Aperiodic Table

[Mark Leach]

Hi All,

It has been pointed out to me that this should NOT be an a database of Periodic Tables because it is aperiodic…

https://www.meta-synthesis.com/webbook/35_pt/pt_database.php?PT_id=1408

idbpt.com

M

Mark Leach

meta-synthesis

[Julio Gutiérrez Samanez]

How curious, Mark, to contradict DIM and all his followers after 157 years of study; it must be a joke by some novice or layperson. Especially now, when two fundamental paradigmatic issues are being debated: the standard empirical sequence: 2, 8, 8, 18, 18, 32, 32, 50, 50… (based on the Madelung rule) and the formalized symmetry sequence SO(4,4) that can 100% describe the 120 elements of 4 binodes of the Binodic Periodic Table with 5 quantum numbers (N, n, Tau, l, pos), evaluated with Lie algebra (baruton and Casimir) and comparable with the work of Varlamov (2025). It is worthwhile to see such diverse, even nihilistic, proposals as this one on "aperiodicity" emerge to shake us out of entrenched paradigms that prevent profound change, because they generate "paradigmatic biases" in researchers and even in modern AI. For more details, I refer you to the following articles that will support a more comprehensive one that I wish to submit for publication in Foundations of Chemistry: 

Thank you..
Julio



https://academia.edu/resource/work/165975282

https://academia.edu/resource/work/166006704

https://academia.edu/resource/work/127507748

https://academia.edu/resource/work/166231396

https://academia.edu/resource/work/166230931

https://academia.edu/resource/work/166007810

(Sorry, I made an English version of this last article but I couldn't find it on Academia. I'll send it if anyone needs it.)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Periodic table mailing list" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to PT-L+uns...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PT-L/A26DA306-0C3A-41D2-B896-490C22086DC7%40meta-synthesis.com.

[Larry T.]

I think it is okay to leave it in because your database is unique and comprehensive and the author uses the colors for element groups. Everything started from Mendeleev's line. BTW, the traditional medium long periodic table is not strictly periodic either.

Best Regards,

V. "Larry" Tsimmerman

[ERIC SCERRI]

Hola Julio,

Thank you for linking these articles, which I look forward to re-visiting.

Regards

Eric Scerri

P.S.  I am hoping that it will soon be possible to register for the 29th ISPC meeting for remote viewing/participation.  https://philosophyofchemistry.com/symposia-2/

The deadline for abstracts is fast approaching.  

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PT-L/CAA-xvT6QYP7hNfOUxEZjisOfQh7g1Czji3BwBin0%3D6RtRx4Aew%40mail.gmail.com.

ERIC SCERRI PhD

UCLA

Website: http://www.ericscerri.com
PhilPeople https://philpeople.org/profiles/eric-scerri
Google Scholar https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=8w1T5bEAAAAJ
ResearchGate https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Eric-Scerri

Editor-in-Chief of Foundations of Chemistry https://link.springer.com/journal/10698

 

[ERIC SCERRI]

Or perhaps everything started from Cannizaro’s line, although he never published it as a line, but provided the values for such a line in his 1858 Sunto.

six out of seven fragment groups are correct.  

If you try to do it with Gmelin’s line, it fails miserably.

Only 3/6 fragment groups are correct.

Or did everything start with Dalton, who first published atomic weights in 1805?

Eric Scerri

Slides are from my recent lecture in Palermo at the celebration of the 200th anniversary of the birth of Cannizaro.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PT-L/CAM1noHVYSbvD4omHVswtMHXFw4NVaKM_zSw-U-WukmS3ckXBEw%40mail.gmail.com.

[ERIC SCERRI]

Even in the 1850s most chemistry textbooks had the element line all wrong.

Correct element line, but this cannot be obtained from the above Turner atomic weights.  

On May 8, 2026, at 7:31 AM, Larry T. <ora...@gmail.com> wrote:

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PT-L/CAM1noHVYSbvD4omHVswtMHXFw4NVaKM_zSw-U-WukmS3ckXBEw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Gerald Eadie]

I agree with Larry. Because the underlying factors of periodicity have not yet been written in stone, why not include a handful of clever attempts to highlight the non-periodic starting function of the list. Even if the definitiveness of periodicity should be nailed down in the future, it should remain in the database as a reminder of our own frailty.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PT-L/CAM1noHVYSbvD4omHVswtMHXFw4NVaKM_zSw-U-WukmS3ckXBEw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Mark Leach]

Hi All,

The Aperiodic Table is from a cartoon/joke website that ‘comments’ on science and scientific issues.

    https://xkcd.com/3242/

Click around, there is some good stuff.

Mark

Mark Leach

meta-synthesis

On 8 May 2026, at 15:45, ERIC SCERRI <sce...@g.ucla.edu> wrote:

Even in the 1850s most chemistry textbooks had the element line all wrong.

[René]

On 9 May 2026, at 00:31, Larry T. <ora...@gmail.com> wrote:

I think it is okay to leave it in because your database is unique and comprehensive and the author uses the colors for element groups. Everything started from Mendeleev's line. BTW, the traditional medium long periodic table is not strictly periodic either.

Best Regards,

V. "Larry" Tsimmerman

I mostly agree with Larry.

Since the author uses colours for element groups, periodicity is still there e.g. one can at least discern the horizontal triads He-Li-Be, Ne-Na-Mg, Ar-K-Ca, Kr-Rb-Sr, Xe-Cs-Ba, and Rn-Fr-Ra i.e. noble gas → alkali metal → alkaline earth metal, and the intervals between the noble gases are: 8, 8, 18, 18, 32.

So, the title "Aperiodic" is wrong. The Aperiodic Table is at least semi-periodic.

Picking up on what Larry said about DIM’s line, the Aperiodic Table is perhaps better dubbed:

"Mendeleev’s Line rearranged inside a rectangular box"

As far as the traditional medium-long periodic table goes, this is semi-periodic in a chemical sense, as similar properties recur after regular but varying intervals, corresponding to the familiar period lengths of 2, 8, 8, 18, 18, 32, and 32.

The same table is also strictly periodic in terms of the recurrance of a uniform Z interval between each new element.

The two kinds of periodicity together manifest the periodic law.

René

[ERIC SCERRI]

On May 9, 2026, at 5:41 AM, 'René' via Periodic table mailing list <PT...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

The same table is also strictly periodic in terms of the recurrance of a uniform Z interval between each new element.

Thanks for you comment.

Can you please explain the above statement Rene?

Do you mean a new element occurs as Z increases?

How is this a case of periodicity?

Eric Scerri

The two kinds of periodicity together manifest the periodic law.

René

[René]

On 10 May 2026, at 01:18, ERIC SCERRI <sce...@g.ucla.edu> wrote:

On May 9, 2026, at 5:41 AM, 'René' via Periodic table mailing list <PT...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

The same table is also strictly periodic in terms of the recurrance of a uniform Z interval between each new element.

Thanks for you comment.

Can you please explain the above statement Rene?

Do you mean a new element occurs as Z increases?

How is this a case of periodicity?

Thanks Eric.

No, I wasn’t specifically referring to a new element occurring as Z increases.

I was using “periodicity” in the broad sense of regular recurrence, as when ripples or waves display a repeating pattern of disturbance over consistent intervals of time or space.

By analogy, the modern PT rests on a regularly recurring interval of Z=1 between successive elements. I appreciate that this is not the usual chemical sense of periodicity, which concerns the recurrence of similar properties at regular but varying intervals of Z. It is nevertheless periodic in the more general sense of a regular recurrence.

A crude analogy would be a series of waves whose crests arrive at regular time intervals, while their heights vary.

While this Z=1 periodicity may be regarded as taken-for-granted or trivial, it is nevertheless the interval that underpins the atomic-number ordering of the elements and hence the modern PT.

Does this make clearer what I had in mind?

René

[ERIC SCERRI]

Hi Rene

Thanks for your explanation. 

Regards

Eric

On May 9, 2026, at 9:15 PM, René <re...@iinet.net.au> wrote: