This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
This redirect contains a translation of Éléments de la période 8 from fr.wikipedia. |
Period 8 element received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
As their existence is scientifically possible, and they can & will be discussed , thee is no reason to delete. If disagree, list of AfD so the chemists can have their say. DGG 01:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
This was merged a year ago and that is a better solution than a separate article on group 8. Extended periodic table can deal with all possible new elements in a better way. -- Bduke (Discussion) 08:53, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
http://radchem.nevada.edu/classes/rdch710/files/transactinide.pdf Double sharp ( talk) 15:03, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Note that this reference begins as a discussion of the (transactinide series) of elements, thus leaving out the first 2 elements of the IUPAC list of their 7th periodic element list, and starting with element 89 Actinium, in accordance with the listing in the Janet periodic table. WFPM ( talk) 15:46, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
The problem with the IUPAC Period 8 content is inherent to the general problem to the whole IUPAC periodic table, in that each period does not begin at the beginning of each series. If the second series of the table (3LI + 4Be)is seen as a second planar alpha particle on top of the first particle, and then the remaining series to be either a (4 element increase)Wrap layer around the centerline of the previous 2 layers or else a second topping layer, then the configuration of the atomic structure becomes understandable, and the the number of elements included in each layer becomes: Layer1 = 2, Layer2 = 2, Layer3 = 8, Layer 4 = 8, Layer 5 = 18, Layer6 = 18, Layer7 = 32, Layer8 = 32, Layer9 = 50, and Layer10 = 50, As in the Janet periodic table. Thus in accordance with the Janet table, the G block should begin at the beginning of the 9th series and include the sequence of 18,+14+10+6+2 = the next 50 elements. WFPM ( talk) 15:14, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
I know that! And appreciate your saying so. But my submitted real physical model image got deleted as part of a program of elimination of the Nuclear model article, so you're going to have to get by with a description unless you can figure out a way to undelete my submitted image. So I can merely point out the conceptual deficiencies of the IUPAC periodic table and leave it at that. I hope you also read the Talk:Charles Janet article, which elaborates on the rationale for the length and subsectioning of the various periods and series, and which is informative as to their length of construction in either case. WFPM ( talk) 21:47, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
If you'll look in my talk section, under Talk:Nuclear model, you'll find my discussion of the subject matter. WFPM ( talk) 00:56, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
Even before I touched this page, the table for Pyyro model table is twice in this page. [1]. Is that OK? - DePiep ( talk) 16:53, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Soon I will probably completely rewrite this article to make it deal with the Pyykkö model (actual science, and not just an extrapolation which is agreed by scientists not to work) of period 8 (Z from 119 to 172). Elements 165–168 are arguably in period 9, but since there are no noble gases after 118 to 172, it's somewhat justifiable to consider elements 119–172 to all constitute an eighth period, with 54 elements. Double sharp ( talk) 11:06, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Period 8 element's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Duellmann":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:48, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Group 3 element which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 21:16, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
The accumulation of the 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 = 18 Elements 121 through 138 of the G block series is involved with the additions of 18 2-neucleon (deuteron) components to a 4-sided structure. They are evidently added in a dynamically balancing manner, which involves each odd addition being followed by a rebalancing even addition. This results in the odd number additions being less stable. Also, the number 3 addition of the first 4 addition is particularly unstable similar to the same position occurrence case that occurs in 43Tc and 61Pm. The predominant failure mode in this area is that of alpha emission, with the occurrence of atomic fission being an indication of the existence of a fairly balanced nucleus. WFPM ( talk) 00:25, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
To me, it sounds like a Martian speech. Articles electron shell and atomic orbital also do not know this notation. Experts, add an appropriate link, please (which possibly will require writing a new section). Incnis Mrsi ( talk) 15:25, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
This redirect contains a translation of Éléments de la période 8 from fr.wikipedia. |
Period 8 element received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
As their existence is scientifically possible, and they can & will be discussed , thee is no reason to delete. If disagree, list of AfD so the chemists can have their say. DGG 01:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
This was merged a year ago and that is a better solution than a separate article on group 8. Extended periodic table can deal with all possible new elements in a better way. -- Bduke (Discussion) 08:53, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
http://radchem.nevada.edu/classes/rdch710/files/transactinide.pdf Double sharp ( talk) 15:03, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Note that this reference begins as a discussion of the (transactinide series) of elements, thus leaving out the first 2 elements of the IUPAC list of their 7th periodic element list, and starting with element 89 Actinium, in accordance with the listing in the Janet periodic table. WFPM ( talk) 15:46, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
The problem with the IUPAC Period 8 content is inherent to the general problem to the whole IUPAC periodic table, in that each period does not begin at the beginning of each series. If the second series of the table (3LI + 4Be)is seen as a second planar alpha particle on top of the first particle, and then the remaining series to be either a (4 element increase)Wrap layer around the centerline of the previous 2 layers or else a second topping layer, then the configuration of the atomic structure becomes understandable, and the the number of elements included in each layer becomes: Layer1 = 2, Layer2 = 2, Layer3 = 8, Layer 4 = 8, Layer 5 = 18, Layer6 = 18, Layer7 = 32, Layer8 = 32, Layer9 = 50, and Layer10 = 50, As in the Janet periodic table. Thus in accordance with the Janet table, the G block should begin at the beginning of the 9th series and include the sequence of 18,+14+10+6+2 = the next 50 elements. WFPM ( talk) 15:14, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
I know that! And appreciate your saying so. But my submitted real physical model image got deleted as part of a program of elimination of the Nuclear model article, so you're going to have to get by with a description unless you can figure out a way to undelete my submitted image. So I can merely point out the conceptual deficiencies of the IUPAC periodic table and leave it at that. I hope you also read the Talk:Charles Janet article, which elaborates on the rationale for the length and subsectioning of the various periods and series, and which is informative as to their length of construction in either case. WFPM ( talk) 21:47, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
If you'll look in my talk section, under Talk:Nuclear model, you'll find my discussion of the subject matter. WFPM ( talk) 00:56, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
Even before I touched this page, the table for Pyyro model table is twice in this page. [1]. Is that OK? - DePiep ( talk) 16:53, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Soon I will probably completely rewrite this article to make it deal with the Pyykkö model (actual science, and not just an extrapolation which is agreed by scientists not to work) of period 8 (Z from 119 to 172). Elements 165–168 are arguably in period 9, but since there are no noble gases after 118 to 172, it's somewhat justifiable to consider elements 119–172 to all constitute an eighth period, with 54 elements. Double sharp ( talk) 11:06, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Period 8 element's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Duellmann":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:48, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Group 3 element which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 21:16, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
The accumulation of the 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 = 18 Elements 121 through 138 of the G block series is involved with the additions of 18 2-neucleon (deuteron) components to a 4-sided structure. They are evidently added in a dynamically balancing manner, which involves each odd addition being followed by a rebalancing even addition. This results in the odd number additions being less stable. Also, the number 3 addition of the first 4 addition is particularly unstable similar to the same position occurrence case that occurs in 43Tc and 61Pm. The predominant failure mode in this area is that of alpha emission, with the occurrence of atomic fission being an indication of the existence of a fairly balanced nucleus. WFPM ( talk) 00:25, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
To me, it sounds like a Martian speech. Articles electron shell and atomic orbital also do not know this notation. Experts, add an appropriate link, please (which possibly will require writing a new section). Incnis Mrsi ( talk) 15:25, 20 April 2013 (UTC)