Jump to content

make a new periodic table or discuss why the current model and trajectory base is suitable/ly ideal


trynglTHReye
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • I do not know what you mean by a "trajectory base"
  • I can think of nothing related to the periodic table that might be thought of as a "trajectory base"
  • While the current periodic table may not be ideal I see no obvious weaknesses
  • What specific uses/goals do you have in mind that require development?
  • You probably would benefit in getting "more learnt verbosely".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks.

  • The direction things are currently going.
  • Relating to etymology or some numerical symbolism, just haven't found the education that quite quenches my thirst whatsoever.
  • Perhaps relating to body chemistry, but got banned for some reason elsewhere talking about blood iron and whatnot.
  • But still not sure how deep I want to get into the vernacular and trajectory base without losing the main thirst or goal in sight/mind/heart.

Just something. These tables just aren't doing it. Consider it like the words forming a mold, not quite saying it, but one lines up with the filler.

If anyone would be invested in welding some new tools rather than being welt to the same messy rigs, unless you prefer it and lay more heavily on making it work than this other way.

Of course I haven't quite seeded the methodology yet but there's a number of goals to put into its function.

Perhaps both can work. Learning modern chemistry as well as taking a look at how the models were developed.

Found these:

https://www.meta-synthesis.com/webbook/35_pt/pt_database.php?PT_id=1099
https://elements.vanderkrogt.net/element.php?sym=C
https://theodoregray.com/PeriodicTable/Elements/006/index.s7.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, trynglTHReye said:

The direction things are currently going.

You need to be a lot more specific.

 

44 minutes ago, trynglTHReye said:

Relating to etymology or some numerical symbolism, just haven't found the education that quite quenches my thirst whatsoever

So which aspects of the current periodic tables use inappropriate symbolism?

 

45 minutes ago, trynglTHReye said:

Perhaps relating to body chemistry,

One could readily highlight and annotate a conventional periodic table to emphasise those elements that play a role in body chemistry. I am sure I have seen examples of such, but for most biological issues there would be better ways of presenting the topic than through an ameneded PT.

I understand that you find the tables clumsy (?), inadequate (?), confusing (?). My impression is this may be because you are striving to extract meaning from PTs that is appropriate. If I wish to make pizza I don't seek the recipe in a railway timetable. I suspect you might.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't the Periodic Table founded on this proposition: that the nuclei of atoms are composed of sub-atomic particles -  ie,   protons and neutrons.

And by counting the number of protons and neutrons in each atom, we arrive at an arrangement for the Table.  That was very reasonable idea,  when we thought of protons and neutrons as "indivisible".  But nowadays we know that they're not indivisible,  but made of smaller components - the "quarks", which come in different varieties.

Therefore I wonder whether a revision of the Table based on the quark components of the nucleus, might offer advantages and provide deeper insights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Charles 3781 said:

Isn't the Periodic Table founded on this proposition: that the nuclei of atoms are composed of sub-atomic particles -  ie,   protons and neutrons.

How could it be? Mendeleev formulated the table several decades before we had a rough but accurate model of the atom (Rutherford). The neutron wasn’t discovered until almost 20 years after that

Plus the nucleus only has a small effect on the chemistry of an atom. The primary effect is the electron structure.

Quote

And by counting the number of protons and neutrons in each atom, we arrive at an arrangement for the Table.  That was very reasonable idea,  when we thought of protons and neutrons as "indivisible".  But nowadays we know that they're not indivisible,  but made of smaller components - the "quarks", which come in different varieties.

They are sort of indivisible. You can’t separate the quarks and free them from either a proton or a neutron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, swansont said:

How could it be? Mendeleev formulated the table several decades before we had a rough but accurate model of the atom (Rutherford). The neutron wasn’t discovered until almost 20 years after that

And the remarkable thing in my view is that the sequence in the periodic table correlates so well to both the number of neutrons and protons in the nucleus and the sequence of available valence electrons, and to the actual energy levels of electrons (s, p, d, f, etc), even though this information was unknown at the time.  The real value of the Periodic Table is that it groups the elements in ways that reflect their chemical behaviors--a very valuable 'shorthand' way of understanding the elements.  Perhaps there are a few places in the table that minor 'tweaks' might be of value, but I don't know off hand where those might be.  For a while after retiring from Chemical Engineering I taught High School chemistry.  The Periodic Table proved to be an excellent way to give students the "Big Picture" of Chemistry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Great talk going. What about etymology or maybe expanding other numerical contexts, like FE being faith or in the word fe-male, also who/which have periodic cycles which results in bloodloss and iron (FE). So check on halflives and properties of things pertaining/relating to the body primarily. JAN, FEB, some basis and focus what are we trying to optimize the table to achieve or keep track of.

Say maybe a pharmaceutical treatment. But why make it easy, huh? No money if it's so easy for uneducated folks rather than funneling everyone into the college instution, albeit it can work. Depends on what we want to make work or be made work of.

 

Anyways isn't it coincidental, for better or worse in a sense, that the elements did afterall line up to being in a certain order and subset arrays/sequence/pattern. Even if not realized at the time, we're making history and tracking/org/sort data. Even your own body.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, trynglTHReye said:

Anyways isn't it coincidental, for better or worse in a sense, that the elements did afterall line up to being in a certain order and subset arrays/sequence/pattern. Even if not realized at the time, we're making history and tracking/org/sort data. 

No, it is not coincidental at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, trynglTHReye said:

Great talk going. What about etymology or maybe expanding other numerical contexts, like FE being faith or in the word fe-male, also who/which have periodic cycles which results in bloodloss and iron (FE). So check on halflives and properties of things pertaining/relating to the body primarily. JAN, FEB, some basis and focus what are we trying to optimize the table to achieve or keep track of.

What about it? Does etymology have anything to do with determining chemistry?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/23/2020 at 9:41 PM, Charles 3781 said:

Therefore I wonder whether a revision of the Table based on the quark components of the nucleus, might offer advantages and provide deeper insights.

Currently existing periodic table is not sorted solely on proton/neutron quantity (or rather "atomic number" and "mass number") but also by similarities of chemical and physical properties.

Elements with similar properties are in a column called group

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_(periodic_table)

e.g. Noble gases are 18th group (single column on the periodic table)

 

There is an alternative to the periodic table, widely used by nuclear physicists, "decay chain" as outlined in this article:

https://metadata.berkeley.edu/nuclear-forensics/Decay Chains.html

e.g.

Cm247.png

(the above image is not full of details, as it misses some rare decay modes, like e.g. double beta decay emitting two electrons and antineutrinos (or neutrinoless, even rarer) )

 

"Decay chain" contains information about isotopes of an element and how it decays from a more energetic to a less energetic form.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decay_chain

 

Edited by Sensei
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Charles 3781 said:

Possibly, we are faced by a Universe with an infinite "onion" effect.   Where, however deep we penetrate into the scheme of things, layer upon layer,  elements, atoms, nuclei, quarks - we will reach no ultimate truth.

The infinity or the finiteness underlying the quark can be a fact.
But does not explain the how of operation. In other words, it should already be possible to detect such a fact by calculations.
No advantage to this order of magnitude solution. If particles or other form of matter would be smaller, that does not solve the current understanding of our universe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.