Is the Periodic Table Broken?! Which elements really belong beneath scandium and yttrium?
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 07. 2024
- Professor Davis explains the group 3 debate and why we may never agree on which elements belong below scandium and yttrium on the periodic table.
See more on periodic table debates on the channel
• Where does hydrogen AC...
That was very interesting indeed. Although I did university Chemistry quite some time ago, I never analysed the Periodic table to that extent (and I blame the impetuosity of youth for that oversight 😄)
Although the Periodic Table structure does rather well to accommodate atomic number and electronic structure, the predominant number of atoms obey the Periodic Table structure property that preserves the identification of the filling of sub shells according to the Aufbau principle, but clearly there are 4 elements that don't quite fit in. Leaving H & He aside, La seems to do the wrong thing and have its single outer electron anomalously in the d shell, so it should be part of the d shell grouping of the periodic table. This would then classify the table as preserving the ACTUAL structure as opposed to obeying the Aufbau principle to the letter. La seems to disobey the Aufbau principle which seems to suggest that there is an issue with the principle that is not well understood. Both La & Lu are filling the d shell so in actuality, the Periodic Table should reflect this if its purpose is to reflect the actual structure.
Despite the eyesore of splitting the d block, the table should reflect the actual structure. As it currently is structured, La & Lu are displayed incorrectly in the f block, despite leaving the group 3 locations vacant. The question is, what should rule, elegance or accuracy?
Thank you. I always wondered and argued with people about this topic.
It is an argument that continues today! Personally, I'm an aufbau guy. There are lots of other exceptions to the order that are ignored on the table, and I like the neat organization of the blocks that a group 3 lutetium creates.
I just watched this video as I am working through "Understanding the Periodic Table". This is the sort of question that makes me stare out the window and ponder. One really wants to be near a supernova to gather up some new elements fresh out of the oven. Of course, supernovae aren't healthy to be around, but still...
Anyway, thanks for providing food for thought.
lots of food for thought on what might/might not exist in row 8. Plenty of hypothesis, but little scientific conclusion! You can find a bit of conjecture in my periodic table course with wondrium, but honestly, nobody really knows where/why/how the periodic table stops!!!
Nice and interesting insights.
From my perspective I had thought you would discuss the other elements on the 3rd column, Sc and Y. But this must be foolish, as you didn't!
Actually that's a great question! Sc and Y are both well behaved with respect to aufbau. Neither have any available f orbitals to complicate the situation. They are s2 d1 elements whose place in the table is uncontested.
Thanks, your Dad
IN 13 years of you tubing. this it the best... comment … ever.....
I don't like this at all. Why can't these elements behave? It's supposed to be science, rational and logical goddammit!
Welcome to the world of chemistry, where the "rule" is a "rule" because it is right more than 51% of the time.... * diabolical laughter *
@@ChemSurvival yeah, French grammar has the reputation, but chemistry is really like that.