If there are new undiscovered elements to be found elsewhere in the universe, how will it fit in the periodic table, or would it distrupt the periodic table. For years the periodic table is prety much solid in a way that everything can be classify. So what if we human found more new elements?
2006-07-11 05:40:50 · 11 answers · asked by PN 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Chemistry
So im guessing if we do find new elements, we will likely try to squeeze it tightly in the p.t. like what we did under transition metals.
What if the new element does not fit at all? will there be a 2nd periodic table?
and for sub-particles, anti-mass. Im not a genius, just curious.
2006-07-11 05:51:36 · update #1
Most of the "newest" elements are man-made in HIGHLY energetic collisions. We literally force two atoms together into something new. These new elements are almost invariably unstable and decay in fractions of a second. Being larger, they always go in at the end of the periodic table.
There is no room within the chart for new elements for one simple reason. Atomic number is designated by the number of protons in an atom. There can be no fractional protons, so there is no room between elements.
The only way to work elements in between existing ones would be to base the entire periodic chart on something different. Perhaps we'll discover some new sub-atomic particle that is even MORE responsible for a particle's reactivity and rework everything. That would be the only way to "break up" the chart and its order.
2006-07-11 05:47:29 · answer #1 · answered by carpetao 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree that any new "elements" would be highly unstable, perhaps existing in the cores of large stars or briefly during a supernova, but I would imagine they would decay into more familiar elements by the time we could detect them. Perhaps what you mean by "new elements" is stuff that is non-baryonic (not made out of protons and neutrons). One theory has it that "dark matter" may not be composed of the stuff that makes up the rest of the visible universe. In this case, a new periodic table would definitely be called for. It's a moot point though because it doesn't seem possible to catalogue anything that doesn't interact with light or ordinary matter. The Periodic Table is based on atomic structure. It could not incorporate something that does not have protons, neutrons and electrons.
2006-07-11 06:14:02 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I do believe so. At one time I wasn't very sure. But after witnessing a very unexplainable sight last year and this year in the same month, I am convinced. Last year a friend was over and I called him to come look at it too. He saw it too. We were quite sober. I am not really a drinker anyway. We were not on drugs either, and the two of us are very sane rational people. It was funny when I first saw it. I took a high powered flashlight and beamed it in the sky at it lol. I was trying to make contact I guess you could say. I tried to reproduce the same light pattern as that thing in the sky. At one point, it was as if the UFO in the sky saw me doing that. Because it started to move really erratically after I did that. It stayed in one small section of the sky too which I found weird. Now here I see it again this year in the same month. That's very strange too. I'm fascinated by stuff like that. I am not really afraid like some that they will reach down and snatch me up into the ship. I guess it's curiosity of the unknown. It's ignorant of a person to think that we are the only ones in the galaxy. I think that the government wants to keep things hidden from people. I think they're so worried that if people found out, they'd freak out and it would be sheer panic and chaos.
2016-03-27 01:10:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since the elements we do know of are ordered according to the number of protons they have (which is what distinguishes one element from another), and we don't have any gaps until we get to Element 112 or so, new ones will most likely be classified the same way and be appended to our table. I seriously doubt if we will find, for example, another isotope of say, sodium. Check out the Table of the Isotopes. It's huge.
2006-07-11 09:38:44 · answer #4 · answered by rb42redsuns 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What is the level of your education?
Any new elements to be found are usually man made inside nuclear reactors or in particle accelerators. They tend to be extremely dense and very radioactive and unstable.
Matter can only be put together in certain ways and remain stable.
2006-07-11 05:50:51 · answer #5 · answered by Terry F 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If they don't meet the current model, they add new classifications. It happened when they started adding radioactive elements. But it is possible to find new elements out there I believe.
2006-07-11 05:44:51 · answer #6 · answered by Blunt Honesty 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We might find technetium naturally elsewhere in the universe.
But I'm not putting much stock in finding elements containing parts of protons in them.
2006-07-11 05:42:36 · answer #7 · answered by bequalming 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
we'd fit it the same way we did in the beginning. at first there were more than a few holes left and if stuff fits in where we have stuff now we'll reorganize it or tack it on at the end depending on its properties
2006-07-11 05:42:17 · answer #8 · answered by shiara_blade 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Anything's possible but the bigger the atom, the less stable it is, so I doubt it's likely.
2006-07-11 05:42:53 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I just recently discovered the element of surprise!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2006-07-11 05:52:25 · answer #10 · answered by embem171 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋