Slashdot Mirror


Four Elements Added To Periodic Table (theguardian.com)

physburn writes: The Guardian reports that four new elements, with atomic numbers 113, 115, 117, and 118, have been formally added to the periodic table. The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry has now initiated the process of formalizing names and symbols for these elements. "The RIKEN collaboration team in Japan have fulfilled the criteria for element Z=113 and will be invited to propose a permanent name and symbol." 115 and 117, with the temporary names of ununpentium and ununseptium, will be named by researchers from Oak Ridge and Lawrence Livermore national labs in the U.S., as well as from the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research in Russia. 118, known for now as ununoctium, will be named by the same group minus the Oak Ridge researchers. Professor Paul Karol said, "A particular difficulty in establishing these new elements is that they decay into hitherto unknown isotopes of slightly lighter elements that also need to be unequivocally identified, but in the future we hope to improve methods that can directly measure the atomic number, Z."

85 comments

  1. Let Bob Lazar name 115 by RubberDogBone · · Score: 4, Funny

    Let Bob Lazar name 115, since he claimed that was the element which powered the alien flying saucers he worked on at S-3.

    Lazarium. Toaster Struedelium. I dunno.

    --
    Sig for hire.
    1. Re: Let Bob Lazar name 115 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Elerium is the name for 115.

    2. Re:Let Bob Lazar name 115 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you need to bombard it with positrons though! :)

    3. Re: Let Bob Lazar name 115 by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This naming convention is mandatory, on pain of having to beat a nighttime crysalid terror mission with a rookie squad that lacks plasma weapons.

    4. Re:Let Bob Lazar name 115 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ZetaRectilium? AnalProbanium?

    5. Re:Let Bob Lazar name 115 by Jamu · · Score: 1

      They should simplify the naming scheme! Starting with Hydrogen, which should be called Unium (or Unum if you're American). Water will be Dioctium Unium. And Roentgenium will be Unununium.

      --
      Who ordered that?
    6. Re:Let Bob Lazar name 115 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No fusion scientist wants to be working with bum isotopes.

    7. Re:Let Bob Lazar name 115 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yawn... Wake me when we get to unununobtainium (with apologies to stutterers )

    8. Re: Let Bob Lazar name 115 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This naming convention is mandatory, on pain of having to beat a nighttime crysalid terror mission with a rookie squad that lacks plasma weapons.

      Primed proximity grenades in-hand, for the win. Just don't reload after they hit the ground...

    9. Re:Let Bob Lazar name 115 by NoSalt · · Score: 0

      Bob Lazar doesn't exist. The Government saw to this.

    10. Re:Let Bob Lazar name 115 by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

      Bullshittium

    11. Re:Let Bob Lazar name 115 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Water will be Dioctium Unium

      Round here, we call it Octium Diunide. Dioctium Unium would be ... rather unstable ...

    12. Re:Let Bob Lazar name 115 by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      It's a good thing we don't have Czechs or Serbians working in the labs that discover these, otherwise we'd now have to figure out how to pronounce Srjnfldvpstvium, Crztlmftszprtium, Fzrtshjnmium, and Strcknstfrtztlium.

    13. Re:Let Bob Lazar name 115 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If and when the time comes, will Element 1000 be called Millenium? /runs away tee-hee'ing!!!

  2. Not found in nature. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it's not found in nature, then they all should be called Unobtanium.

    The four new elements, all of which are man-made, were discovered by slamming lighter nuclei into each other and tracking the following decay of the radioactive superheavy elements.

    Yeah, all ya need to an accelerator and you too can make all you want.

    1. Re:Not found in nature. by Deadstick · · Score: 3, Informative

      If it's not found in nature, then they all should be called Unobtanium.

      More like unobtania, since there are now 28 of them.

    2. Re:Not found in nature. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If it's not found in nature, then they all should be called Unobtanium.

      Just because we haven't found it existing in nature, doesn't mean that it does not or cannot. Especially with heavier elements, there can be situations where they ought to exist naturally but would decay so rapidly that detecting them would be next to impossible.

      So... No. Let's not do that. Especially since it would serve to only further inflate someone's massively oversize Ego.

    3. Re:Not found in nature. by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      An element that is so unstable that it can only exist for fractions of a second before total and complete decay is while an "element" is basically useless, except for theoretical applications (at this point). I would hold of naming and further identification until we can produce enough of it to be useful.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    4. Re:Not found in nature. by danbert8 · · Score: 1

      Tell that to Doc Brown when he obtained Plutonium...

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    5. Re:Not found in nature. by RenderSeven · · Score: 2

      ... so unstable that it can only exist for fractions of a second ... is basically useless

      Oh, I dont know... "attractium" is pretty rare and doesnt last long, but the decay can be delayed with ethanol long enough to have some specific practical, uh, uses. And it's quite stable in the presence of some heavy metals like gold and silver, and especially certain forms of crystallized carbon. Of course the longer you keep it stable, the more dangerous and expensive it is to dispose of when it does finally decay.

    6. Re:Not found in nature. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... so unstable that it can only exist for fractions of a second ... is basically useless

      Oh, I dont know... "attractium" is pretty rare and doesnt last long, but the decay can be delayed with ethanol long enough to have some specific practical, uh, uses. And it's quite stable in the presence of some heavy metals like gold and silver, and especially certain forms of crystallized carbon. Of course the longer you keep it stable, the more dangerous and expensive it is to dispose of when it does finally decay.

      This is Slashdot, none of that stuff is a real problehttp://science.slashdot.org/story/16/01/04/1251259/four-elements-added-to-periodic-table#m here.

    7. Re:Not found in nature. by ChrisMaple · · Score: 2

      No good. Plutonium is now a dwarf element.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    8. Re: Not found in nature. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      =) from Houston

    9. Re:Not found in nature. by Art3x · · Score: 1

      If it's not found in nature, then they all should be called Unobtanium.

      More like unobtania, since there are now 28 of them.

      unicornium, unicornucopia

    10. Re:Not found in nature. by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      Let's just call them after Ytterby, as yttrium (Y), erbium (Er), terbium (Tb), and ytterbium (Yb) are already.
      We could have yttermium, erbinium, terbinium, erbytterium...

    11. Re: Not found in nature. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These elements have already been useful for testing nuclear physics models and relativistic models of electron orbitals, and such models have importance to understanding lighter, more stable but still heavy elements. You can redefine usefulness to exclude that, but it amounts to arbitrarily saying scientists should do something because you personally don't like it.

  3. At lest thisd justfiles a new edition textbooks by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    So let's jack the price up say $250-$300 the unlimited student loan will cover it.

    1. Re:At lest thisd justfiles a new edition textbooks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not really a big price increase these days.

      http://www.amazon.com/Universi...

  4. damn this hipster science. by nimbius · · Score: 5, Funny

    call me a greybeard but ill be in the cold cold ground before I recognize Ununseptium. These damn kids with their designer isotopes that clock less than a second of half-life. superheavy artificial chemical elements are almost as offensive as those hooligans in the physics department with their infernal "strings." "oh its just a theoretical framework, daddy-o, in which the point-like particles of particle physics are replaced..." theyll say, but what in the hell do you put in place of them!? "those groovy one-dimensional objects called strings." theyll croon, probably high on their marijuana reefer cigarettes.

    Mark my words, this never would have happened if Reagan were still president, and the science department hadn't quit making me handle mercury in my cupped hands for demonstrations.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:damn this hipster science. by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      Their half-lives are probably measured in millionths, or less, but regardless, they are not isotopes: variants of a particular chemical element which differ in neutron number, although all isotopes of a given element have the same number of protons in each atom

      --
      I come here for the love
    2. Re:damn this hipster science. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Mark my words, this never would have happened if Reagan were still president, and the science department hadn't quit making me handle mercury in my cupped hands for demonstrations.

      Fear not good citizen! This crazy talk of extra elements is just more of the liberal claptrap spread by these same scientists who have tried to foist the thoroughly debunked earthal heating lie upon the world.

      Stay the course. If Jeebuz wanted us to have more elements than the ones gawd already gave us, it would be in the ultimate science book. Its not, so take that atheists!

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    3. Re:damn this hipster science. by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 1

      There is a possibility these super heavy atoms could be stabilized if they could react and form a molecule. They could even have very useful properties. Even if they don't exist for long right now they are distinct elements from anything else on the periodic table.

      Chemical reactions take place on the order of a few femtoseconds so there is FAR more than enough time for these things to react and make a stable molecule. Look at uranium. On its own it decays as a radioactive compound but if turned into uraninite it is stable and far less dangerous.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    4. Re:damn this hipster science. by Punko · · Score: 1

      Just, no.

      --
      If only we could fall into a woman's arms without falling into her hands
    5. Re:damn this hipster science. by MiniMike · · Score: 1

      Mark my words, this never would have happened if Reagan were still president, ...

      Don't worry, President Trump will build a fence to keep these elements (and the poor metals) out of the U.S.A. on his first day in office. And he'll have the Actinides pay for it!

    6. Re:damn this hipster science. by justthinkit · · Score: 1
      Drivel.

      Chemical reactions take place on the order of a few femtoseconds so there is FAR more than enough time for these things to react and make a stable molecule. Look at uranium. On its own it decays as a radioactive compound but if turned into uraninite it is stable and far less dangerous.

      (1) Chemical reactions take varying amounts of time. Saying they all happen in femtos is ridiculous, but convenient to your thesis above.

      (2) Let's look at uranium. On its own it does nothing. Ohhhh, you were referring to just one of the two main isotopes.

      (3) Finally, you imply that making a chemical compound will somehow magically eliminate U-235's radioactivity .

      Bonus: Love that .sig, btw.

      --
      I come here for the love
    7. Re:damn this hipster science. by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile, liberals won't recognize any element north of bismuth. They're all eeee-vil!

    8. Re:damn this hipster science. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile, liberals won't recognize any element north of bismuth. They're all eeee-vil!

      If you looked at who made the first atomic weapons, they were damned liberal.

      Meantime, I deny the existance of radioactivity. Little particles flying off of solid rocks and metals. That's crazy talk.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    9. Re:damn this hipster science. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a possibility these super heavy atoms could be stabilized if they could react and form a molecule.

      You're looking for an Island of Stability. And they [physicists] are too.

    10. Re:damn this hipster science. by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Today's liberals, of course. Their leftist parents embraced the idea of human progress, including science and its applications, as did Marx himself. The Manhattan Project, Mt Palomar, Hoover Dam and their last program, Apollo, were part of this ideal.

    11. Re:damn this hipster science. by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Their leftist parents embraced the idea of human progress, including

      Eugenics, and Internment Camps.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    12. Re:damn this hipster science. by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      See what I mean? This is exactly how today's left views science.

    13. Re:damn this hipster science. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I am in passive consumption mode so I scrolled past that and then scrolled back up. I'm not going to charge you for the keyboard this time but, for FSM's sake, could you at least give a guy some warning first?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    14. Re:damn this hipster science. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fascinating - I thought molecular bonding had no impact on nuclear stability. Can you give an example where there's a well-documented difference please? I'm pretty suspicious because the energies are just orders of magnitude different - UV vs hard X-rays, sort of thing.

      I guess I'm saying [citation needed] :-)

      Thanks!

    15. Re:damn this hipster science. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... and ... sorry, same guy here .... uraninite isn't a good example, because the Uranum is just as unstable in it or outside it because it's normally the neutron flux that triggers Uranium fission. Of course, at high concentration, U235 can produce its own neutron flux, chain reaction etc, but it's not the state of being in a molecular bond that's preventing that flux, but the huge proportion of reletively stable non-neutron producing U238 that's mixed in.

  5. 4 periodic table elements named... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Leg1, Leg2, Leg3, and Leg4.

    Finally the periodic table gets off the ground.

  6. Uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That means four more cartridges for my 3D printer!

    1. Re:Uh oh by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      That means four more cartridges for my 3D printer!

      But you're still going to keep running out of astatine first.

  7. Monster discovery by RDW · · Score: 4, Funny

    The RIKEN collaboration team in Japan have fulfilled the criteria for element Z=113 and will be invited to propose a permanent name and symbol

    A radioactive super-heavy element from Japan?: Godzillium.

    1. Re:Monster discovery by haruchai · · Score: 1

      I was going with harakirium but I like your suggestion more.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    2. Re:Monster discovery by Nidi62 · · Score: 1
      I think the one that involved the Oak Ridge laboratory should honor another great contribution to humanity that came out of Oak Ridge.

      Therefore, I propose they name it orbium. For the Oak Ridge Boys

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    3. Re:Monster discovery by EmeraldBot · · Score: 1

      The RIKEN collaboration team in Japan have fulfilled the criteria for element Z=113 and will be invited to propose a permanent name and symbol

      A radioactive super-heavy element from Japan?: Godzillium.

      Now we'll actually enjoy watching those elementary school radiation movies!

      --
      "Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
    4. Re:Monster discovery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gojirium! Haikumium? KungFumium!

    5. Re:Monster discovery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gojirium! Haikumium? KungFumium!

      Kung fu is Chinese.

    6. Re:Monster discovery by wkwilley2 · · Score: 1

      The RIKEN collaboration team in Japan have fulfilled the criteria for element Z=113 and will be invited to propose a permanent name and symbol

      A radioactive super-heavy element from Japan?: Godzillium.

      Techinally, it should be Gojirium.

      --
      Have you ever fallen asleep at the keybhanusdiog?
    7. Re:Monster discovery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gojirium? I hardly know 'em!

    8. Re:Monster discovery by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Lawrence Livermore Labs already has Lawrencium, and 4 syllable names are so tedious. Let's call 117 Larry. Or Liver.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    9. Re:Monster discovery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The RIKEN collaboration team in Japan have fulfilled the criteria for element Z=113 and will be invited to propose a permanent name and symbol

      A radioactive super-heavy element from Japan?: Godzillium.

      Combine it with Mothrium and you get an instant reaction: entertainment.

  8. Fictional references to element 115 by Kojow777 · · Score: 2

    For those interested: Materials science in science fiction

  9. Re:Have they found one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Time for you to leave your superstitions and brainwashing behind. There's no value in being a dead-ender who hates civilized people.

  10. WRONG! They are most definitely isotopes by Wdi · · Score: 1

    The (few) identified atoms of each new element had all specific and measured neutron counts. And they still possess half-lifes in the seconds range.

    1. Re:WRONG! They are most definitely isotopes by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      Despite my quoting the wiki definition, I don't think you know what an isotope is.

      As to half-lives, they are all over the map -- 118 is about 0.89 of a millisecond, 117 is measured in days, 115's is 220 ms, 113's is 20 seconds. Generalizing that they are all in one range is never done by anyone but a chemistry novice.

      --
      I come here for the love
    2. Re:WRONG! They are most definitely isotopes by Quantus347 · · Score: 1

      I think you may have misread the OP. It didnt say that they decay into Isotopes of themselves, just that they decayed into previously unknown isotopes of other "slightly lighter elements" which need to be measured and quantified separately.

      --
      Common Sense isn't as Common as people think...
    3. Re:WRONG! They are most definitely isotopes by justthinkit · · Score: 1
      Thanks for trying to adjudicate but:

      These damn kids with their designer isotopes that clock less than a second of half-life.

      'designer isotopes' implies multiple variations of one element, and that is absolutely not what is going on here. Scientists have, apparently, created four new elements, without any mention or hint of them creating two or more isotopes of any of these elements. Just one type of each of four elements.

      --
      I come here for the love
    4. Re: WRONG! They are most definitely isotopes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One neutron number of an element is still an isotope of that element. And all but 118 have more than one isotope described... So you're wrong in about every way except for the quoted definition itself.

  11. Four Elements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So they finally added earth, wind, water and fire to the periodic table? I only read the post title.

  12. Complete bullshit by Wdi · · Score: 1

    Reacting uranium with anything does not (measurably) change its decay rate. Uraninite is NO exception.

  13. yes yes yes by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    it's right in so many ways. It captures the fear and dangers of nuclear work along with the awesome power. perfect.

    however I can't help but think this is just plot by the periodic table printing industry to force us all to upgrade the wall chart. What next? do I have to buy the white album again too?

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  14. Dont get upset by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    we need to update these things periodically.

  15. Mithril! by lasermike026 · · Score: 1

    That is all.

  16. Re:Who cares about LUDDITE elements? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You are all cowniums! Cowniums say "mooonium, mooonium", Come on, say mooonium, you periodic cowniums!

  17. It's nice to see them adding new elements... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..periodically.

    And occasionally.

  18. naqahdah by HermDog · · Score: 1

    Which one?

    --
    JADBP
  19. Re:Not found in appstores. by rwa2 · · Score: 1

    So how long until the periodic table app on my smartphone shows them?

    The one I use already seems to have them listed https://play.google.com/store/...
    but is there a nicer one around? I think I might try https://play.google.com/store/...

    I'm still bitter that I only made it to Silicon in Atomas (https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.sirnic.atomas&hl=en) ... I suppose it'll be a long time before these new entries make any impact there...

  20. Uridium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd name one of them Uridium.

  21. iPodium by Ferocitus · · Score: 1

    Expensive with short half lives?
    iPodium113, iPodium115, iPodium117, iPodium118.

    --
    USB, USB, USB!
  22. 113: Please call it Tokium. by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

    As of yet, there are no elements named after Japan, or any part of it, and there are many, many elements named after places, so this would be fitting.

    More importantly, it would start generations of stoners on the habit of telling each other "let's go do some element 113", thinking they're being clever when in fact they're being about as transparent as if they'd shouted "420".

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  23. Ok by drolli · · Score: 1

    Now we need to add The Fitfth Element to the periodic table.

  24. What, no hackaday? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm surprised slashdot isn't sucking hackaday's dick again.

  25. Hmm by DanJ_UK · · Score: 1

    Been telling people this for years.

    --
    - Dan
  26. What about... by kill_-9 · · Score: 1

    Kc for Kimocium (kimochi....kimochi.. :-p but seriously, Rk for Rikenium or Jp for Japanium (Np for Nipponium is already taken by Neptunium :-)

  27. But wait. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's more.

  28. suggestion by mcswell · · Score: 1

    Since these decay so fast, perhaps one of them should be called Unobtainium.

  29. Name them after daily items. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like iPhonium, iPadium, Nexusium, Galaxium, Kindlium, etc.

    Or more general, like Smartphonium, Tabletium, Ebikium, Adapterium, Chargerium.