• Bags
    link
    fedilink
    English
    55
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    The elements at the very end of the periodic table are somewhat tenuous as we know “elements” to be, as there has only ever been very VERY small amounts of this material produced, and the isotopes of those materials that ARE produced split apart almost immediately with insanely small half-lives, so it’s not like there’s any amount of it just kicking around in a jar somewhere in some lab.

    There’s a ton of interesting reading on the theoretical island of stability in superheavy elements, where a special number of neutrons added to the isotope can possibly make these superheavy elements stable for a macroscopic amount of time so they could actually be studied and handled instead of instantly exploding apart and only being detected through their decay products.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_of_stability

    I think there are elements with experiments designed to produce them up to around atomic number 125 or 127. Currently the highest confirmed, named, and somewhat categorized is 118. There’s info out there about the theoretical elements. Here’s the page for element 119. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ununennium. Purely theoretically, you could just keep adding rows to the periodic table, and it will keep going, but most of those materials will never actually exist or never could exist. It’s kind of like theoretical vs applied math.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      62 days ago

      See also: chart of nuclides

      It contains the periodic table and all the unstable isotopes of every element. The island of stability would be somewhere in the top right corner, outside the chart.

      When you look at the half-life data, it’s pretty clear that lead is the last fully stable element. Anything past that line (126 neutrons) is more or less unstable, but not necessarily useless. For example, uranium and thorium are pretty far away, but they can still have practical applications.

      Between hydrogen and lead, stable isotopes are abundant, but after lead, finding anything you can reasonably do chemistry with gets a bit scarce. When you go past plutonium 244, you’ll find even less chemistry there.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      12 days ago

      When you say macroscopic time are we talking about seconds or years? Wondering whether we can actually build a circuit or something if we could produce a few mg of it.

      • Bags
        link
        fedilink
        English
        32 days ago

        It depends on which theorist you talk to. Some say seconds to minutes, others say days to weeks, the nutcases say thousands to millions of years.

        And at the end of the day, the electrical properties of these elements probably aren’t that interesting or useful, and almost certainly won’t be like, semiconductors or anything fun. Just dumb, heavy, really fucking radioactive wire lol.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11 day ago

          As long as it could be thousands of years we can dream about fantastic new elements that could make arc reactors or interstellar travel possible.

          The more likely reality is a boring line of research of interest only to scientists