Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Element 113 & 115

  1. Jul 17, 2007 #1
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 17, 2007 #2
    Others might feel differently, but my opinion is that the search for super heavy elements is not about chemistry or technology, at least not now, it is about understanding the nuclei structures, binding potentials, ... test the models somehow.
  4. Jul 17, 2007 #3
    I am with Humanino on this. While these super heavy elements can have interesting decay modes that can lead to interesting isotopes for use in chemistry, from a fundamental viewpoint, I find interest in their ability to test our understanding of structure and physics far from stability.
  5. Jul 17, 2007 #4
    I dont actually understand anything you to have said hehe, i mean in the periodic table, every element or whatever you call them has a use, so what COULD 113 & 115 be used for? a ruff guesses are more then welcome, please dont say i dont no lol
  6. Jul 17, 2007 #5
    Most likely these new nuclei are very short-lived. Moreover, it seems that just a few of them were actually prepared in the experiment. So, they are not useful for any practical purpose at this moment. Maybe in 50 years someone will find a method to stabilize these nuclei. Maybe then...
  7. Jul 17, 2007 #6
    Thanks meo.. I dont want to go off topic to much but for example how would you stabilize an element? mix it with other atom, compounds or whatever lol, dont know much about this sort of stuff, but i do find it intresting
  8. Jul 17, 2007 #7
  9. Jul 17, 2007 #8
    I don't know. Currently there is no way to do that. Who knows, maybe some stabilization methods will be invented in 50 years. Without such a stabilization, there is no way to use these elements in practical life.
  10. Jul 17, 2007 #9
    It does not seem likely to me that any time in the near future, anybody can even give sens to the concept of "stabilizing an element". You would need to change the potential, the forces, which would drastically affect the nucleus structure, thus probably changing the electronic structure as well, and eventually getting different chemical properties. My point is that, if you somehow "stabilize" an unstable element, can you still call it the same name ? It would be very different from the original one.
  11. Jul 17, 2007 #10

    Decays? so its un-usable when its decayed, and it decays in 1 tenth of a millisecond, how will scientists be able to conduct any kind of experiment on it?
  12. Jul 17, 2007 #11


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    You do it very quickly! :biggrin:

    Seriously, though, high-energy particle physicists also do experiments involving very short-lived particles. Basically, you don't study the particle directly while it is in flight. Instead, you study it by way of its decay products, by applying various conservation laws to deduce its properties.
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2007
  13. Jul 18, 2007 #12


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    That's exactly the case.

    Transuranics heavier than Cm do not have long half-lives and therefore are of use only as humanino stated - in understanding nuclear physics and nuclear stability. The hope had been to find stable isotopes, i.e. isotopes with half-lives on the order of centuries, millenia or longer.

    Cm-247 has a half-life of ~16 million years, and is one of the more stable transuranics. However, the transuranics have significant radiotoxicity, so their applications are extremely limited. They are also very expensive!

    Heavy elements are 'heavy' so they have no practical use for most material applications. They are a potential energy storage system, but creating, storing and using them is rather impractical because of the cost and the fact that they have short half-lives. There are much better (and much less expensive) ways to store or produce energy.
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2007
  14. Feb 9, 2008 #13
    About The Cost

    im a highschool student, and im doing a report on the discovery of element 113 and 115, can some1 tell me the cost of this discovery??thnx,plz send me a pm if you know.:smile:
  15. Feb 9, 2008 #14


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

  16. Feb 13, 2008 #15
    I remember reading somewhere, or hearing from someone that element 117 is supposedly supposed to be stable enough for us to be able to do something with it, but we havn't been able to get anything that will decay into making it yet. \

    Am i right?
  17. Jun 6, 2011 #16
    Planckium, Feynmanium, Darwinium, Newtonium, Lavoisium or Diracium seem likely candidates for names if you ask me.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook