Home > Yahoo Questions > Your Questions About How To Discover New Elements

Your Questions About How To Discover New Elements

Mary asks…

If a new element were discovered that would fit underneath…?

A new element has been discovered that would fit on the Periodic Table right below Francium. How many protons does it have and how many electrons would it be likely to gain or lose in a reaction?

—I know for electrons it would be 1+ (lose 1) but i dont know about the protons.

thanks for any help :]

New Niche Finder answers:

In your title part of the question you say If it were discovered, yet in the main body of the question you say is has been. This confuses me slightly.
However, it’s atomic number would be 119, so it would have 119 electrons and 119 protons to balance. Neutrons are harder to tell due to different isotopes.
Also, due the the size of this atom it would not be ‘discovered’, more like synthesized, as it would be rather unstable and would likely decompose within a second of being created.
But you are half right, as it would be in group one, it would lose 1 electron in any reactions it would undergo, if any were to happen.

Steven asks…

Atheists,why human kind were able to think and be creative and other creatures only have instinct to relay on?

for survival animals use their instinct,while human use their ability of thinking to create and treat.
how come other species didn’t advance mentally as human did?
if we can train a dog or lion, that mean they are able to absorb and their brain have the ability to think and respond.they gain experience and act according to the energy that surround them.
now if we were evolved from other species, who trained us to think and have feelings one to another?
we learned from experience of life, but that is not enough to make you dream and decide to go to the moon.. that is not enough to invent a microscope to enable us to see bacteria, not enough to discover new chemical elements and see how many electrons, protons and neutrons it contain.
why elephants can’t do what we do and they were here before us?
who made us so unique? evolution is not . because other species evolved too and they still very much the same,just thinking about food and survival nothing else.
don’t worry about my grammar, i’m not doing an essay. i speak,write, read 5 languages, when you reach that level then you can abuse me…ok
@liquid…….LMAO…
you people amuse me so much ….i love you for that…and thanks for your answers. i know biology as the back of my hand, I’m more interested in psychological evolution not biological. if you analyze it properly,you will have doubts about what darwin theorized.

New Niche Finder answers:

And the winner of today’s “Least informed about evolution” award is…

Lizzie asks…

plz plz help me. i don’t understand this??

ok well i had a question and i found the answer but I dont know what it means? can someone plz summarize this?

Question:

what relationship do you think there is between the date of discovery of a metal and how reactive it is?

– Brooke

Answer:

Before 1700, only a handful of elements were discovered. Most were precious metals, such as gold and silver which, are found as native metals without need of refining. Iron has also been known since early time. That’s probably because its most common, native form, iron oxide (rust) is readily “reduced” (removal of the oxygen and return of the electrons it took away) to form pure iron. Primitive smelters were used for this purpose in the so-called, “Iron Age.” In a smelter carbon, present as soot, was heated with the mineral rust to cause the purified iron to form. The rest of the atoms combine to form a carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide mixture. But what does this have to do with your question, you may wonder. The relationship you talk about indeed has something to do with the reactivity of the metal, since it governs in what form you find the element and how difficult it is to isolate. Thus non-reactive, precious metals were discovered early on and then the metals which were easy to convert froma a reacted form to the pure form. This has a lot to do with the current technology that’s accessible to the discoverer. That is, you may find a complicated mixture of metal oxides and know somebody who has just developed the smelter, you so critically need, and then get famous for discovering several new elements (if somehow you can separate them– but that is another part of the answer that we don’t have room for)! Or, you may discover rust and have no way of accessing a smelter because IT hasn’t been discovered or it’s been discovered, but it’s in a country thousands of miles away (and there’s no internet!! Mixtures of metal compounds with very similar chemical properties posed a particularly difficult problem. Highly developed analytical techniques were required to separate and characterize the individual metals. Then there’s the question of utility. Certain discoveries may have been driven by the needs of a community. For example, the search for and discovery of a metal like iron could be driven by a need to make better digging tools or weapons. If someone happened upon another metal, like tungsten, while looking for iron, its discovery would be downplayed or neglected since it would not have an immediate practical use (tungsten’s main use is in filaments for electric light bulbs, a relatively recent invention).

Historically speaking, after 1700, chemistry became more sophisticated and analytical tools were used to separate rarer elements from each other. Thus, the relationship between the date of discovery and the reactivity is relevant only on those rarer elements with more complex chemistries.

New Niche Finder answers:

Basically, if something is reactive, by the time u dig it up etc, it will have changed, and will look/act differently. If it is unreactive, it will just sit there in a chunk, being itself.
So, its easier to discover things that are obviously just what they are. Gold for example – well known by aztecs, ancient egyptians etc etc. You dig it up, and there it is, usable/identifyable just as you find it. Something more reactive will have reacted already into an ore or something more complicated which will require technology to extract it into a pure form.
In general, the less reactive a metal, the earlier it will have been isolated and identified.

David asks…

What if a meteor fell in your yard and you discovered that it was some new element that could shield gravity..

when activated somehow. You also somehow figured out how to control it.

Would you hand it over to authorities or what?
YOU WOULD NEED TO ACTIVATE IT FIRST. THEN IS SHIELDS THE GRAVITY.

New Niche Finder answers:

Unlike Dr. D, I would take over the world.

Michael asks…

In iron man 2 how did stark use the map to create the the new element?

the large replica of the stark expo, how did tony discover the element within the map? Like when he got rid of all the trees, walkways and the globe in the middle was the nucleus I think. How did he basically find the element within the map is what I’m asking. Thanks just a lil confused

New Niche Finder answers:

I believe when he removed those things, what was left was actually a diagram of the element itself. Showing him the element itself. As in how many electrons, protons, neutrons, and how they are arranged.

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

I love hearing from you so please post a comment. All I ask is that you contribute to the conversation in a meaningful way. If your comment is unrelated to the post or is solely self-promotional, your comment will not be approved.

Comments are closed.