Nomenclature of the periodic table

[la pluja]

Something that has bugged me the last few days is the current nomenclature of the chemical elements.
I am relatively new to lojban but what I have learned quite early is that lojban tries to name every object/idea/concept systematically.
So for an example the lojban names for days in a week are named after there position in the week.
Monday (or "is a monday") for example is pavdei (a construct of the rafsi of pa and djedi), literally "one-day".

On the other hand the current nomenclature of chemical elements (https://jbo.wikipedia.org/wiki/dikni_selratni_cartu) is based on their trivia names in latin/english or whatsoever.

Why is this? It's like calling monday mondei in lojba.

I propose the chemical elements are called by the number of protons in their nuclei, which defines the chemical element (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_element).

An possible implementation would be to combine the rafsi of the numbers with the rafsi of ratni.

An example:
 pavrat

x1 is an atom of atomic number 1 of isotope number/atomic weight x2; x1 is hydrogen of isotope number/atomic weight x2

 

and/or

x1 is a quantity of/contains/is made of hydrogen

The latter definition could of course also be made with gunma or something similar.

Any thoughts on that?

(Another proposal which might be discussed is if protons, neutrons and such should be called something equivalent to "up-up-down" [proton]
instead of protoni or nurtoni respectively. Then it would be necessary to define unambigious valsi for quantum states )

I am neither a physician nor an experienced lojbanist but this simply bugged me several days, so what do you think of it?

[Bruno Panasiewicz]

On 2 June 2016 at 16:31, la pluja <hr.mu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Something that has bugged me the last few days is the current nomenclature of the chemical elements.
I am relatively new to lojban but what I have learned quite early is that lojban tries to name every object/idea/concept systematically.
So for an example the lojban names for days in a week are named after there position in the week.
Monday (or "is a monday") for example is pavdei (a construct of the rafsi of pa and djedi), literally "one-day".

On the other hand the current nomenclature of chemical elements (https://jbo.wikipedia.org/wiki/dikni_selratni_cartu) is based on their trivia names in latin/english or whatsoever.

Why is this? It's like calling monday mondei in lojba.

Well, there are problems with Ndei either. pavdei could as well mean "one-day-long", but this is *not* the official meaning.

The way to solve this is to use a type-3 fu'ivla, like deirpa, deinre... sadly no-one uses them, and we're using horrible words.

Note that there are 2 ways (well, 3, if you count the Ndei approach) numbers are used in lujvo:

#1: as a literal quotation of the number: pavypa'a [< pa pacna = 1 hope] = pacna be fi li pa (pacna3 is the probability with which an event will occur – so here, "hope w/ probability 1");

#2: as the number of things that satisfy a given place: rolcti [< ro citka = all eat] = [ka'e] citka be ro da (= "omnivore"; here ro (all) occurs as the number of things x1 eats (here: number of things x1 *can* eat)).

 

I propose the chemical elements are called by the number of protons in their nuclei, which defines the chemical element (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_element).

An possible implementation would be to combine the rafsi of the numbers with the rafsi of ratni.

An example:
 pavrat

One thing to tell you: brivla always end with vowels, so you'll have to stick to pavratni instead (pavrat is a cmevla).

 

x1 is an atom of atomic number 1 of isotope number/atomic weight x2; x1 is hydrogen of isotope number/atomic weight x2

As per usage #1 of numbers in lujvo, this is correct.

I'll try doing something of an automatic insertion of such lujvo into the JVS database.

 

and/or

x1 is a quantity of/contains/is made of hydrogen

Now, that's a different story – you can't do things like that. pavratmai [< pa ratni marji = 1 atom made-of] would be OK. (The place structure would be a bit more complex: "x1 is made of H of isotope x2, in form x3").

 

The latter definition could of course also be made with gunma or something similar.

Not really gunma.

-- mu'o

 

Any thoughts on that?

(Another proposal which might be discussed is if protons, neutrons and such should be called something equivalent to "up-up-down" [proton]
instead of protoni or nurtoni respectively. Then it would be necessary to define unambigious valsi for quantum states)

That's an overkill, I think, but I'm not sure.

 

I am neither a physician nor an experienced lojbanist but this simply bugged me several days, so what do you think of it?

^ 

[John E Clifford]

And, of course, they have the day numbers wrong anyhow (to revive an old argument that has been dormant too long).  

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Bruno Panasiewicz]

On 2 June 2016 at 17:21, 'John E Clifford' via lojban <loj...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

And, of course, they have the day numbers wrong anyhow (to revive an old argument that has been dormant too long). 

That makes matters even worse, but there's a solution. Let's use element days! (that is, lurdei, fagdei, jaurdei, mudydei, jimdei, tedydei, soldei -- Moon-, Fire-, Water-, Wood-, Metal-, Earth- and Sun-day)

-- mu'o

[MorphemeAddict]

I'm not a physicist (or a chemist) either, but one problem I foresee with this approach is that the names of elements are frequently modified in the names of the compounds those elements comprise, for example, carbon dioxide (CO2). The prefix "di-" is also a number, so it would mean putting together two or more number morphemes in such a way that they are still distinct and understandable. Something like " Element6(*1)+Element8*2 ". Valence numbers can come into play, too. I've seen these a lot with iron compounds. There are lots of different systems for adding numbers to these element and compound names: letters of various alphabets (alpha, beta; A/a, B/b; 1, 2), number prefixes from various languages (mono-, di-, tri- vs. uni-, bi-). 

stevo

stevo

Virus-free. www.avast.com

--

[Bruno Panasiewicz]

On 2 June 2016 at 19:36, MorphemeAddict <lyt...@gmail.com> wrote:

I'm not a physicist (or a chemist) either, but one problem I foresee with this approach is that the names of elements are frequently modified in the names of the compounds those elements comprise, for example, carbon dioxide (CO2). The prefix "di-" is also a number, so it would mean putting together two or more number morphemes in such a way that they are still distinct and understandable. Something like " Element6(*1)+Element8*2 ".

That's a thing I don't like either, because it'd both mix both of the ways to use numbers in lujvo, AND be ambiguous about which one is which. Alternatively, we could use type-3 fu'ivla, like ratrpa, ratnre etc., then employ joi (which, surprisingly has rafsi -jol- & -joi-). For example, CO2 would be ratnxa'yjoirelyratrbi. Um, that's quite long, but not too long in comparison to the English "carbon dioxide" equivalent.

 

Valence numbers can come into play, too. I've seen these a lot with iron compounds. There are lots of different systems for adding numbers to these element and compound names: letters of various alphabets (alpha, beta; A/a, B/b; 1, 2), number prefixes from various languages (mono-, di-, tri- vs. uni-, bi-).

No, we ain't putting Latin/Greek prefixes into Lojbanic lujvo!

 

stevo

-- mu'o

 

stevo

-- mu'o

[Niels Tron]

So accordingly dioxide would be simply relyratrbi?

 I do really like this approach especially because it is strictly systematic AND intuitive.

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/lojban/z8MlyYMdAT8/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.

[Pierre Abbat]

On Thursday, June 02, 2016 17:41:35 Bruno Panasiewicz wrote:
> On 2 June 2016 at 17:21, 'John E Clifford' via lojban <
>
> loj...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> > And, of course, they have the day numbers wrong anyhow (to revive an old
> > argument that has been dormant too long).
>
> That makes matters even worse, but there's a solution. Let's use element
> days! (that is, lurdei, fagdei, jaurdei, mudydei, jimdei, tedydei, soldei --
> Moon-, Fire-, Water-, Wood-, Metal-, Earth- and Sun-day)

It's "derdei", referring to the planet of the element Earth, not to the Earth.

As to elements, I think that there should be a better gism than "jicm" for
nonmetals, but generally I think that the current nomenclature is good.

Pierre
--
.i toljundi do .ibabo mi'afra tu'a do
.ibabo damba do .ibabo do jinga
.icu'u la ma'atman.

[Pierre Abbat]

On Thursday, June 02, 2016 22:53:13 Niels Tron wrote:
> So accordingly dioxide would be simply relyratrbi?

I say "tabno relkijytau" and "tabno pavykijytau", but for those two chemicals
I also have alternate names "bakrygapci" and "mantygapci" (the latter because
mantyslami jaurvelvi'u).

Pierre
--
The Black Garden on the Mountain is not on the Black Mountain.

[Niels Tron]

On Thursday, June 02, 2016 22:53:13 Niels Tron wrote:

So accordingly dioxide would be simply relyratrbi?

I say "tabno relkijytau" and "tabno pavykijytau", but for those two chemicals 
I also have alternate names "bakrygapci" and "mantygapci" (the latter because 
mantyslami jaurvelvi'u).

I'm certain you would day that, but my approach would be a rather systematic one. It would simply state that this is a compound of two times the atom of order (proton amount) 8 (which is oxide). 

Of course one could use your proposal, but the idea is that by another way ANY atom can be expressed (in a strictly scientific area or for anyone who doesn't want to learn some randomly assigned words, copied into the lojban language)

[MorphemeAddict]

There should be a way to distinguish (if necessary) element 8 ('oxygen') from its combining form 'oxide', meaning a binary compound of oxygen and another element. 

stevo

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.

[Niels Tron]

There should be a way to distinguish (if necessary) element 8 ('oxygen') from its combining form 'oxide', meaning a binary compound of oxygen and another element. 

Oh yes, sorry I meant "element 8" = "oxygen".  That oxide is meant would be evident if there's more than one oxygen atom in a compound. Or am I wrong about that? (no chemist either)

[MorphemeAddict]

No, 'oxide' isn't used for indicating the number of oxygen atoms in a molecule, but rather to indicate that there is only one other kind of atom in the molecule besides oxygen, hence the 'binary' I mentioned before. 

E.g., carbon dioxide (CO2) has one carbon atom and two oxygen atoms per CO2 molecule. The 'two' is indicated by "di-", and the fact that there is only one other kind of atom, namely, carbon, is indicated by the "-ide". The oxygen is indicated by its supershort combining form "ox-". 

This also means that a molecule with three or more different kinds of atoms can't be called an "-ide". 

stevo 

[Niels Tron]

Okay I understand now, but is it important to include this indication in lojban? I'm not a chemist so I don't see why it would be important whether there are one or more other kinds of atoms..

[MorphemeAddict]

I don't know if it's important to indicate this kind of detail, but it can't hurt. Maybe it's necessary in chemistry as a whole, so should be in whatever language is used to describe it. 

IUPAC has rules for naming compounds. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_nomenclature

stevo

[Pierre Abbat]

On Sunday, June 05, 2016 02:47:44 MorphemeAddict wrote:
> This also means that a molecule with three or more different kinds of atoms
> can't be called an "-ide".

Not quite true; ammonium (NH4) and cyanogen (C2N2) are often treated as if
they were elements. Ammonium cyanide has three kinds of atoms.

There's a set of affixes for indicating how many oxygen atoms are in an
inorganic acid or salt thereof, but the number of oxygens (except for -ide,
which is 0) is not constant over elements. (Carbon is treated inconsistently:
carbonic acid is treated as inorganic, but the acid with one fewer oxygen is
treated as organic and called formic, not carbonous.)
hydropelonic acid -> pelonide
hypopelonous acid -> hypopelonite
pelonous acid -> pelonite
pelonic acid -> pelonate
perpelonic acid -> perpelonate.

Pierre
--
La sal en el mar es más que en la sangre.
Le sel dans la mer est plus que dans le sang.

[MorphemeAddict]

I expected there to be some exceptions. The nomenclature of chemistry is very old and very conservative. 

stevo

[Ilmen]

On 07/06/2016 02:39, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> (Carbon is treated inconsistently: carbonic acid is treated as
> inorganic, but the acid with one fewer oxygen is treated as organic
> and called formic, not carbonous.)

Isn't formic acid considered organic because it has a direct
carbon-hydrogen bond, whereas carbonic acid has none and is thus
considered inorganic?

—Ilmen.

[gleki.is...@gmail.com]

Em quinta-feira, 2 de junho de 2016 17:31:34 UTC+3, la pluja escreveu:

Something that has bugged me the last few days is the current nomenclature of the chemical elements.
I am relatively new to lojban but what I have learned quite early is that lojban tries to name every object/idea/concept systematically.
So for an example the lojban names for days in a week are named after there position in the week.
Monday (or "is a monday") for example is pavdei (a construct of the rafsi of pa and djedi), literally "one-day".

On the other hand the current nomenclature of chemical elements (https://jbo.wikipedia.org/wiki/dikni_selratni_cartu) is based on their trivia names in latin/english or whatsoever.

Why is this? It's like calling monday mondei in lojba.

I propose the chemical elements are called by the number of protons in their nuclei, which defines the chemical element (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_element).

An possible implementation would be to combine the rafsi of the numbers with the rafsi of ratni.

An example:
 pavrat

x1 is an atom of atomic number 1 of isotope number/atomic weight x2; x1 is hydrogen of isotope number/atomic weight x2

 

and/or

x1 is a quantity of/contains/is made of hydrogen

The latter definition could of course also be made with gunma or something similar.

Any thoughts on that?

But why not just use e.g. {lo ratni be li pa bei li re} for Deuterium etc.?

For ions like CH3- separate single words could be used of course.

[MorphemeAddict]

Although use of "ratni" with appropriate arguments is clear enough for talking about atoms and elements, phrases such as the example given are also rather long and not especially conducive to use in compounds, either linguistic or chemical. 

stevo

--