- @
- Followers:
No Tweets Found
CNN POLITICS ON FACEBOOK » | CNN POLITICS ON TWITTER »
Periodic table gets a makeover
Remember memorizing the periodic table in high school? Well, forget it. Some information on the table is about to be reset.
The world's top chemists and physicists have determined that the atomic weights of 10 elements - ones you've actually heard of - need to be expressed as an interval (or range) rather than a static number, Science Daily reports.
The new atomic weights of hydrogen, lithium, boron, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, silicon, sulfur, chlorine and thallium will more accurately reflect how those elements occur in nature.
"For example, sulfur is commonly known to have a standard atomic weight of 32.065. However, its actual atomic weight can be anywhere between 32.059 and 32.076, depending on where the element is found," the article explains.
The change will take effect in 2011, designated by the United Nations as the International Year of Chemistry, according to Science Daily.
No word yet from CBS on whether the changes will require major rewrites of upcoming episodes of "The Big Bang Theory."
On Twitter
On Twitter
@cnnbrk on Twitter
It's been decades since I looked at the Periodic Table. I forgot how much I loved it.
I remember stareing at that table since it hung in a class when I was a student it was the last thing I seen as I fall asleep in class...
@Kim my memory to a T. i didnt need it then i am less likely to use it now. i will leave those jobs available for those who see the purpose of them. i am too busy living my life to disect every thing around me to see if it will shorten my life which might be extended for a miniscule amount of time so i can learn the freaking periodic table
Ummm sooooo............... I actually major in chemistry and this doesn't seem new at all. I already knew there were isotopes of the elements but why would we have to include it in the periodic table. The ones on the table show what are most common in nature and the other atomic weights are the isotopes of the elements already on the board. So this isnt really news?
Those aren't isotopes. Isotopes would be +/- whole numbers in the atomic weight. The weights of these are changing by fractional amounts. I'm guessing it has something to do with the crystal lattice structure of the molecules under different environmental conditions?
The fractional amounts come from the weighted average of the isotopes. The number on the periodic table is the average based on the elements numerous isotopes and their relative natural abundance. So I believe the way the periodic table is written is more convenient the way it is (at least for college chem/biochem degrees) compared to the possible new configuration. It seems like the new periodic table changes only benefit the professional analytical chemists and physicists.
A quote from the original article says that elements with only one stable isotope don't have this range, so the range should have something to do with isotopes. Not completely certain how exactly they are calculating this range though.
I don't understand what the big new idea is here: scientists have known this for some time but never wanted to change the table for it. It complicates simple things such as stoichmetry problem solving. Yes, atoms range between certain values: they may have several isotopes, and the amu is set off of the weight and %. This process is simple and allows for clear calculations. LEAVE IT BE.
There is no need to memorize the periodic table and high school teachers that still make their students memorize are (insert disparaging remark here). It is more important to know how to use the information on the Periodic Table than to memorize the information.
To all those who spout it doesn't matter... Neither does celebrity gossip and half of the other crap we call news. For those of us who use it an average of the range will likely be sufficient to solve problems outside of high order chemical analysis. And lattice structures really..? I would be more compelled to guess environment of formation determine the isotopic masses.
1. This will not affect high school periodic tables. As mentioned above, the number is based on the average versus abundance.
2. This will affect professional chemists. As they probably will be able to know the origin of there materials they will be able to calculate out more accurately as they should.
The last line is ridiculous. Why can't we have a serious news story without dropping pop culture into it?
De estos sitios web de información! Gracias grande! Gracias por un buen rato visitando news.blogs.cnn.com. Es realmente un placer la comprensión de un sitio web como esta lleno de información agradable. Gracias!
Usted tiene ciertamente algunas de las opiniones y puntos de vista agradables. news.blogs.cnn.com ofrece una nueva mirada a la materia.
Hola, acabo de descubrir news.blogs.cnn.com en Yahoo, y encontró que es realmente impresionante. Voy a mirar hacia fuera para Bruselas. AgradecerÃa si seguir escribiendo sobre este tema en el futuro. Mucha gente se beneficiará de su escritura. ¡Salud!
Encontré este mensaje el dÃa de hoy, mientras que en la oficina de gran utilidad envió el enlace a mà mismo y lo más probable es marcar news.blogs.cnn.com cuando lo hacen en casa