Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. New Element 118

New Element 118

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
htmldatabasecomgame-dev
18 Posts 14 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • 7 73Zeppelin

    Claims look legit this time. Revisiting one of physics' most embarrassing cases of scientific misconduct, researchers from Russia and the United States announced Monday that they have created a new super-heavy element, atomic number 118. Article link[^].

    C Offline
    C Offline
    Chris Meech
    wrote on last edited by
    #6

    Hey, why all the fuss. After all it's like Jumping Jack Flash, it's a gas, gas, gas. ;P

    Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] Nobody likes jerks. [espeir] The zen of the soapbox is hard to attain...[Jörgen Sigvardsson] I wish I could remember what it was like to only have a short term memory.[David Kentley]

    R 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • J John M Drescher

      Scientists said they smashed together calcium with the manmade element Californium to make an atom with 118 protons in its nucleus. The new element lasted for just one millisecond, but it was the heaviest element ever made and the first manmade inert gas

      I think we need better standards than that. Should we name an element that is stable for only 1 millisecond? And only one atom?

      D Offline
      D Offline
      Dan Neely
      wrote on last edited by
      #7

      most of the superheavy's have only been produced a handful of times and possibily excluding a theorectical "plateau of stability" are all so massive that they're extremely unstable becuase the strong force can't effectively reach across the entire nucleus.

      J 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • D Douglas Troy

        They've known about Administratium for decades, but actually proving it did something ... took time. :rolleyes:


        :..::. Douglas H. Troy ::..
        Bad Astronomy |VCF|wxWidgets|WTL

        S Offline
        S Offline
        Steve Mayfield
        wrote on last edited by
        #8

        more like we are embarrassed to admit it exists :-O Steve

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • J John M Drescher

          Scientists said they smashed together calcium with the manmade element Californium to make an atom with 118 protons in its nucleus. The new element lasted for just one millisecond, but it was the heaviest element ever made and the first manmade inert gas

          I think we need better standards than that. Should we name an element that is stable for only 1 millisecond? And only one atom?

          A Offline
          A Offline
          Andy Brummer
          wrote on last edited by
          #9

          There are plenty of named particles which decay faster then that. They only show up as resonances in collision spectra. In that energy relm one milisecond is an extrememly long time, it is 1012 femtoseconds after all.

          Using the GridView is like trying to explain to someone else how to move a third person's hands in order to tie your shoelaces for you. -Chris Maunder

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • C Chris Meech

            Hey, why all the fuss. After all it's like Jumping Jack Flash, it's a gas, gas, gas. ;P

            Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] Nobody likes jerks. [espeir] The zen of the soapbox is hard to attain...[Jörgen Sigvardsson] I wish I could remember what it was like to only have a short term memory.[David Kentley]

            R Offline
            R Offline
            Rob Manderson
            wrote on last edited by
            #10

            *watches Chris really show his age...* :)

            Rob Manderson I'm working on a version for Visual Lisp++ My blog http://blogs.wdevs.com/ultramaroon/[^] My blog mirror http://robmanderson.blogspot.com[^]

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • D Dan Neely

              most of the superheavy's have only been produced a handful of times and possibily excluding a theorectical "plateau of stability" are all so massive that they're extremely unstable becuase the strong force can't effectively reach across the entire nucleus.

              J Offline
              J Offline
              Jon Pawley
              wrote on last edited by
              #11

              dan neely wrote:

              ... the strong force can't effectively reach across the entire nucleus.

              That's the first time anyone has said that to me as being the reason why large atoms are unstable. But it makes so much sense... Cheers, Jon

              D 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • 7 73Zeppelin

                Claims look legit this time. Revisiting one of physics' most embarrassing cases of scientific misconduct, researchers from Russia and the United States announced Monday that they have created a new super-heavy element, atomic number 118. Article link[^].

                N Offline
                N Offline
                Nitron
                wrote on last edited by
                #12

                um... ok... :~ who's funding this stuff anyway? oh well, I guess I just don't get it.. :suss:

                ~Nitron.


                ññòòïðïðB A
                start

                D 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • 7 73Zeppelin

                  Claims look legit this time. Revisiting one of physics' most embarrassing cases of scientific misconduct, researchers from Russia and the United States announced Monday that they have created a new super-heavy element, atomic number 118. Article link[^].

                  M Offline
                  M Offline
                  marius_romanus
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #13

                  It BSOD's so fast. Maybe they should call it VISTium , once they are sure it exists for real. Marius

                  --------------------------------------------------------- Complete freedom is a state without context ---------------------------------------------------------

                  S 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • J Jon Pawley

                    dan neely wrote:

                    ... the strong force can't effectively reach across the entire nucleus.

                    That's the first time anyone has said that to me as being the reason why large atoms are unstable. But it makes so much sense... Cheers, Jon

                    D Offline
                    D Offline
                    Dan Neely
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #14

                    Yep, unlike gravity and electromagnatism which have 1/r/r falloffs, the strong force is constant for a distance d and then falls off to zero. If part of the nucleus vibrates outside the range of the strong force the net potential on it goes from negative (atractive) to positive because only yhe EM force is acting on it. At taht point the atom pushes itself appart. This is only a first approximation description, the reason heavy elements have more nuetrons than protons is because each nuetron boosts the strong force only while protons boost both the strong and EM.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • N Nitron

                      um... ok... :~ who's funding this stuff anyway? oh well, I guess I just don't get it.. :suss:

                      ~Nitron.


                      ññòòïðïðB A
                      start

                      D Offline
                      D Offline
                      Dan Neely
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #15

                      Mostly governments, the giant particle accelerators have gotten too expensive for anyone else. There's a reason they're largely international colaborative projects as opposed to mononational prestige ones.

                      N 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • D Dan Neely

                        Mostly governments, the giant particle accelerators have gotten too expensive for anyone else. There's a reason they're largely international colaborative projects as opposed to mononational prestige ones.

                        N Offline
                        N Offline
                        Nitron
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #16

                        dan neely wrote:

                        Mostly governments, the giant particle accelerators have gotten too expensive for anyone else. There's a reason they're largely international colaborative projects as opposed to mononational prestige ones.

                        I guess I just don't see the purpose. I mean, surely they must have known this 'element' would only last as long as it did, what, a few milliseconds... Is there any practical or even theoretical knowledge that comes of projects like this? I'm (obviouslly) not in that field so I wouldn't know. Add on top of that a media's version of the project and you've got the blind leading the blind so to speak.

                        ~Nitron.


                        ññòòïðïðB A
                        start

                        T 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • N Nitron

                          dan neely wrote:

                          Mostly governments, the giant particle accelerators have gotten too expensive for anyone else. There's a reason they're largely international colaborative projects as opposed to mononational prestige ones.

                          I guess I just don't see the purpose. I mean, surely they must have known this 'element' would only last as long as it did, what, a few milliseconds... Is there any practical or even theoretical knowledge that comes of projects like this? I'm (obviouslly) not in that field so I wouldn't know. Add on top of that a media's version of the project and you've got the blind leading the blind so to speak.

                          ~Nitron.


                          ññòòïðïðB A
                          start

                          T Offline
                          T Offline
                          Tim Craig
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #17

                          Nitron wrote:

                          I guess I just don't see the purpose. I mean, surely they must have known this 'element' would only last as long as it did, what, a few milliseconds...

                          It proves the theory.

                          The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • M marius_romanus

                            It BSOD's so fast. Maybe they should call it VISTium , once they are sure it exists for real. Marius

                            --------------------------------------------------------- Complete freedom is a state without context ---------------------------------------------------------

                            S Offline
                            S Offline
                            Steve Mayfield
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #18

                            yes, but after injecting a couple of Service Packs, it becomes stable :-D Steve

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            Reply
                            • Reply as topic
                            Log in to reply
                            • Oldest to Newest
                            • Newest to Oldest
                            • Most Votes


                            • Login

                            • Don't have an account? Register

                            • Login or register to search.
                            • First post
                              Last post
                            0
                            • Categories
                            • Recent
                            • Tags
                            • Popular
                            • World
                            • Users
                            • Groups