Elements 118 and higher = why?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Gara
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Elements
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the potential applications and stability of superheavy elements, particularly those beyond element 118. Participants explore hypothetical uses for these elements, their stability, and comparisons with existing materials like titanium and depleted uranium.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that higher atomic number elements may be more stable, questioning the practical applications of such heavy materials if they were stable.
  • There is a suggestion that the concept of 'island of stability' implies some nuclides near element 114 could be more stable, but their half-lives may still be very short, limiting practical use.
  • One participant discusses the properties of titanium, arguing it has a high strength-to-weight ratio and is superior to steel for certain applications, although there is a challenge regarding the effectiveness of titanium swords as weapons.
  • Another participant mentions that while titanium is strong, other materials like diamond may have higher strength-to-weight ratios, depending on the context.
  • There is a mention of lithium's potential strength-to-weight ratio in a vacuum, suggesting it could be significant due to its low weight.
  • Depleted uranium is noted for its effectiveness in shells due to a phenomenon called adiabatic shearing force, indicating a specific application in military contexts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the stability and utility of superheavy elements, with no consensus on their practical applications or the best materials for specific uses. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the potential of these elements.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in understanding the stability of superheavy elements and the applicability of their properties, particularly in relation to half-lives and material effectiveness in various contexts.

Gara
Messages
152
Reaction score
0
let's asume that the higher we go, the more stable the element is, or so i am lead to believe.

let's asume that at 160, it is perfectly stable. what would be the point? what i mean is, what could we use such a heavy material for? construction? AP ammo? engine blocks?

it seems to me there are 3 key points to using one material over another.

1) weight
2) strength
3) volume

eg, you could make a Titanium sword. It would be stronger, and lighter, but it's "volume" would be greatly larger. if it came to engine blocks of a car, this would be bad cos it would make the engine much larger (albeit stronger and lighter)

so what would such a heavy element be good for?

which element has the highest strengh to weight ratio?

------------------------------------------------------------------
caution, the above poster may have no idea what he's talking about.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Gara said:
let's asume that the higher we go, the more stable the element is, or so i am lead to believe.
Are you referring to the island of stability? 'Stability' is rather relative; there is an expectation that some nuclides near element 114 will be considerably more stable than heavier and lighter ones, but the expected half-lives are still no more than seconds (or much less). Not much good for car engine blocks :wink:
 
i was talking about that, yes. but what about after that?
 
Gara said:
eg, you could make a Titanium sword. It would be stronger, and lighter, but it's "volume" would be greatly larger. if it came to engine blocks of a car, this would be bad cos it would make the engine much larger (albeit stronger and lighter)
Actually, no - strength of material is generally in terms of volume or area, ie tensile strength is pounds per square inch. Titanium both has a higher tensile strength than steel and a higher strength to weight ratio. So a titanium sword would be both stronger and lighter than a steel one of identical proportions.
which element has the highest strengh to weight ratio?
I think its titanium, but you can exceed that with alloys and carbon composites.
 
Last edited:
Gara said:
i was talking about that, yes. but what about after that?
... the nuclides become increasingly unstable, with half-lives of microseconds or less (OK, maybe one or two get to live as long as a millisecond).
 
A titantium sword might not really be an effective weapon.

If it were a "thrusting" weapon like a foil or an epee, it might be nice because it would minimize fatigue on the combatant.

But if titanium were used on a "slashing" weapon such as a sabre, it might not be effective because it doesn't carry as much momentum to it's target.

-Glenn
 
which element has the highest strengh to weight ratio?

BEC Helium is the strongest material known to man.

But if you're talking about something more down-to-Earth, then diamond is the strongest.

Both only contain one element! :wink:
 
How about Lithium in a Vacuum? I am sure it has a large strength to weight ratio, if only because of its low weight.
 
WE also worry about shearing forces. Eg Depleted uranium is agreat for shells because is shows a phenominae called Adiabatic Shearing force.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
8K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
5K
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K