![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
The article says: "Compounds that contain rhodium are not often encountered by most people and should be considered to be highly toxic and carcinogenic. Rhodium compounds can stain human skin very strongly. This element plays no biological role in humans."
If that is really true, why is it used to plate jewlery? 71.199.123.24
-The article means COMPOUNDS, not the actual metal itself. the base metal is harmless but compounds such as rhodium (III) fluoride or rhodium (III) chloride
Borislav Dopudja 18:51, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Elemetal rhodium is harmless, but his salts should be treated as a deadly poison.
As many may know, Rhodium is used in plating jewelry. Among this jewelry, now commonly found to contain Rhodium, are Grills (dental jewelry most popular in hip hop fashion.)There has been talk of Rhodium making the wearers 'sick'; though no actual symptoms were specified. Perhaps more research should be done in this area.
Gold may very well be toxic - the issue is that it's so inert that normally you're hard pushed to get any compounds formed in the first place. There are a handful that I've come across - lithium auride I think is one, along with LiAuCl and some others like the arthritis drug aurothioglucose. Oh. This is a discussion on Rhodium. Never mind. Dan Pope 00:42, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
According to the USGS, in their most recent platinum group mining summary, no Rhodium was mined in the United States -> [2]. Hipocrite - «Talk» 14:00, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
What is a furnace winding in this context? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.169.125.74 ( talk) 07:10, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
One part of the article said it was not attacked by acids, and slightly attacked by aqua regia. Later in the article there was an uncited statement saying that sulfuric acid completely dissolves rhodium. Aqua regia is far stronger than pure sulphuric acid, and can completely dissolve metals that sulphuric acid cannot even attack. 24.65.95.239 ( talk) 01:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Can User:Cadmium please provide a source for the changes made regarding the radioactivity of fission rhodium? This article gives an activity of 1.3×10-3 Ci/g after 5 years, which would be about 640 MBq for 13.3 grams, although this was apparently based on a different assumption about the half-life than the values given in Nubase. — Ta180 19:57, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
In the "From Nuclear Fuels" section, it starts off talking about rhodium, but every other reference in the paragraph is to ruthenium. Is this a cut-and-paste error? Or is it somehow intentional? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.223.116.200 ( talk) 23:49, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! I changed it.-- Stone ( talk) 14:26, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Added a comment about the sharp price decline of rhodium as a result of the global slowing economy.
is rhodium a conductor? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.105.2.254 ( talk) 12:01, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
---
Rhenium is not a precious metal. Am deleting the comment about it being so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.27.245.170 ( talk) 16:56, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Does Rhodium in Jewlery items pause any danger of radiation? many white gold items from india have Rhodium in it and I am not sure if they are safe Please reply
Are you sure about the specific heat? I think you may be off by a factor of 1000.
The Rhodium page talks about reactivity with oxygen at length, or rather the lack thereof. Then in the table entry about Oxidation State, it talks about an amphoteric oxide. I suspect there is some algorithm generating this entry, as there is no means of editing it (that I see). I would like to see the mention of an oxide dropped with respect to the oxidation states available for Rhodium. Fortran ( talk) 23:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
I found a factual error in the article. In the article it states that only small amounts of rhodium will dissolve in aquaregia. But if you bring the aquaregia to boiling temp It will dissolve both platinum and rhodium. I do this on a regular basis. As this is my bussiness.[user 69slinkys] 8:50 24 feb 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.247.21.245 ( talk) 15:52, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
It appears the Young's modulus and Bulk modulus values had been interchanged earlier, which I have now corrected. Poisson's ratio nu=0.26, and Young's modulus E=380 GPa are consistent with ASM Metals Handbook. Bulk modulus K = E/{3(1-2*nu)} shows that K must be less than E if nu is less than 1/3. This relation would give K=263 GPa.
Two other citations of sources reported on the web give K=275 GPa at 293.15K: K=275 GPa Darling, A.S. Journal of the Institute of Metals. 1966. K=274.5862 GPa, J.R.Handley. JM Internal document.
I have not checked the primary reference for these last two sources, but this is enough support to indicate that the earlier values for K,E had been interchanged. This error also occurred in another standard websource www.webelements.com and I have written to the editors of that source as well. Rbbwiki ( talk) 23:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC) Rbbwiki ( talk) 23:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Rhodium supposedly will not react with Fluorine, even though it will form compounds with Oxygen, Chlorine, etc.
If significant amounts of rhodium occur in spent nuclear fuel, what is it a decay or fission product of? -- Carnildo 05:27, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
According to the Chart of the Nuclides (14th Edition), the yield of mass number 103 from fission of U-235 is 3.03% from U-235, 1.57% from U-233, and 7.0% from Pu-239. Of course, Rh-103 is only 1 of many isotopes with a mass number of 103 which are produced. Rh-103 is the only stable isotope with a mass number of 103, so it will be the end product of beta minus decays from the neutron rich side and beta plus/electron capture decays from the neutron deficient side. Beta decay/electron capture is the only decay mechanism present, so all mass 103 produced by fission of U-233, U-235 or Pu-239 will result in Rh-103 eventually. The two longest lived isotopes at mass number 103 are Ru-103 (39.27d) on the neutron rich side and Pd-103 (16.99d) on the neutron deficient side. Fortran ( talk) 23:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Rhodium powder pressed melted.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on July 27, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-07-27. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! — howcheng { chat} 08:29, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
If I remember correctly this was used to set the record in 1999 for getting closest to absolute zero (it got to 10-10 K) - shouldn't this have a mention? 220.255.1.68 ( talk) 12:18, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Why is there no mention of the importance of Rh in the Monsanto process? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto_process#section_1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.130.18.100 ( talk) 18:08, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
"Diluted nitric acid dissolved all but palladium and rhodium, which were dissolved in aqua regia" - History section in this article. "However, aqua regia does not dissolve or corrode titanium, iridium, ruthenium, rhenium, tantalum, niobium, hafnium, osmium, or rhodium"- Following link from Aqua regia article.
Tumorte ( talk) 07:51, 7 August 2016 (UTC)Tumorte. 2016-08-07. 09:51.
There is no mention of rhodium's electrical conduction properties, nor is there mention of electrical components (ie power recepticals, contacts, etc) plated with rhodium (and the theoretical performance improvement, if any, resulting from this). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.2.107.38 ( talk) 04:09, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
The reference paper https://www.mdpi.com/2304-8158/8/2/59 abstract says:
The quantification limits for Pt and Rh are 0.007 and 0.0008 μg kg−1 respectively. Considering all the potato samples, concentrations of Pt and Rh vary in the ranges from 0.007 to 109 μg kg−1 (sample no, 6 potatoes grown in Sicily) and from 0.0008 to 0.030 μg kg−1 (sample no. 3 of potatoes grown in Emilia Romagna), respectively.
I think this means that Rhodium appears in potatoes in a concentration between from 0.0008 to 0.030 μg kg−1.
1 μg kg−1 would be 1 part per billion (ppb) or 1e-9, 0.001 μg kg−1 would be 1 part per trillion (1e-12), so 0.0008 means 0.8 parts per trillion (ppt) or 8e-13, and 0.030 μg kg−1 means 30 ppt.
So we need to correct this sentence: "Rhodium is present in potatoes in a range between 109 ppb to 7 ppt" (which already sounds unlikely, which is why I'm here :) - it appears that a previous editor has confused the Platinum and Rhodium concentrations.
I suggest: "Rhodium has been measured in some potatoes in concentrations between 0.8 and 30 ppt".
Hagrid67 ( talk) 16:04, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
The sentence that first mentions the Median Lethal dosage thing on rats in the Precautions section has a grammatical error.
It states, " Median lethal dose (LD50) for rats is 198 mg of rhodium chloride (RhCl3) per kilogram of body weight. "
It should be, "The median lethal dose (LD50) for rats is 198 mg of rhodium chloride (RhCl3) per kilogram of body weight."
Please edit, as I have given a detailed description on how to edit and where to edit. -- Thingy9 ( talk) 01:54, 20 March 2020 (UTC)Thingy9
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
The article says: "Compounds that contain rhodium are not often encountered by most people and should be considered to be highly toxic and carcinogenic. Rhodium compounds can stain human skin very strongly. This element plays no biological role in humans."
If that is really true, why is it used to plate jewlery? 71.199.123.24
-The article means COMPOUNDS, not the actual metal itself. the base metal is harmless but compounds such as rhodium (III) fluoride or rhodium (III) chloride
Borislav Dopudja 18:51, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Elemetal rhodium is harmless, but his salts should be treated as a deadly poison.
As many may know, Rhodium is used in plating jewelry. Among this jewelry, now commonly found to contain Rhodium, are Grills (dental jewelry most popular in hip hop fashion.)There has been talk of Rhodium making the wearers 'sick'; though no actual symptoms were specified. Perhaps more research should be done in this area.
Gold may very well be toxic - the issue is that it's so inert that normally you're hard pushed to get any compounds formed in the first place. There are a handful that I've come across - lithium auride I think is one, along with LiAuCl and some others like the arthritis drug aurothioglucose. Oh. This is a discussion on Rhodium. Never mind. Dan Pope 00:42, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
According to the USGS, in their most recent platinum group mining summary, no Rhodium was mined in the United States -> [2]. Hipocrite - «Talk» 14:00, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
What is a furnace winding in this context? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.169.125.74 ( talk) 07:10, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
One part of the article said it was not attacked by acids, and slightly attacked by aqua regia. Later in the article there was an uncited statement saying that sulfuric acid completely dissolves rhodium. Aqua regia is far stronger than pure sulphuric acid, and can completely dissolve metals that sulphuric acid cannot even attack. 24.65.95.239 ( talk) 01:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Can User:Cadmium please provide a source for the changes made regarding the radioactivity of fission rhodium? This article gives an activity of 1.3×10-3 Ci/g after 5 years, which would be about 640 MBq for 13.3 grams, although this was apparently based on a different assumption about the half-life than the values given in Nubase. — Ta180 19:57, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
In the "From Nuclear Fuels" section, it starts off talking about rhodium, but every other reference in the paragraph is to ruthenium. Is this a cut-and-paste error? Or is it somehow intentional? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.223.116.200 ( talk) 23:49, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! I changed it.-- Stone ( talk) 14:26, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Added a comment about the sharp price decline of rhodium as a result of the global slowing economy.
is rhodium a conductor? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.105.2.254 ( talk) 12:01, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
---
Rhenium is not a precious metal. Am deleting the comment about it being so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.27.245.170 ( talk) 16:56, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Does Rhodium in Jewlery items pause any danger of radiation? many white gold items from india have Rhodium in it and I am not sure if they are safe Please reply
Are you sure about the specific heat? I think you may be off by a factor of 1000.
The Rhodium page talks about reactivity with oxygen at length, or rather the lack thereof. Then in the table entry about Oxidation State, it talks about an amphoteric oxide. I suspect there is some algorithm generating this entry, as there is no means of editing it (that I see). I would like to see the mention of an oxide dropped with respect to the oxidation states available for Rhodium. Fortran ( talk) 23:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
I found a factual error in the article. In the article it states that only small amounts of rhodium will dissolve in aquaregia. But if you bring the aquaregia to boiling temp It will dissolve both platinum and rhodium. I do this on a regular basis. As this is my bussiness.[user 69slinkys] 8:50 24 feb 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.247.21.245 ( talk) 15:52, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
It appears the Young's modulus and Bulk modulus values had been interchanged earlier, which I have now corrected. Poisson's ratio nu=0.26, and Young's modulus E=380 GPa are consistent with ASM Metals Handbook. Bulk modulus K = E/{3(1-2*nu)} shows that K must be less than E if nu is less than 1/3. This relation would give K=263 GPa.
Two other citations of sources reported on the web give K=275 GPa at 293.15K: K=275 GPa Darling, A.S. Journal of the Institute of Metals. 1966. K=274.5862 GPa, J.R.Handley. JM Internal document.
I have not checked the primary reference for these last two sources, but this is enough support to indicate that the earlier values for K,E had been interchanged. This error also occurred in another standard websource www.webelements.com and I have written to the editors of that source as well. Rbbwiki ( talk) 23:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC) Rbbwiki ( talk) 23:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Rhodium supposedly will not react with Fluorine, even though it will form compounds with Oxygen, Chlorine, etc.
If significant amounts of rhodium occur in spent nuclear fuel, what is it a decay or fission product of? -- Carnildo 05:27, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
According to the Chart of the Nuclides (14th Edition), the yield of mass number 103 from fission of U-235 is 3.03% from U-235, 1.57% from U-233, and 7.0% from Pu-239. Of course, Rh-103 is only 1 of many isotopes with a mass number of 103 which are produced. Rh-103 is the only stable isotope with a mass number of 103, so it will be the end product of beta minus decays from the neutron rich side and beta plus/electron capture decays from the neutron deficient side. Beta decay/electron capture is the only decay mechanism present, so all mass 103 produced by fission of U-233, U-235 or Pu-239 will result in Rh-103 eventually. The two longest lived isotopes at mass number 103 are Ru-103 (39.27d) on the neutron rich side and Pd-103 (16.99d) on the neutron deficient side. Fortran ( talk) 23:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Rhodium powder pressed melted.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on July 27, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-07-27. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! — howcheng { chat} 08:29, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
If I remember correctly this was used to set the record in 1999 for getting closest to absolute zero (it got to 10-10 K) - shouldn't this have a mention? 220.255.1.68 ( talk) 12:18, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Why is there no mention of the importance of Rh in the Monsanto process? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto_process#section_1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.130.18.100 ( talk) 18:08, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
"Diluted nitric acid dissolved all but palladium and rhodium, which were dissolved in aqua regia" - History section in this article. "However, aqua regia does not dissolve or corrode titanium, iridium, ruthenium, rhenium, tantalum, niobium, hafnium, osmium, or rhodium"- Following link from Aqua regia article.
Tumorte ( talk) 07:51, 7 August 2016 (UTC)Tumorte. 2016-08-07. 09:51.
There is no mention of rhodium's electrical conduction properties, nor is there mention of electrical components (ie power recepticals, contacts, etc) plated with rhodium (and the theoretical performance improvement, if any, resulting from this). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.2.107.38 ( talk) 04:09, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
The reference paper https://www.mdpi.com/2304-8158/8/2/59 abstract says:
The quantification limits for Pt and Rh are 0.007 and 0.0008 μg kg−1 respectively. Considering all the potato samples, concentrations of Pt and Rh vary in the ranges from 0.007 to 109 μg kg−1 (sample no, 6 potatoes grown in Sicily) and from 0.0008 to 0.030 μg kg−1 (sample no. 3 of potatoes grown in Emilia Romagna), respectively.
I think this means that Rhodium appears in potatoes in a concentration between from 0.0008 to 0.030 μg kg−1.
1 μg kg−1 would be 1 part per billion (ppb) or 1e-9, 0.001 μg kg−1 would be 1 part per trillion (1e-12), so 0.0008 means 0.8 parts per trillion (ppt) or 8e-13, and 0.030 μg kg−1 means 30 ppt.
So we need to correct this sentence: "Rhodium is present in potatoes in a range between 109 ppb to 7 ppt" (which already sounds unlikely, which is why I'm here :) - it appears that a previous editor has confused the Platinum and Rhodium concentrations.
I suggest: "Rhodium has been measured in some potatoes in concentrations between 0.8 and 30 ppt".
Hagrid67 ( talk) 16:04, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
The sentence that first mentions the Median Lethal dosage thing on rats in the Precautions section has a grammatical error.
It states, " Median lethal dose (LD50) for rats is 198 mg of rhodium chloride (RhCl3) per kilogram of body weight. "
It should be, "The median lethal dose (LD50) for rats is 198 mg of rhodium chloride (RhCl3) per kilogram of body weight."
Please edit, as I have given a detailed description on how to edit and where to edit. -- Thingy9 ( talk) 01:54, 20 March 2020 (UTC)Thingy9