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.
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.
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.
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.
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".
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.
The middle ages called, they want their alchemy back.
Great Intellect...
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.
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?
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.
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.
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!
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
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
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.
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.