mickeyw
- 2
- 0
I have a question about lanthanides and actinides... is there any reason that they broke both the lanthanides and actinides from the periodic table?
The discussion revolves around the placement of lanthanides and actinides in the periodic table, exploring reasons for their separation from the main body of the table and addressing questions about their electronic configurations.
Participants express differing views on the reasons for the separation of lanthanides and actinides in the periodic table, with no consensus reached on the matter. Additionally, there is an unresolved question regarding the electronic configurations of these elements.
Some claims about the electronic configurations and energy levels are presented without consensus on their implications or correctness. The discussion also references external resources that may not be accessible to all participants.
That is not necessarily the case. This website - chemlab.pc.maricopa.edu/periodic/periodic.html - has alternative forms of the periodic table, however there seems to be some problem with it at the time this is posted. But the main idea is that there are alternate forms that do not 'break out' the lathanides and actinides. They are grouped however for reasons of similarity in some chemical properties. For example, the lanthanides tend to form 3+ valences, and so the oxides are generally M2O3. The atomic radii are fairly close for the lanthanides and actinides - http://www.webelements.com/webelements/properties/text/image-balls/atomic-radius-emp.htmlmickeyw said:I have a question about lanthanides and actinides... is there any reason that they broke both the lanthanides and actinides from the periodic table?