalatium or something, because some companies just love to do that sort of things and have previous experience on the practice. =)

    3. Re:Just give up by tim_darklighter · · Score: 1

      No, they'd change Am to BankofAmericium before that, and then make Barium become Bm so that they could have Ba.

    4. Re:Just give up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This has been modded funny, but if I were a betting man, I'd put my money on it being named after a corporation.

    5. Re:Just give up by snookums · · Score: 1

      Unless they open it to Internet voting. In which case it will be Nevergonnagiveyouupium.

      --
      Be careful. People in masks cannot be trusted.
    6. Re:Just give up by CptNerd · · Score: 1

      Unless they open it to Internet voting. In which case it will be Nevergonnagiveyouupium.

      You mean rickrollium?

      --
      By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
    7. Re:Just give up by Beerdood · · Score: 1

      Too long. Maybe something shorter and catchier, like McElement. Would also consider Cokium or Walmartium

      --
      Global warming and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking number of pirates - Gospel of the FSM
  17. A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A nucleus with a half-life measured in milliseconds or smaller doesn't seem to qualify, at least in my sort of language-to-thought translator, as really as an "element". That word carries with it the connotation of actual material existence which seems incompatible with its inability to actually exist for any period of time on the human scale.

    I freely admit this is a quibble, but this sort of thing bugs me. Yes, IAAP and this rant has no bearing whatsoever on the scientific merits of the research (not my field, so I'll pass on that) and is just about the naming.

    1. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by RobVB · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you want to quibble about semantics, here's one for you: an atom with a half-life.

      --
      I'd rather you rationally disagree than irrationally agree.
    2. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So whats the time?
      Everything on the periodic tables will fade after a time.
      Is it a millisecond? a full second? a year? million years?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oooo, that does hurt the brain.

    4. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by idontgno · · Score: 5, Insightful

      True. Matter and energy are transient; entropy and stupidity are eternal.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    5. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Sure, the atom is a tad underpowered, but they should be able to run half-life.

    6. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by MartinSchou · · Score: 1

      Everything on the periodic tables will fade after a time.

      As in it will decay into something else?

      And what exactly will hydrogen decay into?

    7. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by bcrowell · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Technetium, element 43, has no stable isotopes. Do you want to forbid people from referring to it as an element? That would be kind of silly. Chemists can do reactions with technetium, form compounds with it, etc.

      Or if you want to arbitrarily pick some minimum half-life, what is that half-life going to be?

    8. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Deadstick · · Score: 2, Informative
      No problem: "half life" is just the period of time that an atom has a 0.5 probability of surviving. In other words, it's directly comparable to "life expectancy" -- and you have one of those.

      rj

    9. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh, pwned!

    10. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      So how do you define an element? Half-life of one minute? What natural distinction does that represent? If you put the right nucleons together and the strong force grabs them, I'd say it quacks like an element.

      rj

    11. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by glwtta · · Score: 1

      its inability to actually exist for any period of time on the human scale

      That makes no sense, why would it need to exist on the "human scale" to actually exist? Most of physics doesn't work on the human scale.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    12. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      An isotope might have a half-life, yes, but an atom doesn't.

    13. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 1
    14. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by n30na · · Score: 1

      Why don't we ask Gordon Freeman?

    15. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Attlanttizz · · Score: 1

      On the other hand it is possible that this element is produced in some heavy mass stars, and even though it has a short life it is produced enough to call it an existing element.

      I for one am surprised for instance that free standing neutrons have only a half-life of 15 minutes, even though it is stable when bound in a nucleus.

      Perhaps element 112 could be stable when chemically bound to other elements? Not that I am any expert on this matter, just thinking out aloud.

    16. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If proton decay is real, then perhaps hydrogen will decay into a positron and a neutral pion and a free electron. The neutral pion quickly decays into two photons.

    17. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Helium

    18. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Hatta · · Score: 1

      What is the half life of helium-4?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    19. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by protein+folder · · Score: 1

      What the hell do you think an isotope is?

      --
      Your mind is squeezed by a blast of pain!
    20. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 1

      If you want to quibble about semantics, here's one for you: an atom with a half-life

      That's a good quibble, but so long has passed from when the term was coined (back when the atom was thought to be atomic in the indivisible sense) that it's impossible to go back and rework the language. By contrast, my quibble here involves naming an "element" right now, so it's a current dispute.

      Reading Democritus is fun though! Better than the infinite-divisibility theories of the time -- bones are made of smaller bones which are themselves made of smaller bones ad infinitum!

    21. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by machine321 · · Score: 1

      Protons, electrons, and sub-atomic particles?

    22. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by 4D6963 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Isotopes and atoms are the same thing in nature, the difference in terms is that you use isotope for atoms of the same element with a different atomic mass. So if a chemical element only has one isotope and that it's radioactive then it's correct to claim that an atom has a half life.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    23. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Celeste+R · · Score: 1

      An atom with a half-life can still bind with other atoms, and an atom with a common half-life doesn't necessarily have to have a half-life at all. The fact that each atom binds to other atoms differently is important, and that's why it's catalogued in the Periodic Table.

      As has been observed in the past, an isotope can actually be stable, where the more common variant isn't.

      You, sir, are misinformed.

      --
      There are no perfect answers, only the right questions. More questions at http://foresightandhindsight.blogspot.com/
    24. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by MadTinfoilHatter · · Score: 1

      No problem: "half life" is just the period of time that an atom has a 0.5 probability of surviving.

      I believe that the GP was referring to the fact that the word "atom" means "undividable". But that's just my guess, of course...

    25. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 1

      No, the nuclei of elements below (and including) lead are infinitely stable* ** -- you would have to input energy to break those nuclei apart. Be grateful for this -- this allows the sun to generate energy from 4H->He -- that reaction is downhill in energy, albeit with a huge activation barrier.

      If all elements decayed into hydrogen, nuclear fusion would be impossible and the universe would be a colder, darker place than it already is.

      * That is, there exists at least one infinitely-stable isotope for that element, for those that want to quibble.

      ** According to all proven physics (e.g. the Standard Model -- you don't get a name like that without being pretty well hashed out). String theory suggests the decay of the proton, which might change this. On the other hand, string theory suggests all kinds of wacky and sometime contradictory (there are lots of implementations) things that need to be sorted out by experiment before we start quoting them like fact.

      Further Reading:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stable_isotope
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_elements_by_nuclear_stability
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton_decay

    26. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And during that 1 millisecond that the atom existed for, your computer executed 3 million instructions (maybe more if it happens to be a quad-core).

      Why should we limit ourselves to the time dimension though?
      A single atom of anything is too small for you to measure. So, since you can't see hydrogen or oxygen atoms, does that mean they don't exist?
      Clearly, they are too small to qualify as an "element" since that word carries the connotation of a building block (like a brick, for instance).

    27. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 1

      Technetium, element 43, has no stable isotopes. Do you want to forbid people from referring to it as an element? That would be kind of silly. Chemists can do reactions with technetium, form compounds with it, etc.

      Or if you want to arbitrarily pick some minimum half-life, what is that half-life going to be?

      I think you just gave me a perfectly non-arbitrary standard -- if it lives long enough to do chemistry, it's an element. Certainly many of the very heavy atoms with half-life in the nanoseconds don't qualify. This makes a lot of sense to me now too -- an element is defined by its chemical properties and so without chemistry, no element.

      Thanks for helping me out there!

    28. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Stupidity is an illusion created by poeple who don't want to fully understand a given situation.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    29. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Brimmith · · Score: 1

      Who's to say that this element, that's not stable on our planet, be stable on another planet? We know there are more elements but that haven't lasted long enough for us to classify them as elements. I'm sure somewhere in the universe they exist in nature.

    30. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by HybridST · · Score: 0

      I would imagine that it's ever so slightly less than that of the nucleons inside it...

      --
      Ever notice that Cobra Commander sounds an awful lot like Star scream?
    31. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh? Hey, stop making fun of Poland!

    32. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Don't they, though? Even protons have a half life of about 1x10^36 years. A free neutron decays in about 15 minutes. All particles have a half-life, some are just much, much shorter than others.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    33. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Ecuador · · Score: 1

      I am sure entropy doesn't have to be eternal, there must be a way to reverse it... Hmm, let's ask Multivac...

      --
      Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
    34. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      an element is defined by its chemical properties and so without chemistry, no element.

      Last I checked, an element is defined by the number of protons in the nucleus of an atom of that element. Hence, an atom with 112 protons in the nucleus is element 112. There's no need for anything about stability of any isotopes of the element in the definition.

    35. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by reverseengineer · · Score: 1

      But to make that distinction actually takes away from the most powerful feature of the periodic table- that you may predict chemical and physical properties of unknown elements through their relationships to known elements on the table. Even though only single, highly unstable nuclei of Element 112 have ever been synthesized, we can predict that it will behave like the other Group 12 elements (zinc, cadmium, mercury). It should be a volatile metal, possibly either liquid or gas at standard temperature and pressure, it should have a +2 oxidation state and readily form oxides and sulfides, and it probably forms amalgam-type alloys the way mercury does.

      I understand the trepidation to call something an "element" if its rarity and instability means that it has never existed as part of a chemical compound, but I think there is more utility in connecting these superheavy laboratory creations to the existing table of chemical elements than there is in presenting them as something altogether different.

      After all, what evidence we do have strongly suggests that short-lived as they are, the transactinides do have the chemical properties predicted by their periodic table locations. Hassium (Element 108), whose most stable isotope has a half-life of about 17 minutes, for instance, has been experimentally shown to form a tetroxide, just like osmium above it in the table. And it's important to note that most of the transactinides, unstable as they are, do tend to have at least one isotope with half-life in the seconds-to-minutes range, which can be long enough to get them to participate in chemical reactions.

      --
      "FDA staff reviewers expressed concern about the number of patients who were left out of the study because they died."
    36. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's all load of kipple.

    37. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Worked with Pluto

    38. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is a poeple? And why are we letting them create illusions?

      Especially when they don't want to fully understand a situation?

      I think an illusion created under those circumstances would, indeed, be stupid.

      But aside from that, you're wrong. Stupidity is all too real.

    39. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

      Yes, IAAP

      What's a pemist?

    40. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by CptNerd · · Score: 1

      True. Matter and energy are transient; entropy and stupidity are eternal.

      Hm, so has anyone suggested "inanium?"

      --
      By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
    41. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by metaforest · · Score: 1

      How about....

      Pedantium?

      Or

      Uselessinium?

    42. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by metaforest · · Score: 1

      Stupidium.
      Worthlessium,
      Patheticium,
      Prematureium,
      Stillbornium,
      Fartainium
      Rantium,
      twinkleinium,
      Noseeinium,
      Dontcareium.

    43. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No problem: "half life" is just the period of time that an atom has a 0.5 probability of surviving. In other words, it's directly comparable to "life expectancy" -- and you have one of those.

      rj

      errr no. It's an FPS made by Valve.

    44. Re:A semantic quibble about these things (rant?) by Skjellifetti · · Score: 1

      You've discovered peridoxium.

  18. Cardboardium. by Franklin+Brauner · · Score: 2, Funny

    The most useful element.

    1. Re:Cardboardium. by AndrewNeo · · Score: 1

      This way we can make a space ship out of cardboardium alloys!

    2. Re:Cardboardium. by jeffshoaf · · Score: 1

      The most useful element.

      Nope - that would be ducttapeium.

      --
      Putting the "anal" back into "analyst"...
    3. Re:Cardboardium. by dodobh · · Score: 1

      Ductapium.

      --
      I can throw myself at the ground, and miss.
  19. all hail.... by somecreepyoldguy · · Score: 4, Funny

    hypnotoadium

    1. Re:all hail.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All Glory to the hypnotoadium...

  20. Unobtainium by gigowiz · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Not available anywhere!

  21. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Hinhule · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why dont you say what you really mean?

    Fine, I'm a little bit better than the rest of you slackers.

    Happy now?

  22. The by JustOK · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Element formerly known as ununb"i. And give it some funky symbol

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
    1. Re:The by bky1701 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The middle ages called, they want their alchemy back.

  23. Take a page from hollywood by somecreepyoldguy · · Score: 1

    make it a sequel how about Oxygen2 Silicon 2.0 Plutonium 4: This Time its Personal

  24. Geekoidium by geekoid · · Score: 1

    or maybe Farnsworthium? Herbertium?

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  25. the discovery was announced at a meeting by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Funny

    in a large hall previously devoted to gymnastics

    so i propose gymnasium, auditorium, or symposium

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  26. Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    I have a serious question. Looking at the history of human technical achievement, why are Germans overrepresented among technical achievers? The Germans produced the first car (beating Henry Ford to the punch), co-invented calculus (with an Englishman), developed part of the foundation of quantum physics, etc.

    By contrast, I see almost nothing from any African state. Africans contributed almost nothing to human technical achievement. (The father of Barack Hussein Obama is a Kenyan. In Kenya, arresting and burning supposed witches is still a common occurrence.)

    Does anyone know why the Germans outperform? I define "German" to include "German Jews".

  27. Emergentium by TeknoHog · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In Europe, the general emergency call number is 112. I also like Gentoo.

    --
    Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    1. Re:Emergentium by SlovakWakko · · Score: 1

      You just beat me to this proposal :)

    2. Re:Emergentium by jshackles · · Score: 5, Funny

      No it's 0118 999 881 999 119 7253

    3. Re:Emergentium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, that's easy to remember.

    4. Re:Emergentium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Britain is not really Europe

    5. Re:Emergentium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but only in the UK since they privatized their emergency system.

  28. They flunked Latin... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Bi" comes from "bis", which is Latin for "twice". "Un" by itself doesn't really mean anything, but can be used as a prefix as in "undeviginti", meaning nineteen. "One" is "unus", "una" or "unum", depending on the gender. I suppose "centesimusduodecimium" would be a bit too complicated? (from "centesimus duodecimus", meaning "the hundred and twelfth")

    1. Re:They flunked Latin... by Phreakiture · · Score: 1

      There is a standardized set of modules that are used for temporarily naming heavy elements, which modules are all one-syllable, and have been carefully selected from Latin and Greek both, with the purpose being to make sure that taking the first letter of each module will provide a unique mnemonic for the element. Hence, element 112 gets the mnemonic Uub, just as Hydrogen gets H and Helium gets He. The Latin-language correctness or incorrectness is not at all part of the consideration.

      --
      www.wavefront-av.com
  29. Trajanium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trajanium :

    As in 112 A.D. the emperor of Rome was Trajan.
    And under his rule, Roman Empire reached his maximum extent (113 A.D.)
    Or will this be more suited for the next element (113), the ununtrium ?

  30. How about "Frank"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, just imagine: "...Meitnerium, Darmstadtium, Roentgerium and... Frank"

  31. I hate whoever renamed unununium by selven · · Score: 1

    Unununium was such an awesome name, why did they have to rename it something stupid like roentgenium? What does that mean anyway? Does it mean it creates rodents?

    1. Re:I hate whoever renamed unununium by SargentDU · · Score: 1

      I agree, besides, Roentgen already has units of radiation named after him. "How many Roentgens were generated with the decay of your Roentgenium?" Blah.

    2. Re:I hate whoever renamed unununium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unununium was such an awesome name, why did they have to rename it something stupid like roentgenium? What does that mean anyway? Does it mean it creates rodents?

      ouch. Just.... ouch.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Conrad_R%C3%B6ntgen

    3. Re:I hate whoever renamed unununium by Nyvhek · · Score: 0
    4. Re:I hate whoever renamed unununium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wilhelm Roentgen discovered X-rays, and was awarded the first Nobel Prize in Physics in 1901 for that discovery. The element 111 was named after him in order to honor him.

  32. ignotium by elrick_the_brave · · Score: 1

    From the root Latin word:

    ignotus : unknown, obscure, ignorant, ignoble

    --
    (1st sig) If this were a snappy sig, you'd be reading it right now. (2nd sig) I'm a karma whore. >Insert FUD here
  33. I'd say... by El_Servas · · Score: 1

    Servasium...

    Damn.. there goes my karma. T_T

  34. unnameium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, it is unnamed, right?

  35. l'Hopital's rule... by postermmxvicom · · Score: 1

    Mod parent up. That is a great idea. I was told l'Hopital didn't invent that theorem, but paid for it. The actual story is a little more complicated, but it's the same idea.

    I suppose they should reserve the right to refuse people bid's for controversial or vulgar names, but would you honestly care if it got named Gatesium or Hiltonium? I can think of millions of reasons not to care.

    --
    One last thing: Sometimes I wonder; "Is that someone's signature? Or do they type that at the end of each post?"
    1. Re:l'Hopital's rule... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      would you honestly care if it got named Gatesium or Hiltonium? I can think of millions of reasons not to care.

      And all one million of them are 'Money'. There really is no depth to which you will not sink for it is there? Maybe you shouldn't sell the permanent worldwide representation of a core part of human knowledge to some fucking corporation for a momentary gain in funds. Yes, let's have basic knowledge inherently linked with advertising. Great. Really fucking great.

    2. Re:l'Hopital's rule... by darthnoodles · · Score: 1
      Basic knowledge? I hardly think that an obscure element on the periodic table is basic knowledge. It's not like they're selling naming right to the alphabet.

      I disagree with the notion of selling the name also, but I won't go so far as to say it's basic knowledge.

    3. Re:l'Hopital's rule... by Plumber,+Programmer, · · Score: 1

      Yeah, imagine if it that had happened a few years ago, and it was "Enronium."

    4. Re:l'Hopital's rule... by oatworm · · Score: 1

      Ladies and gentlemen... MinuteMaidFedExTostitosium!

  36. guantuelv by surkum · · Score: 1

    How about guantuelv, easy to remember :)

    --
    here ends what some neis
  37. Once the news reaches Harvard... by W2IRT · · Score: 5, Funny

    Lehrerium!

    --
    Cheers, Peter, W2IRT
  38. In light of its size by T+Murphy · · Score: 1

    Lipidium

  39. ALL HAIL THE HYPNOTOAD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Name it Hypnotodium

  40. It's about time... by sagematt · · Score: 1

    Goatsecxium

  41. Ununbium by mr_stark · · Score: 1

    All the heavy unstable elements already have names derived from their atomic mass, so 112 would be Ununbium

    Its also slap bang in the middle of the island of stability most heavy elements are too unstable to last before they decay into smaller elements. 112 Has a half life of 29 seconds, which isnt too bad considering 115 has a half life of 88ms.

    --
    I can't think of anything witty right now
    1. Re:Ununbium by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      All the heavy unstable elements already have names derived from their atomic mass, so 112 would be Ununbium

      Not quite sure what your point is here, but that system of names was specifically designed to be placeholders until the official discoverers of each element choose a permanent name.

  42. You destroy your own argument by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    right here...

    "Un" by itself doesn't really mean anything, but can be used as a prefix

    ...because they are using it as a prefix

  43. elem 112 by Mysund · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hundredandtwelvium

    1. Re:elem 112 by NevarMore · · Score: 1

      German team, einhundretzwolfium . Has the added benefit of being worth a shit ton of points in scrabble.

    2. Re:elem 112 by Celeste+R · · Score: 1

      Eleventytwodium

      --
      There are no perfect answers, only the right questions. More questions at http://foresightandhindsight.blogspot.com/
    3. Re:elem 112 by CptNerd · · Score: 1

      German team, einhundretzwolfium . Has the added benefit of being worth a shit ton of points in scrabble.

      But only if you're playing in Germany, unfortunately...

      Hm, how about "Trivium", to win in Trivial Pursuit?

      Or, if they decide to go by emails, maybe "Internetium"?

      --
      By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
  44. I dub thee... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stickinthemudium

  45. What have the Africans ever done for us? by bigdaisy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Apart from BEER, humanity itself, controlled fire, language (probably), sterilisation of food and water, the world's tallest building (a pyramid) until recently, the roots of most modern popular music genres, airmail (by homing pigeon), the pendulum, the tunnel boring machine, stone tools, knives, pigments, burial, housing, bread, plywood, cement, river boats, sutures, the aqueduct, candles, glass, the water clock, toothpaste, metal block printing, coffee, the astrolabe, the ventilator, explosive gunpowder, the cannon, handguns, cartridges, heart transplants, the CAT scanner, ....

    You mean, apart for all that?

    1. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by ConsumerOfMany · · Score: 4, Funny

      Didn't they discover the coke bottle too? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080801/

    2. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by ricosalomar · · Score: 1

      Algebra?

    3. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by nicolas.kassis · · Score: 1

      Brain surgery.

    4. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      So basically, coffee and beer.

    5. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by XcepticZP · · Score: 0

      No that happened in the middle east.

    6. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by XcepticZP · · Score: 0

      Oh boy you made me chuckle with that post. I'm not sure if you're trying to be sarcastic with that post or not. Some of those are pretty far fetched.

      Post a citation for your funky post when you wake up from lala land, buddy.

    7. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by XcepticZP · · Score: 0

      On a side not, you can't have algebra without a numbering system. And correct me if I'm wrong, but Africa never had a numbering system, or an alphabet(excluding the Egyptians, but they form part of the middle east in ancient times). This was until Europeans brought them language, technology and religion.

    8. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by realnrh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Just like the rest of life, it boils down to the eternal question: "What have you done for me lately?" And 'lately' is a variable set by the question's asker defined as 'since the last time you did something for me.'

      --
      Long? What do you mean the signature at the bottom of every comment I post on Slashdot is too lo
    9. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by ricosalomar · · Score: 1

      Yes.

    10. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by QuoteMstr · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have nothing against Africa, but your post is full of lies.

      beer

      The earliest beer comes from Mesopotamia and Egypt (which doesn't count, as it's culturally part of the Middle East).

      world's tallest building

      Egypt doesn't count.

      the roots of most modern popular music genres

      Dubious at best. The truth is that we have no idea what music sounded like before accurate musical notation came into widespread use during the Middle Ages.

      airmail (by homing pigeon)

      The use of homing pigeons for communication was invented by several civilizations independently.

      the pendulum

      The Chinese were the first to employ the pendulum, and Galileo Galilei was the first to study their properties mathematically.

      the tunnel boring machine

      Have a source for this one? It's rather difficult to create a tunnel boring machine without at least a steam engine.

      the aqueduct

      The Nile doesn't count.

      candles, glass, the water clock

      Again, Egypt doesn't count. Alexandria counts even less, given its Hellenic character.

      metal block printing

      Everyone knows Gutenberg invented movable type.

      the ventilator

      You mean bellows? Invented independently by every civilization that discovered metallurgy.

      explosive gunpowder, the cannon

      Err, no.. The closest you could get would be the early use of firearms against the Byzantines, but the people involved were not African.

      CAT scanner

      Post-colonial South Africa doesn't count either, as it's culturally mostly European.

    11. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It *may* be culturally part of the middle-east *now*. It sure wasn't *then*.

    12. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by RancidPeanutOil · · Score: 1

      I think he means, what have they done for us lately

    13. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by XchristX · · Score: 1

      Wasn't coffee from South America?

      --
      l'Homme n'est Rien l'Oeuvre Tout: Gustave Flaubert to George Sand
    14. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brought Peace?

    15. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by beav007 · · Score: 4, Informative
      By this logic we can extrapolate that the USA has never invented more than the Teepee and peace pipe, as the majority of the population are not native.

      Egypt is geographically African, and that's enough.

      the aqueduct

      The Nile doesn't count.

      Who said anything about the Nile? The Egyptians had sophisticated irrigation systems.

      Another thing we can credit to Egyptians, and thus to Africa, is antibiotics:

      Antibiotics are compounds produced by bacteria and fungi which are capable of killing, or inhibiting, competing microbial species. This phenomenon has long been known; it may explain why the ancient Egyptians had the practice of applying a poultice of moldy bread to infected wounds.

      http://acswebcontent.acs.org/landmarks/landmarks/penicillin/discover.html

    16. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by macdaddy357 · · Score: 1

      No, coffee was first discovered in Ethiopia where it still grows wild. That is in Africa, in case you didn't know.

      --
      How ya like dat?
    17. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Many of these are pre-history or not African at all. The remainder are largely Ancient Egyptian.

      You could be more careful... there are examples worth raising.

    18. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      The US is part of the West, and the West has invented quite a bit.

    19. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by beav007 · · Score: 1

      The US is east from here, and way to go trying to ride the coattails of an abstract (read: "more or less imaginary") group for credit.

      My point (which you've obviously missed), is that saying "Egypt doesn't count as Africa", or "South Africa doesn't count as Africa" is as valid (and useful) and saying "Caucasians don't count as Americans".

    20. Re:What have the Africans ever done for us? by XchristX · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected. Thanks.

      --
      l'Homme n'est Rien l'Oeuvre Tout: Gustave Flaubert to George Sand
  46. Ubuntium? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...since it's heavy.

  47. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by pkluss · · Score: 4, Informative

    Read "Guns, Germs, and Steel" by Jared Diamond. He very clearly outlines why development was accelerated in some regions and not others.

  48. mootium

    http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1894028,00.html

    retarded fanbases with way too much time to mindlessly endlessly vote are not unique to the Colbert Report

    come to think of it, then perhaps AmericanIdolium is an even more appropriate name choice

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  49. Trollinium by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    I was going to suggest "Taminium" or "Luciferium", and link to an old journal entry that describes her, but I'd be modded "troll", especially if I linked to the journal titled "NSFW" that describes her. Nobody but my journal's readers would have gotten the joke.

    So I'll instead suggest "Uribeum".>

    1. Re:Trollinium by fprintf · · Score: 1

      Nobody but my journal's readers would have gotten the joke.

      Which I guess means that nobody would read the joke, so nobody gets it anyway. Does anyone read Slashdot journals anyway?

      --
      This post brought to you by your friendly neighborhood MBA.
    2. Re:Trollinium by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Informative

      A lot of folks read mine. Hell, comments in it get moderated! Try Dork Side of the Moon or Sickness, pain, and death. And Star Trek. people have asked me to turn my old K5 "paxil Diaries" into a book and get it published.

      Some of my journals are NSFW, which maybe explains why some folks like reading them...

    3. Re:Trollinium by conspirator57 · · Score: 1

      tagging for the above post:

      pimpmyjournal

      --
      "If still these truths be held to be
      Self evident."
      -Edna St. Vincent Millay
    4. Re:Trollinium by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Needs no pimping. He asked, I answered. Folks see my comments, click "journal" and there they are.

    5. Re:Trollinium by RockWolf · · Score: 2, Funny

      tagging for the above post:

      pimpmyjournal

      Steve's journal will have 35" dubs and ladder-bar rear end, for sure.
      Ladder bar, as in extension ladder welded in, cross-braced with 2x4. :)

      /~Rockwolf

      --
      February 9th, 2009 8:55pm: Slashdot becomes self-aware.
    6. Re:Trollinium by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Sup dawg, I herd yo liek joornuhls...

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  50. Missing Option! by Fred.cpp · · Score: 0, Redundant

    CowboyNealium (I'ts a heavy element, right?)

  51. A Horrible suggestion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wonderflonium?

  52. How about... by Drone69 · · Score: 0

    The Element Formerly Known as Ununbium ?

  53. How about ... by Sukhbir · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Ubuntium

  54. island of stability by bcrowell · · Score: 4, Informative

    What's interesting about this kind of thing is that it's getting very close to the island of stability, which is a predicted set of heavy elements that would be stable with respect to fission. What they made is Z=112 (number of protons) and N=165 (number of neutrons), which is a little on the neutron-deficient side of the island in the WP article's chart. If you want to go nuts with far-future scientific extrapolation, it's conceivable that if you could make the isotopes on the actual island of stability, you could actually have macroscopic quantities of the stuff. It would probably be extremely susceptible to neutron-induced fission, so you could probably make a nuclear bomb the size of a pencil eraser. Arms control would get really tough! So maybe it's fortunate that there are extremely difficult technical problems to be solved before we can get there.

    To a nuclear physicist, what's more interesting about this kind of thing is that it's a sensitive test of models of nuclear forces and models of the many-body problem. The strong nuclear force isn't like gravity and electromagnetism, which are simple 1/r^2 forces; it doesn't have simple mathematical behavior, and all we have are approximations to its behavior. Also, many-body problems -- even classical many-body problems -- are really tough.

    1. Re:island of stability by wurp · · Score: 1

      I was struck by the same thing (no simple behavior of strong force) during my 4000 level nuclear physics course in university. At the time, I didn't know QCD (Quantum Chromodynamics) existed, and I still don't know much about it.

      I note that when people list great unsolved problems in physics, I haven't seen it include "understanding strong force quantitatively".

      Do you happen to know if we understand strong force, but the problem is that our model is extremely complex to solve in almost all real world scenarios, or if we just don't understand the low level? QCD should be our explanation of strong force, but I know that the equation we used for calculating which isotopes would be stable looked like a mess concocted to fit mass quantities of data rather than an expression of well understood low level forces.

    2. Re:island of stability by bcrowell · · Score: 1

      Do you happen to know if we understand strong force, but the problem is that our model is extremely complex to solve in almost all real world scenarios, or if we just don't understand the low level? QCD should be our explanation of strong force,

      The strong force is really an interaction between quarks and gluons. The problem is that nobody has the faintest idea how to calculate anything about the properties of a nucleus by treating it as a system of quarks. When we try to write down equations to approximate, say, the force between a neutron and a proton, we're already making an approximation to treat them as two bodies instead of six. Even if we had techniques of calculation that would allow us to get reasonable answers from a many-quark model, the model would have a ton of adjustable parameters. All you'd be able to do is to fit those parameters to the experimental data, but that doesn't mean you've got a true expression for the interaction. You'd just have another approximation.

  55. Dear Editor, by iVasto · · Score: 1

    I hate to inform you, but the days of memorizing periodic tables are gone. I have recently taken some college chemistry classes and the high numbered elements are never mentioned outside of general properties they all have in common.

  56. That's just... by PinkyDead · · Score: 1

    ... bolonium.

    --
    Genesis 1:32 And God typed :wq!
  57. Element 112 by rossdee · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well since there is Uranium, neptunium and plutonium, why not call this one Jupiterium

    1. Re:Element 112 by raguirre · · Score: 2, Funny

      I thought Plutonium no longer was an element...

    2. Re:Element 112 by Fluffy_Kitten · · Score: 1

      Jenovium.

      --
      People who have no sig are cool
    3. Re:Element 112 by McNihil · · Score: 1

      Nice... I raise you some radio active versions

      Denebium

      Betelguezium

      Solium

    4. Re:Element 112 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well since there is Uranium, neptunium and plutonium, why not call this one Jupiterium

      Is plutonium still an element?

    5. Re:Element 112 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The next one should actually be Saturnium. Jupiterium, or Zeusium as it is more formally known, would then be next.

  58. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by thebheffect · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And where do you think Germans came from? The cradle of civilization maybe? Where is that again?

  59. Recursive acronym by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about using a recursive acronym? It would be the first time ever for an element.

    1. Re:Recursive acronym by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you proposing... Bingium?

  60. 116 comment and no one mentioned this? by koutbo6 · · Score: 5, Funny

    isn't it obvious?
    Tiberium!
    Now its just a matter of time before the rise of nod.

    --
    You speak London? I speak London very best.
    1. Re:116 comment and no one mentioned this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol
      renegade much?

      im a personal fan of:

      bullshitium

      fmlidium (with atomic symbol FML)

      omygodium (atomic symbol OMG)

      elevendytwodium

      since there's boron
      you can have:

      moron

      and as well you can have

      blueraydon

      and also

      mendelevium

  61. Bolognium by _14k4 · · Score: 1

    Of course, we should see if it is indeed snacktacular first.

  62. techi.. by surkum · · Score: 1

    Or maybe "passwordusage" ;)

    --
    here ends what some neis
  63. Hetfieldium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cause Jaymz is Heavy !!

  64. ubuntum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah

  65. Old news? by Lucent · · Score: 0

    Ptable.com has had this one for a decade. What gives?

  66. Temporarium by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    Considering it is another one of these silly artificially created elements that only exist under certain lab conditions and only then for fractions of a second before they decay and are gone. Tp or Te I think.

  67. Come on guys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tiberium.

  68. Name it after the dude. by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

    Sigurdium.

  69. yes but to a relativistic fly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    think about time dilation of one of these elements as it enters some fantastically acceleration, such as near a black hole. the element's "wall clock" half life would be drastically expanded, and you would see it quite well, perhaps as seconds, or hours, or days...

    also think about a fly. to them time passes differently than for you and me.

    so just in case you are ever transformed into a fly, and you are sitting next to a black hole in a magic bubble looking at someone drop huge blobs of super-elements into it, remember... you want to have names for all those things. not just silly numbers.

  70. No name eh? by Peepsalot · · Score: 2, Funny

    In that case it's quite clear what to call it: Anonymium

    1. Re:No name eh? by Xaoswolf · · Score: 1

      Wait, so this element can be used to protest scientology?

  71. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't answer the "Germans vs everyone else" question, but as for Africa, it's theorized that the closer to the equator a country is, the less innovative it is. Maybe that hot sun makes people want to sleep through the day and not invent stuff.

  72. The Hoff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hofmania (or -um, if you insist). After Professor Hofmann, of course.

  73. Colbertium by xlysogenx · · Score: 1

    Steven Colbert will undoubtedly harness the Colbert bump on the naming of this element. So far he's had a newly discovered spider and the new space station module named after him..

  74. New school. by sootman · · Score: 1

    Goatsecxium.

    No good? OK, how about happyfunium? Do not taunt happyfunium!

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  75. Pool's Closed. by Icegryphon · · Score: 1

    mootonium, after the Time Mag most Influential man of the year.
    tg*l
    hayo
    emos
    *eut

    1. Re:Pool's Closed. by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      I must have been living under a rock since I'd never heard of 4chan.org

    2. Re:Pool's Closed. by Xaoswolf · · Score: 1

      Thegamium

  76. Obvious name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The name, of course, needs to be

    AWESOMEITE

  77. Overheard by camperdave · · Score: 0

    Overheard at an atomic energy conference somewhen in the future...

    "Sorry, did you say the hydrogen fuses with Colbertium, or cold barium?"

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  78. Germans love David Hasselhoff by doublearon · · Score: 1

    Hasselhoffium?

  79. Tylium by ManWithIceCream · · Score: 1

    They should call it Tylium.

    1. Re:Tylium by cashman73 · · Score: 1

      Or Dilithium?

  80. Since the Germans discovered it.... by macdaddy357 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Germans discovered it, so it will be called Nazium. I keed! I keed!

    --
    How ya like dat?
  81. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by c6gunner · · Score: 1

    And your point is .... ?

    Computer processors come from silicon, but you can't surf for porn with a bucket of sand or a block of quartz.

  82. time to use chinese symbols in western science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you can fit a lot of information into a little space with chinese writing.

  83. wonderflonium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wonderflonium - it's the logical choice... (do not bounce)

  84. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by BubbaDave · · Score: 1

    And where do you think Germans came from? The cradle of civilization maybe? Where is that again?

    Belgium.

    Dave

  85. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Lord+Agni · · Score: 2, Informative

    Then read "Carnage and Culture" by Victor Hanson, to find out why Diamond is full of it.

  86. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Gerzel · · Score: 1

    Ford invented MASS PRODUCTION of cars but not the car itself. There were many previous example of the "car" before Ford.

  87. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 2, Funny

    Watch it!! This isn't a Serious Screenplay.

    --
    Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
  88. Sub ubi by Tickety-boo · · Score: 1

    How about Semperubisububium

    Always wear under wear

    --
    Reading made Don Quixote a gentleman. Believing what he read made him mad.
  89. Chemistry Major by Psychotic_Wrath · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I am a senior in chemistry. I have taken all the chemistry courses, including inorganic chemistry. With Inorganic chemistry the lowest elements on the periodic table e used were the 2nd row, occasionally a third row element. We by no means have to memorize them. I do know some teachers of gen. chem. that require students to memorize the first 16. Some may even want the first 36. Asking to memorize the entire periodic table is kind of crazy, since most of the higher elements nobody will ever use unless they decide to work for CERN or some other extremely specialized field of chemistry.

    --

    Doctors do Massage in Longview WA now, who knew?
  90. Is it me or does this read like an Onion headline? by lemurosity · · Score: 1

    I can see the sub-story: "US schools requiring bailout to support printing of new periodic tables."

  91. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Lord+Agni · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Thomas Sowell wrote "Ethnic America", exploring why different ethnic groups do better or worse than others in the American milieu, but he also discusses different ethnic groups and cultures around the world. For instance, Jews tended to be more successful in urban-type jobs (clerks, lawyers, educators, etc.) than rural, e.g. farming. Jews newly immigrating to the US and still living in tenements tended to have the same rates of public library use as native-born middle class Americans. They were in the slums, but the slums were not in them. Chinese, Arabs, Persians, and Indians who emigrate tend to be in merchant or small businessman class wherever they end up, even if they were not merchants back home. Could have to do with the temperament of someone who is willing to leave hearth,home and the familiar and take on the responsibilities of a new, different society. Germany was long known as the "land of poets and philosophers", until the rise of Nazism and it was done in by its poets and philosophers.

  92. So the name for now is... by roskoff · · Score: 1

    .. a conundrium.

  93. Come on... by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 1

    Everyone knows that the most useful element is Ducttapium!

    --
    Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
  94. So your obviously a racist troll, but anyway... by docbrody · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Your list of German achievements is not really that impressive in the scope of history. Lets break it down:

    The first car. I think a frenchman was actually the first, but the real innovation was Henry Ford's mass production assembly line, not the automobile itself.

    Calculus. Leibniz and Newton are not co-inventors - not really anyway. Basically they both built on work done by others including al-Haythem and other decidedly non-German mathematicians. The difference is that Newton did something truly amazing (and innovative) with it.

    Quantum physics. As you say 'developed part of the foundation.' Quantum theory developed gradually, with contributions of a lot of people from a lot of places. It was not like Einstein's theory of relativity, which was a real breakthrough (although it too relied on the field equations of Maxwell (an Englishman) and other past theories. Einstein was from Austria by the way.

    So all your examples are sort of 'me too' or 'i helped out' innovations. You would be better off to look at the French (Curie, Pasteur, or even Descartes). Or the English (Darwin, Newton). Or the Italians (Galileo, Marconi, etc.). And I am just picking a few of the bigs from Europe (since I am not readily familiar with the history of science outside the western world - my bad).

    And lets not forget the Americans. There is no ethnic identity associated with being American, but one could argue that is their strength - the mixing together of scientists who hail from all parts of the world with different cultural backgrounds and ways of thinking about life the universe and everything.

    So to bring it down to your level, what have the Germans really innovated, uniquely and on their own? How to start (and loose) two world wars? How to best gas Jewish people?

    But seriously, the Germans have made great contributions to science and technology. That can not be ignored. But not more than many other nations. They are about par for the course.

    1. Re:So your obviously a racist troll, but anyway... by tenco · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Calculus. Leibniz and Newton are not co-inventors - not really anyway. Basically they both built on work done by others including al-Haythem and other decidedly non-German mathematicians. The difference is that Newton did something truly amazing (and innovative) with it.

      Lebnitz's notation is in widespread use today. And what about the binary system?

      Quantum physics. As you say 'developed part of the foundation.' Quantum theory developed gradually, with contributions of a lot of people from a lot of places.

      Planck started it.

      Einstein was from Austria by the way.

      Wrong.

      I have a few more:

      • David Hilbert
      • Werner Heisenberg (uncertainty principle)
      • Fritz Haber (Haber-Bosch process)
      • Walter Hermann Nernst (third law of thermodynamics)
      • Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassmann (discovery of nuclear fission)
      • Robert Koch
      • Wolfgang Paul (paul trap)
    2. Re:So your obviously a racist troll, but anyway... by tenco · · Score: 4, Insightful

      OMG. I can't believe I did this. Clearly, separating science discoveries by nation is a stupid idea.

    3. Re:So your obviously a racist troll, but anyway... by rbrausse · · Score: 1

      > Einstein was from Austria by the way

      Switzerland btw :)

    4. Re:So your obviously a racist troll, but anyway... by shermo · · Score: 1

      So essentially what you're saying is that they all stole the ideas from someone else and then improved on them?

      Thankfully, modern copyright laws are putting an end to this despicable practice.

      --
      Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
    5. Re:So your obviously a racist troll, but anyway... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While such lists are always senseless. Your argument is it too, because on one hand you say (correctly) that many inventions developed gradually, and on the other hand you want to discredit the list by pointing out other people have done something similar before.

      The first car.

      Carl Benz and Gottlieb Daimler developed automobiles based on gasoline driven engines. However, the idea of machine powered vehicles came up with steam engines. Therefore many attempts have been made to create a steam driven vehicle. Later Rudolf Diesel developed the diesel engine which is a derivate of the gasoline based engines. So who did the most important invention? Those persons thinking about a engine-driven vehicle or those who developed engines which allowed to create working implementations of this idea.

      I think a frenchman was actually the first, but the real innovation was Henry Ford's mass production assembly line, not the automobile itself.

      The idea of an assembly line was long known and used in manufactories. Ford used the concept on cars. This was a great idea, but on what basis could you say that invention was more important than the other. When all these car developers which developed cars before Henry Ford didn't improve the concept of a car, Henry wouldn't had the chance to develop cheap cars. The same is about human flight. Many people tried it. They tested various ideas. Lilienthal was on of the first to fly or glide with an apparatus . And the Wright brothers were one of the first to make a motor flight.

      Calculus. Leibniz and Newton are not co-inventors - not really anyway. Basically they both built on work done by others including al-Haythem and other decidedly non-German mathematicians. The difference is that Newton did something truly amazing (and innovative) with it.

      Hello? While Newton developed the same stuff as Leibniz, he made something truly amazing, while the other guy didn't? So either both found interesting things in mathematics or both just assembled pieces created by others or they did something of both.

      Quantum physics. As you say 'developed part of the foundation.' Quantum theory developed gradually, with contributions of a lot of people from a lot of places. It was not like Einstein's theory of relativity, which was a real breakthrough (although it too relied on the field equations of Maxwell (an Englishman) and other past theories. Einstein was from Austria by the way.

      Beside the point, that a lot of people contributed to this field and there were many Germans involved in it. And also Einstein's wife. And he developed the idea in Switzerland. And no: Einstein was born in Ulm, Germany which belonged to the German Empire at that time.

      So all your examples are sort of 'me too' or 'i helped out' innovations. You would be better off to look at the French (Curie, Pasteur, or even Descartes). Or the English (Darwin, Newton). Or the Italians (Galileo, Marconi, etc.). And I am just picking a few of the bigs from Europe (since I am not readily familiar with the history of science outside the western world - my bad).

      Yes Galileo, the man behind the Copernican Change? Who had help from Johannes Kepler? And if you dig deeper in this subject, you will find other great minds had discovered the same thing in India and China. Oh and they all didn't know each other.

      And lets not forget the Americans. There is no ethnic identity associated with being American, but one could argue that is their strength - the mixing together of scientists who hail from all parts of the world with different cultural backgrounds and ways of thinking about life the universe and everything.

      Blah, blah. On the same bases you could say, that the heterogeneity of Europe allows scientists different views to a subject and therefor they were so innovative in the past centuries.

    6. Re:So your obviously a racist troll, but anyway... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quantum physics. As you say 'developed part of the foundation.' Quantum theory developed gradually, with contributions of a lot of people from a lot of places. It was not like Einstein's theory of relativity, which was a real breakthrough (although it too relied on the field equations of Maxwell (an Englishman) and other past theories. Einstein was from Austria by the way.

      James Clerk Maxwell was from Scotland by the way.

    7. Re:So your obviously a racist troll, but anyway... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Einstein was born in Ulm, which, at the time of his birth, was in Germany.

      Hitler was from Austria.

    8. Re:So your obviously a racist troll, but anyway... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Ulm was never part of Austria.

    9. Re:So your obviously a racist troll, but anyway... by ailnlv · · Score: 1

      Germans didn't start WW1, that was an Austrian invention. Germany was just dragged into the war because of a treaty, just like the rest of europe and russia. Hitler was Austrian too btw, and by 1939 Austria was part of Germany. So the whole starting and losing two world wars is mainly an Austrian invention.

      Oh, hey! Godwin's law!

    10. Re:So your obviously a racist troll, but anyway... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Germans invented the Shamwow...

    11. Re:So your obviously a racist troll, but anyway... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maxwell was not English. He was Scottish. You are from America? So I will say you are from Mexico. Its not rocket science to get the basic facts correct

    12. Re:So your obviously a racist troll, but anyway... by Shoe+Puppet · · Score: 1

      Einstein was from Austria by the way.

      He was from Germany, only later he moved to switzerland.

      --
      (+1, Disagree)
  95. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by BubbaDave · · Score: 1

    Watch it!! This isn't a Serious Screenplay.

    Damn, I must have buried that at least 5 layers deep!

    Dave

  96. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by SleepingWaterBear · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Someone get rid of the troll mod on this. It's not an unreasonable question, and it's asked in about the most politically correct language manageable for such a charged issue.

    The truth is that the scientific and technical advances don't come at random, but are dependent on a range of societal factors. China has one of the largest populations of any countries on earth, yet many much smaller countries produce far more scientific advances per capita. This is clearly not a genetic issue - the Chinese are dramatically disproportionately represented in the sciences in the US, but their society isn't managed in a way that's conducive to training the independent thinking skills needed to do the best science. Go back a few centuries though, and China was the most sophisticated and advanced civilization in the world.

    I'm not passing value judgements here, every civilization has it's own strengths and weaknesses, but the sort of mindless PC attitude that mods such a reasonable and polite question as trolling really shouldn't be tolerated.

    The parent post (and probably mine as well) could very reasonably be modded off-topic however!

  97. Slashdotium by Petersko · · Score: 1

    Slashdotium is a terrible idea. Most scientists studying it won't even bother to take measurements. They'll just assume they know what the results will be and they'll write pages and pages of opinions on it.

  98. Flubber? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Flubber.

  99. anamyous coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Voldamortium - for the element that could not be named.

  100. Ubuntium? :) by tomweeks · · Score: 1

    Then you can tell people that running Linux is an elemental experience. :)

    Tweeks

  101. Logical Proposal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they allow the public to weigh in on it's naming they should call it Gnutonium.

  102. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by damburger · · Score: 1

    I love how a vaguely racist troll turns into a literary debate :)

    I have read Guns, Germs and Steel and found Diamond's arguments pretty compelling; I have not heard of Carnage and Culture but I will give it a brief peruse and see if its worth a read.

    --
    If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
  103. Yourmomium by mcshiggits · · Score: 1

    I feel very strongly that the heaviest element should always be known as yourmomium.

  104. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by damburger · · Score: 1

    China seems a good environment for scientists (so long as they don't talk back to the party of course) - the cultural revolution is long over. You look at their population, 4 times the size of the US, and note that they have fewer scientific achievements. However, look at their GDP - slightly less than that of Spain - and note that they have manned space flight.

    Now, whether or not China is a good environment for free expression, fair treatment in the workplace, opportunity for personal advancement, and not being run over by tanks - that is mostly a separate question.

    --
    If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
  105. Wildridium by wylderide · · Score: 1

    Hey, just because it's got nothing to do with me is no reason they shouldn't name it after me, is it? Well, they should do it anyway.

    --
    This is the best restaurant I ever eat in
  106. Unobtainium by iplayfast · · Score: 0, Redundant

    This stuff is so useful, that it can be used with any experiment to obtain the results you want.

    So let's call 112 UnObtainium so we can finally do all those experiments.

  107. used for? by idigitallDotCom · · Score: 1

    All jokes aside now... what on earth is the use of such a super-heavy element? And why did they strive to create it - just to prove they could?

    --
    blog.idigitall.com
    1. Re:used for? by Xaoswolf · · Score: 1

      well, they need to make something for the Miss Universe contest of the year 3000's tiara...

  108. Priorities... by ZarathustraDK · · Score: 1

    In light of the amount of suffering taking place in the world : Thiswasmoreimportantium

    --
    If you quote this signature there'll be 72 copies of Windows ME waiting for you in Heaven.
  109. Relax man... by postermmxvicom · · Score: 1

    First, most research is related to advertising. Big Pharma?

    Second, you can deny people the right to bid on stupid names. You don't want reebokium, don't let them bid on that name.

    Third, you are not selling your soul/child/arm...

    Now, I could hear an argument about how it is a priceless thing and so on. But having an element named something you want it to be won't immortalize you. Rutherfordium doesn't make Rutherford immortal. In fact, it probably doesn't even introduce the man to many people who wouldn't already know his name.

    But, if you were so purely interested in science and stuff as you claim. Then take the money and do some more research advancing human knowledge instead of advancing your own ego.

    --
    One last thing: Sometimes I wonder; "Is that someone's signature? Or do they type that at the end of each post?"
  110. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 0, Troll

    Would these be the starving ones? Or the ones dying of disease?

  111. Dammit by wurp · · Score: 1

    Yesterday I had mod points.

  112. Yes it was by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Both the airport and the headquarters were renamed in 1998, when Bill Clinton was still president.

  113. Elerium-113 by IronDragon · · Score: 1

    ..one step closer to plasma cannons and antigravity engines.

  114. Expensive. Unstable. Vistaonium by wowbagger · · Score: 1

    This is a very expensive to create, very unstable material. Obviously, it should be called Vistaonium.

    The beauty is that we have a natural way to refer to isotopes of it: Vistaonium-home, Vistaonium-business, Vistaonium-premium, Vistaonium-lite, etc.

    When we start hitting the island of stability and get stuff that will hang together, we can name it Gnuonium.

  115. Name Element 112 Auction by intjgeek · · Score: 1

    I would like the right to name the element to goto the highest bidder and all proceeds of the auction to goto charity. See the auction at http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220432828283

    --
    -- INTJ Geek Blog http://www.intjgeek.com
  116. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

    I think it's the environment. Daily life is simply more difficult (dense jungle, exotic diseases, empty deserts), so they didn't have a lot of free time to organize and develop civilization (Egypt is an exception, but they were insulated from the rest of the continent by a desert)

  117. We already have Helium, so... by Plumber,+Programmer, · · Score: 1

    How about Shelium?

  118. Obvious by He+who+knows · · Score: 1

    Nevergonagiveyouupium

  119. Adamantium? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    somebody had to say it

  120. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by SleepingWaterBear · · Score: 1

    The part of my comment felt a little off to me too. You're probably right that GDP is at least as important a factor as anything else here. Still, the main thing I wanted to get across was that societal factors influence technological advance, and it's certainly the case that there are reasons the per capita GDP is so low in China.

    Personally, I'm inclined to think that lack of freedom of expression is a huge contributing factor to poor GDP since it allows for the sort of corruption which cripples economic efficiency, and also gives free reign to nepotism and cronyism which make it much more difficult for competent individuals to get into positions of power.

  121. Keep it in theme by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

    After they named one element they discovered -Hassium- after the state where they are, and another -Darmstadtium- after their city, why not another after a castle nearby -Frankensteinium-

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    1. Re:Keep it in theme by CptNerd · · Score: 2, Funny

      But would they have to pronounce it "Frahnkensteenium"?

      And why not "igorium"?

      "It's pronounce 'eyegorium'!"

      --
      By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
  122. ok so only 4 atom have been observed... by cdpage · · Score: 1

    but can some one tell me, is this something that can possibly naturally occur? and if so, if were in abundance, would it still decay as rapidly.

  123. Next Questionâ"What would you do with said el by cdpage · · Score: 1

    what reacts with zinc or lead that might explode?

  124. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    You hear lots of people touting Africa as the "cradle of mankind" and rhetorical crap like that. But if humanity did indeed start there, then why oh why did Africa amount to nothing? They had humans first, they had the head start.

    Okay, so then we go on to the suggestion that maybe the living conditions there were harsh hence people put little emphasis on scientific progress and instead opted to just survive. I call bullshit. Look at the middle east, look at how harsh they are, yet they've made countless advances. Same goes with Europe. Europe's environment can be much harsher than in Africa. In fact, I think a harsh environment is exactly why civilization advanced and prospered everywhere but Africa. African's had it easy, and thus there was no pressure for them to make technological advances. Sure this isn't always the case for all other emergent civilizations, but I think the harsh environment was a spark none the less.

    Okay, so lots of places in Africa are developed now, no more threat of "predators and oh so harsh conditions". Yet African's are suffering now. They have high mortality rates, low literacy rates, and generally reliant on the helping hand of "wealthy nations". Wait, the reason they're not performing well in science now is because of colonialism, duh! How convenient for them to have such a wonderful excuse. The evil whites (and Arabs, don't forget their slave trade which in fact started before the European one) have pushed us into poverty, they say.

    Every step of the way they have excuses and more excuses. Well I don't want excuses as answers to my questions. I valid explanations, with reasoning behind them.

    I would have posted this to your parent, but somehow I think you're more qualified to argue with me :)

  125. Futurama reference... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you guys kidding me?

    That's Dolemite, baby!

  126. alternatively by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BiteMyShinyMetalAssium

  127. Well Since they are German. . . by XiX36 · · Score: 1
    It's got to have a really long name made out of a string of words something that might look like:

    Atomare-Struktur-Mit-HundertzwÃlf-Protonen-Und- Elektronen-Die-Zeigt-dass-Deutschland-Ist-Wissenschaftlich-Besser-Als-Alle-Anderen-Nationen-Der-Welt,-Nehmen-Sie-Sich-Also-Dass Francium!

    (Nuclear-Structure With 112 protons & electrons That showsthat Germany Is Scientifically better than any other nation in the world, so take that Francium! note: quite probably just gibberish in German, as it has been babelfished ;)

    --
    Insert witty sig here.
  128. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by MozeeToby · · Score: 1

    What's interesting to me is that the joke actually started out with the horrible word being 'fuck' and Adams was forced to change it by his editors, censoring and watering down his joke about censorship. To me, the joke works better with 'Belgium' as the outlawed word because it points out how arbitrary and meaningless our definition of curse words are.

  129. eleventytwosium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c'mon

  130. hmm by CrazyJim1 · · Score: 1

    Stadium?

  131. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by QuoteMstr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, first of all, I haven't read "Carnage and Culture". But I just looked at the Amazon summary, and I don't think it refutes "Guns, Germs, and Steel" at all.

    First of all, Europeans got their asses handed to them from about 300CE to the 1480s. The Germans sacked Rome again and again, so viciously that our word "Vandal" comes from the name of one of the Germanic tribes involved. A few hundred years after the Western Empire finally collapsed, the Muslims handily conquered the Iberian Peninsula (on which Spain and Portugal reside today) and reduced the Byzantine Empire to a remnant centered on Constantinople (tellingly, Istanbul today). The only two things that stopped Muslims overrunning Europe were:

    • Charles Martel barely eeking out a victory in France at the Battle of Tours
    • The Byzantines holding the line for a while with Greek Fire

    This bare survival doesn't indicate European military superiority. Instead, it reveal a fundamental weakness that nearly led to the end of our civilization.

    Europeans armies weren't anything special until the Renaissance. Don't forget how we were utterly defeated time and again in the Crusades, or how Western European armies decided to sack Constantinople (greatly weakening the only thing between the Islamic world and Western Europe) because the holy land was too tough. The Chinese had a great professional military as well, and don't forget where Sun Tzu hails from.

    And how can we discuss European military weakness without invoking Ghengis Khan, the barbarian who nearly destroyed Europe again. He overran Russia and penetrated all the way to Vienna before being stopped. The idea mentioned in the summary that European armies were particularly ruthless is obviously bunk: Genghis Khan had entire cities impaled. There just wasn't anything particularly exceptional about European armies.

    Yes, the Europeans armies later become practically invincible, but only due to cultural changes and competition among martial nation-states. Europe's later military superiority was not an inherent property of Europeans, but instead was a result of the same forces that Diamond details in "Guns, Germs, and Steel".

  132. Mcidasium by Zorlon · · Score: 1

    Mcidasium

    --
    - Things are the way they are because they're coded that way -
  133. How about Unobtanium by JSBiff · · Score: 1

    It strikes me that, considering how unstable and impossible to observe this stuff is, maybe we should just call it Unobtainium.

  134. Debianium? by Big_Monkey_Bird · · Score: 1

    Debianium

  135. You could always by PoolOfThought · · Score: 1

    do just about anything really significant (shady or otherwise) if you want the kids to remember you in class. Then if you are just wanting to complicate matters say something oddballish (Eurika!) immediately following your significant act. Then they'll have to remember the who and the what and the when of the act. But that won't be enough. They'll have to remember what magic word you said immediately afterwards... "TacoNealium!"

    --
    My present is the activity I am currently engaged in with the purpose of turning the future into a better past.
  136. Does this exist in the wild? by Xaoswolf · · Score: 1
    The article states that they have made four atoms of this stuff. Can you find it anywhere else? Is it something that we would only find in the hearts of stars or deep in clouds of dark matter? And if it only lasts for a few milliseconds, what can we do with it?

    But he is now setting his sights higher. "We tried the same experiment to get to element 120. We've not seen it yet, but we believe the element exists and, with a long enough beam time, it could be produced," he said.

    Exists where? "Exists" and "we can make" are two different things.

    1. Re:Does this exist in the wild? by the_other_chewey · · Score: 1

      Exists where? "Exists" and "we can make" are two different things.

      "exists" here means "is something that can be made" - as opposed to "cannot possibly exist (due to $somelimitationofnature)"

    2. Re:Does this exist in the wild? by Xaoswolf · · Score: 1
      So these exist in much the same way that Cthulhu Lego sets exist. They aren't in the actual catalog, but if you get enough pieces and put them together, you can make it.

      If that's the case, then it probably shouldn't go on the periodic table. Or at least just not be appended to the end of the table. Perhaps a subset could be added for man made elements.

  137. Phlebotinum by realnrh · · Score: 1

    Or maybe Rebelscum.

    --
    Long? What do you mean the signature at the bottom of every comment I post on Slashdot is too lo
  138. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by mikechant · · Score: 1

    However, look at their GDP - slightly less than that of Spain

    That figure looked grossly wrong to me - so I checked and you'll find that China's GDP is about three times that of Spain (this is the sort of thing where I think wikipedia is pretty trustworthy).
    See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

  139. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by CapsaicinBoy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There is a TED talk by Hans Rosling which demonstrates Africa is actually making insanely rapid progress, but it isn't apparent to us because they started at so far behind.

    http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_reveals_new_insights_on_poverty.html

  140. GDP by tibman · · Score: 1

    The CIA Factbook says:
    GDP of China in 2008
    Approx: $7.8 Trillion

    GDP of Spain in 2008
    Approx: $1.378 Trillion

    Values are US dollars (in 2008)

    --
    http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
  141. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

    If we're still talking about why most of africa is a wartorn shithole I think we're overthinking this and only need to look back about 80 years or so.

    --
    A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
  142. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

    Sort-of. Europeans were the ones who could build infrastructure 100 years ago. However, the climate of Africa is inhospitable for Europeans, so they build the bare minimum infrastructure for resource extraction and with the exception of South Africa, didn't settle. The lack of decent infrastructure is one of the leading causes of sub-Saharan Africa's slow development.

  143. It obviously should be called ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It obviously should be called Geranium, since it is a trans-uranic element discovered in Germany.

  144. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by DancesWithBlowTorch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My conjecture is that this was down to Geography: The concept of a "German" nation meant different things at different times, but Central Europe, probably a less loaded term for this area, has been an incredibly competitive environment for the past 3 Millenia. There were literally hundreds of tribes / kingdoms / nations fighting for land, food and power. The winters were cold, so people had time on their hands and a need to invent machines that helped them stay alive. Finally, the area was (and still is) at the heart of international trade between Western Europe, the Mediterranean, Arabia and the far East. There were a lot of goods coming through, lots of ideas, and lots of ways to make a profit. This kept people (comparably) open-minded and (comparably) well off. Both are important factors allowing artists (from Duerer to Beuys), philosophers (Luther, Kant, Nietzsche,...), scientists (Leibniz, Helmholtz, Humboldt, Planck, Einstein,...) and musicians (Bach, Haendel, Mozart, Haydn, ...) to develop their ideas, and giving entrepreneurs (Bosch, Siemens, Krupp, Daimler, Benz, ...) a chance to sell their goods.

    But, really, this is not unique to Germany. The rest of Europe produced brilliant minds as well. And they, too, spent a large part of their time killing each other. This, put simply, is the reason why Europe, European ideas and European nations dominated the world for a thousand years, and why they still play a major role in the world: It was a tough, rough place, but with enough structure to allow people to spend their time on more than pure survival. It brought out the best and the worst in the humans who lived there. A hundred years ago, America was just like that. Tough, rough, and full of opportunities. Right now, maybe China, Brazil and India are such places.

  145. Illuminotum by Lepton68 · · Score: 1

    Illuminotum

    --
    Mike from www.myallo.com/blog
  146. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by damburger · · Score: 1

    My mistake. Nevertheless, it is in the bottom end of the range of (much smaller) western European countries.

    --
    If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
  147. Whatever they name it by Gryle · · Score: 1

    The chemical should be "T", so that I can finally write Tungsten $ELEMENTNAME Flourine when I'm frustrated with lab results.

    --
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
  148. I've been reading by wurp · · Score: 1

    and I think you're wrong.

    We have very complex, but what look to be complete, quantum field theories for quantum chromodynamics.

    I agree that you have to deal with the fundamental representation rather than our high level concepts. It looks to me as if QCD does that just fine; the problem is just that calculating actual results for more than two interacting fields is computationally intractable using our current model.

    Of course, the big caveat here is that while I know the mathematics of basic quantum mechanics in the operator theory formulations, I don't know quantum field theory so most of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_chromodynamics is over my head.

    1. Re:I've been reading by wurp · · Score: 1

      Hmm, let me amend that a bit. I think you're right, that we don't know how to approximate the forces well. I think we do have a complete model of the underlying interactions that we believe would churn out the right answer if we knew how to apply it correctly.

      http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0954-3899/31/8/E01 looked like a good overview of the issues.

    2. Re:I've been reading by bcrowell · · Score: 1

      I think we do have a complete model of the underlying interactions that we believe would churn out the right answer if we knew how to apply it correctly. http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0954-3899/31/8/E01 looked like a good overview of the issues.

      I'd say that the abstract you linked to pretty much confirms what I was saying. (It's been 13 years since I did research in low-energy nuclear structure physics, and I haven't been reading the literature since then, but I have been keeping up to some extent via newspaper articles, etc. I know, for example, that there's been some encouraging success since then with applying QCD to systems with A<=2.)

    3. Re:I've been reading by wurp · · Score: 1

      I *think* I just what you were saying. Are you arguing that we don't understand the equations that describe the lowest level strong force interactions, or are you saying that we don't know any way to apply the equations to come up with answers for most real world situations?

    4. Re:I've been reading by bcrowell · · Score: 1

      Are you arguing that we don't understand the equations that describe the lowest level strong force interactions, or are you saying that we don't know any way to apply the equations to come up with answers for most real world situations?

      Both.

    5. Re:I've been reading by mako1138 · · Score: 1

      My understanding is that we have QCD equations all figured out, but doing stuff like perturbative QCD is computationally or analytically intractable. There's a lot of work in Lattice QCD, which is QCD done on a grid, but of course this is an approximation approach.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lattice_QCD

      I know my group's experimental work has something to do with deriving more useful QCD equations, but my understanding stops there.

  149. I believe it is necessary to point this out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are an asshole.

  150. Isn't it obvious? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    GoldenPalace.comium

  151. you can nit pick errors and ommisions on my part.. by docbrody · · Score: 1

    but the larger point still stands. The original poster is just plain wrong when he claims that Germans 'outperform' other countries - they simply do not. They are about average.

    As I said in my first post 'Germans have made great contributions to science and technology.' Perhaps you didn't read that part because you felt the need to come up with a list of more German 'greats,' - which was one of the more pathetic things I have seen someone post on slashdot. You didn't even come up with a good list, and some of them are pretty debatable.

    We could sit here all day and site this or that scientist/innovator from this or that country, but I guarantee you that if we did just that, even the most ardent German nationalist would ultimately be forced to admit that Germany is about average.

    Ask yourself if you really want to join in with this German delusion of superiority. The facts just don't bare out the argument, and historically, the results have been tragic - perhaps for Germany more than anyone else (holocaust victims excluded).

    And what of the original post that started this all off. Do you support that as well? Why single out Africans? How about native Americans, Mongolians, Kurds, etc etc? Different parts of the world developed at different rates. Civilizations, and their associated technological and scientific innovations have come and gone. Northern Europe (including Germany) was once a land of barbarians. When people from all parts of the world are given a chance to get a higher education and participate in the scientific process of discovery (such as in America, and to a lesser extent in Europe today), then we find that we are all about the same. Differences have more to do with the kind of institutional racism (and sexism) that original poster espouses.

  152. How about Onlyexistsfortwomillisecondsium by kriston · · Score: 1

    How about Onlyexistsfortwomillisecondsium.

    --

    Kriston

  153. Gentoo by lannocc · · Score: 1

    In Europe, the general emergency call number is 112. I also like Gentoo.

    I like Gentoo as well, but I don't get the reference.

    1. Re:Gentoo by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

      I like Gentoo as well, but I don't get the reference.

      Seems like you need to

      # emerge reference

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  154. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by damian+cosmas · · Score: 1

    RTFB, then bloviate. You sound somewhat uninformed otherwise. I understand how a book review by Newt Gingrich could be off-putting.

    I've read both. IANAC (I Am Not A Classicist), but Neither Diamond nor Hanson should be taken too seriously. They're polemicists at worst, and pop historians at best, and darlings of the Left and Right, respectively.

    Anyway, in defense of Hanson, the thesis of his book is quite competently defended, and is a bit more nuanced than "Europe is better and always has been." He uses historical battles as illustrative examples of aspects of Western Culture that have led to our Post-Renaissance dominance, which even you, in your haste to condemn the book you haven't read, concede. Things like private land ownership, the ability of a market economy to rapidly switch to war-time production (cf. Venice and the battle of Lepanto, US Pacific Fleet in WWII), civic militarism (i.e. direct participation of soldiers in the government they're fighting for).

    Finally, read some Bernard Lewis (who is actually a respected historian) to cure you of your fascination with Arab Culture. If you're too lazy to read that, the short version is: "we had an enlightenment; they didn't."

  155. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by mikechant · · Score: 1

    Nevertheless, it is in the bottom end of the range of (much smaller) western European countries.

    No, you should have looked at the figures - you're still not in the right area. China's GDP is third in the world, well ahead of France, Germany and the UK, and only just behind Japan in second. Given China's growth rate and population, it is inevitable it will overtake Japan in the next few years.

    I can understand how you could make this mistake though; China's GDP has been increasing at a ridiculously high rate in the last decade and it has come up the GDP rankings very fast.

  156. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

    I define "German" to include "German Jews".

    Much like you define "American" to include "American Jews" and "Arab" to include "Arab Jews", yes?

    Why the inclusion of one particular religion?

  157. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by mikechant · · Score: 1

    Just to clarify, I was taking the rankings from the two 2008 surveys shown in wikipedia; the third (2007) survey shows China fractionally behind Germany, but given the year's gap I don't think this contradicts the later surveys.

  158. Periodic Table of Celebrities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LandoCalrissium

  159. www.goldenpalace.comium by initialE · · Score: 1

    er or something. Take 2 pentium and call me in the morning

    --
    Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
  160. Asshatium by n4djs · · Score: 1

    Since there isn't anything quite as dense as an asshat....

  161. Goodie by Martin+Spamer · · Score: 1

    It should be called the Goodie, because it's dense, unstable and has a short life span.

  162. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

    You're asking why more inventions have come from developed countries, than third world countries?

    I don't think that needs answering. The question of why Europe (and America) began accelerating technological progress into the industrial revolution before other continents is a more interesting question.

    There's nothing special about Germany in particular. And your reference to Obama's father, trying to associate him with belief in witchcraft, makes me wonder if your post is just an anti-Obama troll in disguise (and anyway, the overwhelming majority of the US believes in supernatural things such as witchcraft, Creationism, God and so on, although thankfully far fewer people kill over it these days).

  163. Apology by wurp · · Score: 1

    I also want to apologize for the abrupt and antagonistic tone of the first sentence in the GGP post. It's a style I've developed on slashdot, and it's asinine.

  164. After one of the greatest science fiction writers- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Buttheadium

  165. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

    It's not an unreasonable question, but I can see that it is a troll well-disguised as that reasonable question: the comparison to Africa seems totally arbitrary (why Germany vs Africa, as if they're the only two places in the world?) and then we end up with the reference of Obama's father being a Keynan. I mean, come one:

    Africans contributed almost nothing to human technical achievement. (The father of Barack Hussein Obama is a Kenyan.

    You're telling me that's not a troll? Followed up with the witch burning, as if that has anything to do with Obama or his father?

    Perhaps it wasn't meant as a troll - but I can certainly see a mod taking it that way, and I'm curious why he wrote it like this if it wasn't meant as a troll.

    And I don't see what "PC" has got to do with it - no one is claiming offence at language. Crying "OMG PC gone mad" is typically the cry of someone who disagrees, but can't explain why - let's stick to the facts rather than claiming "PC" (indeed if anything, you are the one being PC, as you are complaining about moderation that's offended you, saying it "shouldn't be tolerated" - should the mods not mod as they think best, out of fear of offending you? That would be PC).

  166. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

    And what great advances to mankind have you brought, anonymous coward?

    They had humans first, they had the head start.

    This isn't a game of Civilization where every country is entirely independent, starting from having to discover The Wheel. New nations are still made up of people who bring the knowledge already known - after all, look how US is now where it is, despite being around for less. Clearly the people who travelled from Africa didn't have to start from scratch.

    The evil whites (and Arabs, don't forget their slave trade which in fact started before the European one) have pushed us into poverty, they say.

    It probably didn't bloody help, did it.

  167. Considering its half-life by SteveFoerster · · Score: 1

    How about "pandemonium"?

    --
    Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
  168. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by koreaman · · Score: 1

    Didn't settle outside of South Africa? I guess all those whites in Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi, Namibia, Kenya, Réunion, Angola, Mozambique, and Libya (and that's just what I got from a two-minute skim of the Wikipedia article on "White Africans") are just anomalies then?

  169. Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't believe anybody has said adamantium....

  170. Just do half the world a favor... by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

    And don't name it Obamium or AlGorium. GAH!!!!!!

  171. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by smoker2 · · Score: 1

    If you're too lazy to read that, the short version is: "we had an enlightenment; they didn't."

    The "enlightenment" is so called because it defined the end of "the dark ages". You're right, the arabs didn't have a dark age, they just kept going with science, astronomy, mathematics etc. Our enlightenment comes in no small part from their culture where it mixed with ours, in spain. And their culture was mixed with indian culture, and the indians culture was mixed with oriental culture.

    In short, fuck off, you bombastic prick.

  172. You've got . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    . . . Constipatium.

  173. Fibonacci by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank you very much for defining the Fibonacci sequence on Slashdot.

  174. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I don't see what "PC" has got to do with it - no one is claiming offence at language.

    Political correctness really isn't about offence at language.

    Look at "political INcorrectness". Most people (in the U.S. at least) immediately equate it with conservatism nowadays. It's a euphemism for racism. But it has a positive connotation, not a negative one. It means "I don't care who I offend [with this stupid offensive statement that I will now make]... I'm just calling it like it is!".

    If you want to see real political correctness, watch what happens the next time someone criticizes Limbaugh in any way whatsoever. Many Republicans have spoken about how he can't be controlling the party, they need to move away from him, he's not helping, etc., because he has borderline personality disorder (which they leave out). No offensive language involved at all. And within days, the person has to run around apologizing to Limbaugh. It's happened many times now, and goes down the same way each time.

  175. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by metaforest · · Score: 1

    WTF does any of this UberMenslich bullshit have to do with 112 protons, a hand full of neutrons and an attendant cloud of electrons?

    Discovering new atoms is a freaking crapshoot!

    So what? It's not like there is enough of these Unobtainium, or Obscurium atoms lurking around to do anything useful. Not even enough atoms can be created to determine it's physical properties.

    So some German physical scientists can tell their grandkids that they filled in a functionally useless record in the second-to-last row of the periodic table. So what?

    Maybe they will get really lucky and some astrochemist will observe a puff of them in a super nova....

    Not saying that it's totally useless, but geez, it's not all THAT and a bag of chips.

  176. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've actually seen that talk... However your post is quite an over-simplification of what he said. He makes the correlation between education, wealth and the resulting health. I might be citing Rosling from his other talk, as I think he has had 2-3 of them on TED. One particular thing that he noted was the fact that education has a higher influence than wealth on the resultant mortality rates. Which might explain why Africa still has high mortality rates, despite so much aid. This is especially true if you consider AIDS awareness and prevention education. You would be amazed at how many people in Africa believe that sex with a virgin and/or young child cures you of AIDS/HIV.

    I'm not trying to argue about that one particular point. Africa has come a long way and is doing reasonably well now, compared to before.
    But let us be honest. Can you say that Africa would be doing so well without so much international aid and investment? I know lots of this "help" is in the form of loans. But these loans are being canceled left right and centre these days.

  177. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It probably didn't bloody help, did it.

    Colonization of Africa most certainly helped them. Sure, slavery was bad and unfair. But if colonization of Africa never happened, then most likely they still wouldn't have writing, religion or technology. Religion isn't such a good example, as they had ancestral worship prior to colonization.

    Granted, they might have developed those things on their own. But that demonstrates my point exactly. They were already behind Europe and the rest of the world; during the middle ages even. And we all know how technological progression has an exponential growth trend. Even with all the technology and knowledge sharing in the world now, Africa is still only outputting a minuscule amount of advances to the world. Which I would argue is steadily decreasing anyways.

    This isn't a game of Civilization where every country is entirely independent, starting from having to discover The Wheel. New nations are still made up of people who bring the knowledge already known - after all, look how US is now where it is, despite being around for less. Clearly the people who travelled from Africa didn't have to start from scratch.

    It doesn't matter if the Europeans/Asians/Arabs had to start from scratch or not. They still started at the same time, and yet there is a discrepancy in the result. I would, however, like to add that I think they did in fact, to a certain extent, start from scratch. A new environment, especially a cold one such as Europe, requires a totally different set of skills than say a semi-arid environment such as Africa does.

    And what great advances to mankind have you brought, anonymous coward?

    Have you no better argument than an ad hominem and a poor analogy to a game of civilization? Any "advances" I have made are irrelevant to the discussion here. This isn't a pissing contest, buddy.

  178. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by _2Karl · · Score: 1

    Africans contributed almost nothing to human technical achievement.

    Let's see, Mathematics, the concept of zero, astronomy, agriculture.... Care to revise your statement?

  179. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Indians might be dark skinned, but they aren't from Africa.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  180. Since nobody can spell it anyway by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Adnausium

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  181. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by _2Karl · · Score: 1

    Ahh I retract my "concept of zero".

  182. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by damian+cosmas · · Score: 1

    Careful, your ignorance is showing.

    The Enlightenment was in the 18th Century. The Renaissance (literally, rebirth) was immediately after the Dark Ages, and indeed did include the incorporation of Arab knowledge, which was quite substantial at that time, into European Cultures. Subsequently, the Middle East stagnated (prior to the rise of European Colonialism, mind you, so you can't really blame whitey for this one), while Europe dominated.

    Pick up a copy of What Went Wrong . It'll explain why you are wrong better than I can.

  183. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

    There was scientific development in the so called dark ages. Most of the improvements consisted in techniques to improve agricultural and industrial production which paved the way for a population boom that fueled the change made in the renaissance. Technologies from the dark ages include: heavy plow, crop rotation, tower mill. Was it not for the increased population pressure there would have been little motive for expansion and colonization.

  184. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

    First of all, if Diamond is an amateur, he must be the most cited amateur on earth.

    Second, would you need to actually read a book that claimed aliens built the Pyramids, or would a review be sufficient to convince you that the book is full of shit? Hanson is just the latest in a long line of Western exceptionalists. War does not a civilization make, and war is generally won or lost before the first shot is fired. Hanson reverses cause and effect. Do you seriously think that if the Greeks hadn't invented the phalanx, the rest of Europe would never have developed as it did?

    Also, perhaps you should think before assigning a "fascination" with Arab culture to me. It's hardly the case: it's just another culture like many others on the planet. It fell into decline, but in the time I mentioned, it was further along than the West.

  185. 'Taconium' is Perfect by airship · · Score: 1

    I think 'Taconium' is the perfect name. After all, it IS the heaviest of all the elements.

    --
    Serving your airship needs since 1995.
  186. For the Linux crowd... by thexile · · Score: 1

    Ubuntunium.

  187. Let's see. New and short lived... by cryoknight · · Score: 0

    Noobium

  188. Re:Serious Question: Why do Germans outperform? by Lord+Agni · · Score: 1

    Maybe you should actually read the book, instead of taking someone else's word on it's contents, then commenting on those comments. The thesis is not that universal military superiority of Western culture, but that a culture is reflected in how a civilization or nation wages war. Western culture does not guarantee success in any endeavor, but in war, gives a larger margin for error than many others. Really, read the book, your local library probably carries it. Hanson is no mere darling of the right, as someone describes him in this thread, but a well-informed classicist and a good writer.

  189. suggest by bruceslog · · Score: 1

    BackToTheFutureum
    heavy stuff.

    Or maybe TripleStuffedTaconium.

    TakesADecadeToNameium.

    I have more !

    This could be fun. :)

    --
    If it has tires or tits, it will give you problems.