Slashdot Mirror
No Longer "Noble"; Argon Compound Found In Space
mbstone writes "Scientists at the University College of London — where argon was originally discovered in 1894 — have now found spectroscopic signatures of molecules of argon hydride (ArH), said to be produced via explosive nucleosynthesis in a core-collapse supernova in the Crab Nebula. The post-supernova molecular dust was observed by the Herschel Space Observatory shortly before it ran out of coolant in April.."
I don't get the connection between the title and the summary.
That far right side of the Periodic Table...where Helium, Neon, Xenon, Argon, and Radon live. Those elements have always been taught as being chemically inert (i.e. not able to be combined with any other elements), hence why they are called "noble" gases. This apparently is the first instance where that rule isn't necessarily true.
Do we categorize Argon as a non-noble gas, or do we redefine what a noble gas actually is?
Wait, I guess noble doesn't mean what I thought it meant, or there were already plenty of exceptions, as I just read this wiki article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_gas_compounds
Only it's not; apparently compounds of the noble gases have been known for a while. The only thing there's no known compound of is helium. At least that's what one my chemistry friends is telling me.
Yeah, I had a sig once; I got bored of it.
But worth explaining for others that either didn't have chemistry class or maybe snoozed through it. The atoms of "noble" gases have their outer electron shell full so are very non-reactive, they usually don't make chemical bounds with other elements except under extraordinary circumstances requiring a lot of energy. Helium, neon, argon, and radon are probably the ones most people have heard mentioned at some time in daily life.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_gas
And now we are Argon?
This isn't even a compound, though. It's a molecular ion, ArH+. If you added an electron to it, it would fall apart, since ArH (neutral) is not bound.
A similar molecular ion exists for helium, HeH+. This ion is very important for the evolution of the early universe, since it can emit IR radiation to cool gas clouds, allowing stars to form from the nearly-pure H/He clouds that existed after the big bang.
Does this count? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium_hydride_ion
Several of the others form more-or-less stable molecules- usually with Hydrogen, none had been found for Argon up to now.
The circumstances under which it forms appear to be rather extreme. I don't know enough (ok, anything) about Nuclear Chemistry to know if it is significant that the Isotope is Ar36 rather than the Ar40 we get here. Normally it would make no difference but this is an extreme case.
Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
Noble as in inert - it's not supposed to react to form a stable molecule.
Noble doesn't imply non-reactive, all of the noble elements can be ionized, with enough energy, just like any other element. What it means is they have a stable electron configuration. Helium, Neon, Argon, Krypton, Xenon, and Radon all have there outermost electron orbital shells filled. This means they're not inclined to give, borrow, or take electrons from other elements, this is why there called noble.
The fact that argon hydride was found in space implies that krypton, xenon, and radon hydride can also be found in space.
This, mod parent up up up.
Noble elements aren't that because they CANNOT combine with things, they are that because they RARELY combine with things.
Their outer shell is pretty bloated, so the amount of things they can combine with are extremely limited.
Title is so horribly wrong.
A better title would have been "Less Noble, argon compound found in space."
More so because it was found in nature, which is pretty damn impressive to find.
36Ar is the cosmically abundant isotope. On Earth, most argon is 40 Ar, because it comes from the radioactive decay of 40K. Earth is poor in 36Ar because it formed at a position in the solar nebula too warm to condense Ar.
it's just there so that the submitter could act snobby with knowledge and fail at it.
I really doubt anyone is going to stop using argon for it's relatively inert properties because if this..
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
xenon will combine with halogens. anything will combine with anything, you just need enough juice.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
You mean my plans to build an Argon bomb and take over the world aren't going to work?
Damn.
No sig today...
The fact that argon hydride was found in space implies that krypton, xenon, and radon hydride can also be found in space.
Probably, but since the quantities of those elements will be dramatically lower than argon, detecting them will likely be much more difficult.
make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
You mean my plans to build an Argon bomb and take over the world aren't going to work?
You'll just have to use 39Ar or 42Ar, and probably need a H-fusion reaction to detonate it.
make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
...declare me to not be noble. Denethor be damned.
Oh, wait, argon, not Aragorn.
Silence is a state of mime.
I don't get the connection between the title and the summary.
That far right side of the Periodic Table...where Helium, Neon, Xenon, Argon, and Radon live. Those elements have always been taught as being chemically inert (i.e. not able to be combined with any other elements), hence why they are called "noble" gases. This apparently is the first instance where that rule isn't necessarily true.
Of course it took the energy of the collapse of a star to produce those compounds, so for practical purpose, those gases are still all pretty noble.
That far right side of the Periodic Table
Also known as the fascist elements.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Helium, neon, argon, and radon are probably the ones most people have heard mentioned
Everybody's heard of krypton, although most of them think it's a planet and Tom Clancy couldn't spell it.
Neither --- you're not thinking sufficiently American.
Send the supernova a Cease & Desist letter. That'll teach'em to stop messing with us!
Noble In Name Only
I thought we could rely on these gasses to stay true to their column on the periodic table, but, no, they've sold out, just like that whorish oxygen and hydrogen, which will twerk with even the most sordid elements of society.
We're just going to have to look elsewhere for the stability we crave at all levels.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
they're not inclined to give, borrow, or take electrons from other elements
Except these aren't the words used on the wiki page. The word I was taught is "share". For example, Hydrogen has one electron and desires two for stability. So it shares one from Oxygen or Carbon, etc. And in that sharing, Oxygen (desiring two) gets its needs satisfied by sharing one each with two Hydrogens.
I come here for the love
Argon compounds have been formed in the lab for nearly 15 years. No Nobel compounds have been directly observed in space of any kind, which is the new part, not that Argon in particular was found in a compound.
Elements which can't combine with anyone else, "herding cats" comes to mind.
Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
Can't anything live up to its promise
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
No, noble != inert
When I first learned about the elements many years ago, the description for those elements in the rightmost column was "inert". This means completely non-reactive.
Later on, when chemists made compounds of xenon, they realized the elements might not be so inert, after all. They gave the elements a new name: noble. They were not truly inert, but tended to have that tendency. Like other noble elements--such as gold or platinum--the elements in the rightmost column were disdainful of mixing with the hoi-polloi. It didn't mean they couldn't combine with other elements; they are just disinclined.
...you want to 1-up him you'll have to go for the quantum mechanic explanation of bonds. As far as *useful* models for chemical bonds go, even chemists use something pretty far from the "truth" . There are valence bond theory, orbital hybridization, resonance, and quite a few more.
When it comes to explaining nature, you use the model that is most USEFUL for what you want to explain, not for the most complicated one possible to impress your peers because you are so smart. :) That is why in many books atoms are still represented by red, white, blue "balls" and no one complains about it.
And by the way, the in the oxygen-hydrogen bond oxygen actually does sort of "borrow" the electron - the probability distribution for the location of that electron shifts towards the nucleus of the oxygen. That is why water molecules, while actually neutral (if not ionized), still act polar - the oxygen is essentially negative, the hydrogens positive. There is no equal "sharing".
Have any evidence to support your hypothesis that the big bang is just a theory?
According to my parents I am direct evidence the big bang,
and my hair and skin are different than theirs due to the uncertainty principal.
...and my hair and skin are different than theirs due to the uncertainty principal.
As is Quantum Mechanics or one of them isn't sure they're your parent?
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
The significant parts of this discovery are:
- a noble gas has been found in space (this confirmed people's expectations that argon-36 could be found as part of a supernova, even though argon-40 is much more common on Earth - note that argon-36 is also available on Earth, just in smaller quantities, it's not a new isotope)
- a noble gas molecule has been found in space (previously, argon compounds were only detected following Earth-based lab experiments)
The significant part of this discovery is not:
- that a noble gas can form a compound. Argon has had known compounds since 2003. Xenon has had known compounds since 1962, some of which are even stable at normal room temperature/pressure.
It means I can finally synthesize some Kryptonite! Superman, all your base will be mine soon! Bwahahahahaha
There are the "fullerene compounds", like He@C60, where noble gas atom is trapped inside carbon fullerene. that @ sign means trapped atom. they have distinct chemical properties even though the inside noble gas isn't chemically bonded but instead surrounded by carbon. Argon, Krypton and Xenon ones exist also.
Actually, it's much more complicated. The gas Argon got its name from greek "argos", which means inert. The chemical group got the name of "noble gases" at the end of the 19th century from William Ramsay (Nobel prize in 1904). The first compound of a noble gas was discovered in 1962 by Neil Bartlett. Argon was the last noble gas for which a compound could be synthesized (2000).
... It's not always easy to be noble under extreme conditions. Happens to the best of us!
Not a single "krypton can be found in space" joke? really?
I think the Krypton in space was destroyed in a supernova...
You are both wrong. You have to use Illudium which must be detonated with a Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator. If you don't, you won't have an Earth-shattering Kaboom!
You get a big ol WHOOSH today. That was a joke. JustOk called the show Big Bang but the show's name is The Big Bang Theory, hence why AC said it was just a theory. You are so eager to get your troll on, you miss some of the obvious stuff.
That is not Nobel, its just Stuck Up.
Argon molecular ions were known well before that. The helium analogue, HeH+, was discovered in 1925!
Argon forms compounds without too much coercion. Back in the mid '60s chemists were playing with them regularly. As I understand it (I'm NOT a chemist and haven't done this myself):
Just mix argon and fuourine in a pressure vessel and heat it up. (VERY CAREFULLY! Fluorine gas is deadly!) You'll quickly get copious amounts of argon difluoride, tetrafluoride, and even some hexafluoride. These are stable enough to stick around once you bring things down to room temperatures.
Once you've got them, there are techniques for substituting other stuff for one or more of the fluorines.
But you DO have to be careful, even after the fluorine is out of the picture. I hear these compounds tend to be explosive, due to argon's propensity for dumping the riders and flying away alone.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Did a little checking. It's Xenon that they were playing with back then. Xenon is reasonably easy to convince to make covalent bonds, and some of its compounds are used industrially and available in commercial quantities.
Argon is less reactive, and they didn't get it to form compounds until 2000, with some encouragement from an ultraviolet light source to kick an electron up to another level.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Well, if it is no longer of the Nobility, can it least get a peerage with a Knighthood?
Tracy Johnson
Old fashioned text games hosted below:
http://empire.openmpe.com/
BT
These hydrates or clathrates are not ionic or co-valently bonded.
They are looser associations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane_clathrate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clathrate_compound
Yes it did, originally. For the first 30 or 40 years after they were discovered, none of them had any known chemical compounds. Off the top of my head, xenon compounds were discovered in the late 1940s, krypton by the late 1950s, I'm not sure about argon's history, and neon compounds were announced some time since I was a student, so post 1980s.
True, but not relevant ; the term "noble gasses" was in use long before there was any detailed understanding of atomic orbitals. The law of octets - related to classical valence theory - on the other hand, goes back to [I've forgotten his name] who was groping towards the theory of the periodic table a couple of decades before Mendeleev, and so nearly 4 decades before the discovery of helium.
This is in flat contradiction to your first statement.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"