Rosie_0801 Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Humour me, oh Clever Sciencey Types! There is something wrong with me. I find it easier to wrap my head around quantum physics than electricity and magnetism. This is not to say I understand much of the former, but it is not thoroughly rejected by my brain as the latter is. But that is a digression because I've been killing myself reading and have got silly. What is the point of making artificial elements? I suppose they did at first just to see if they could, but who would fund them to keep playing? With a shelf life of three seconds, they can't be much practical use for anything, can they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsbeth Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 I don't know alot about this, but can ask my chem. geek husband any questions you have. I know of two possible reasons. First, several elements were discovered through artificial synthesis and THEN found to occur in small amounts naturally. So I surmise it's helpful for potential discovery. Secondly, some scientist suppose that some of these elements did exist when earth was first created but b/c of their short half-life no longer exist. Those interested in early earth conditions might "play" with them for this reason. That's all I've got :001_smile: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosie_0801 Posted December 4, 2012 Author Share Posted December 4, 2012 That's better than I had! Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Candid Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Also, and I hope someone with more knowledge than me will post! I think some elements and isotopes are created as part of the nuclear process in creating either energy or bombs. I even think that all the artificial elements are radioactive. But I don't think I picked this up anywhere scientific so I'm hoping someone who knows better will confirm or deny this. (Note: I recently read The Radioactive Boy Scout which had a lot of nuclear process, I recommend it as a read.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosie_0801 Posted December 5, 2012 Author Share Posted December 5, 2012 That book looks exciting! :eek: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsbeth Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 This has sparked some discussion here. Some of them are used in nuclear medicine and "Americium" is used in smoke detectors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 First, it greatly strengthens any given atomic theory if the theory correctly predicts the properties of heretofore unknown before they are created. Secondly, I believe there is a predicted set of stable elements just past the heaviest ones yet created. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Candid Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 That book looks exciting! :eek: For less thrilling but still science fun, you can also check out Science Fair Season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 My 11 year old insists they ought to be taken out of the periodic table because they "don't count". I think he just dislikes chemistry and is being contrary, but I can see his point. I will have to watch this thread for evidence to prove he should have to remember them, lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosie_0801 Posted December 6, 2012 Author Share Posted December 6, 2012 First, it greatly strengthens any given atomic theory if the theory correctly predicts the properties of heretofore unknown before they are created. Secondly, I believe there is a predicted set of stable elements just past the heaviest ones yet created. Really? That is interesting! Where did you read that? Thanks for chiming in, ladies. It's something I'm interested in, but don't know enough of to talk about. :) I really want other people to talk so I can listen. :p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dmmetler Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 As a daughter of a PhD Chemist who grew up in university science labs, I think a big part of it is that I haven't yet known a PhD research chemist who wasn't of the "Let's poke it (or pour it together) and see what happens". They just grow up and get bigger and better labs to do it with.Whether it has a practical purpose is figured out later-the goal NOW is simply to do it-and we'll let the other guys figure out what they can do with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 Really? That is interesting! Where did you read that? Gosh, I don't remember where, but here's wikipedia (gasp!) on the subject: http://en.wikipedia....nd_of_stability Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regentrude Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 I will have to watch this thread for evidence to prove he should have to remember them, lol. Why would he need to remember? Memorizing all elements is not terribly useful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kareni Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Why would he need to remember? Memorizing all elements is not terribly useful. Not necessarily useful but it can be entertaining. My daughter memorized a number of the elements quite painlessly due to a love of Tom Lehrer and his songs. He's known for his song (also ). Regards, Kareni Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.