Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elements/Archive 63
This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements. 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 60 | Archive 61 | Archive 62 | Archive 63 |
RfC: On discovery of the 23 nonmetals
Should this content on the discovery of the 23 nonmetals be removed from the nonmetal article?
RfC is here. --- Sandbh (talk) 13:37, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Neptunium
The infobox image for neptunium was recently replaced by File:Neptunium_metal.jpg because the old image didn't show the pure metal. It will need to be reassessed for Wikipedia:WikiProject_Elements/Pictures. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:47, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Probably it should be a C, given the low resolution. But it's likely difficult to find anything better. Double sharp (talk) 06:01, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- The infobox image for plutonium is being discussed at Template talk:Infobox plutonium#Infobox image and may be changed to File:Plutonium ring.jpg, so it may need reassessment too. HertzDonuts (talk) 17:44, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
"the"
@Grendon84 has been systematically changing the first part of elements like:
- Selenium is a chemical element; it has the symbol Se and atomic number 34.
to remove "the":
- Selenium is a chemical element; it has symbol Se and atomic number 34.
The edits are marked minor and have no edit summary.
If there is an agreed form this it should be cited in the change. If not these changes should not be made, they are just annoying and to me they read like a word is missing. Johnjbarton (talk) 16:57, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- To my understanding, the form without "the" was initially approved, though I prefer using "the" as it reads as a bit more natural. 108.160.120.147 (talk) 13:13, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
Paper accepted for publication that updates various nuclei
While cleaning Isotopes of silver (updated to NUBASE2020 in 2022), I uncovered a paper, which has been accepted to Physical Review C and is available as an arXiv preprint, that updates the masses of various nuclei.
- Jaries, A.; Stryjczyk, M.; Kankainen, A.; Ayoubi, L. Al; Beliuskina, O.; Canete, L.; de Groote, R. P.; Delafosse, C.; Delahaye, P.; Eronen, T.; Flayol, M.; Ge, Z.; Geldhof, S.; Gins, W.; Hukkanen, M.; Imgram, P.; Kahl, D.; Kostensalo, J.; Kujanpää, S.; Kumar, D.; Moore, I. D.; Mougeot, M.; Nesterenko, D. A.; Nikas, S.; Patel, D.; Penttilä, H.; Pitman-Weymouth, D.; Pohjalainen, I.; Raggio, A.; Ramalho, M.; Reponen, M.; Rinta-Antila, S.; de Roubin, A.; Ruotsalainen, J.; Srivastava, P. C.; Suhonen, J.; Vilen, M.; Virtanen, V.; Zadvornaya, A. "Physical Review C - Accepted Paper: Isomeric states of fission fragments explored via Penning trap mass spectrometry at IGISOL". journals.aps.org. arXiv:2403.04710.
This updates the following nuclei and their isomers: 84Br, 105Mo, 115Pd, 119Pd, 121Pd, 122Ag, 127In, 129In, and 132Sb. In particular, I have updated 122Ag in the table — for this nucleus, the 3− state in NUBASE2020 is declared nonexistent. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:05, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Appearances of elements we have no data for?
Of the known elements, we know for certain what ninety-seven look like at STP (the first ninety-nine less astatine and francium).
It's predicted that astatine is silvery metallic, and I assume francium would be the same. But I'm not sure if relativistic effects kick in - caesium is a bit golden - why shouldn't francium be, or is francium likely silvery as well? I'm not sure. Wikipedia does not make any assumptions to what francium's color might be in its article. Silvery like most? Or golden like caesium?
I presume fermium onwards are all likely silvery, I note Wikipedia says roentgenium is likely silvery, so I assume that all past fermium are at least to tennessine, maybe oganesson? I'm not sure what oganesson would probably look like if it's not a gas, as Wikipedia says it's probably a solid.
Is there any data on what these elusive radioactive elements might look like if we were to theoretically get a macroscopic sample of them and have the result not be instant destruction and death? 108.160.120.147 (talk) 18:12, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Einsteinium is a decent measuring stick. There are a lot of folks who postulate that the post-astatine elements will be silvery gray or metallic white but the sources do not look great. Reconrabbit 19:49, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Francium is probably somewhere between Rb and Cs in colour (I answered why here). But so far no RS; that's just applying the physics behind alkali metal colours on my end. In most cases the electronic structure is less simple (and also the predicted structure is sometimes not cubic, leading to anisotropic optical properties) and it will be a good deal harder to work it out. I suspect that not too much thought went into most of the "silvery" predictions and it's just that this is how most metals look. Though it's not even clear if Cn, Fl, and Og are metals or not. Double sharp (talk) 01:14, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Unknown
I'm i the process of removing undiscovered decay modes from isotope lists I've edited, unless there is an experimental bound. But I'm not sure how to denote decay modes with unknown branching ratio, such as the β+ and β+p modes of 124Pr:
- β+
- β+?
- β+ (?%)
- β+ (unknown%)
- Add a new column with the branching ratio.
–LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- β+ (?%) is succinct & unambiguous. YBG (talk) 09:31, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- +1 Double sharp (talk) 09:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with YBG and Double sharp. Any potential confusion (e.g., unobserved decay modes vs. observed decay modes with unknown branching radio) can be resolved with explanatory footnotes. Complex/Rational 11:53, 1 October 2024 (UTC)