Franklyn (2008)

[Rene]

An electronic orbital periodicity table I found here:

https://www.sciencemadness.org/whisper/viewthread.php?tid=10516#pid126343

The accompanying text is:

Mendelevian grouping is only one possible organizational scheme, regardless of the schematic choice. A table is useful only to the extent that it provides easy reference to data and comparison. Most everyone who has considered arranging elements in tabular form has pondered what layout best serves the purpose.

Below is a table I once made to determine the electronic shell and orbital structure of any element at a glance. Everything to the left and above the element's position indicates the complete full orbitals for those shells. Actually you can see the group members run diagonally from upper left to lower right.

This arrangement shows that the progression of successive electrons is not straight forward with regard to placement within the atoms. The Mendelevian sequence beginning with period 6 through the Lanthanides back to period 6 transition metals until Radon, continuing with period 7 ending with the first member of the Actinides, is as follows :

shell 6 , s orbital - Cesium, Barium ( Cs, Ba )

shell 5 , d orbital - Lanthanum ( La )

shell 4 , f orbital - Cerium -> Lutecium ( Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu )

shell 5 , d orbital - Hafnium -> Mercury ( Hf, Ta, W, Re, Os, Ir, Pt, Au, Hg )

shell 6 , p orbital - Thallium -> Radon ( Tl, Pb, Bi, Po, At, Rn )

shell 7 , s orbital - Francium, Radium ( Fr, Ra )

shell 6 , d orbital - Actinium ( Ac )

shell 5 , f orbital - Thorium ( Th )

René

[johnmarks9]

Fascinating, René - and a very interesting thread.

Thorium is, of course, [Nt]6d²7s². Lu is [Xe]4f¹⁴5d¹6s² and Lw is [Nt] 5f¹⁴6d¹7s² (also, arguably, [Nt] 5f¹⁴6d¹7p²).

So by the arguments you make concerning La, Th is a d-element.  Lu is clearly a d-element and Lw may even be a p-element.

It seems to defeat the purpose of the s-, p-, d- and f-blocks to pander to every whim of the vagaries of electron-filling.

[Rene]

On 16 May 2024, at 19:52, johnmarks9 <johnm...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Fascinating, René - and a very interesting thread.

Thorium is, of course, [Nt]6d²7s². Lu is [Xe]4f¹⁴5d¹6s² and Lw is [Nt] 5f¹⁴6d¹7s² (also, arguably, [Nt] 5f¹⁴6d¹7p²).

So by the arguments you make concerning La, Th is a d-element.  Lu is clearly a d-element and Lw may even be a p-element.

It seems to defeat the purpose of the s-, p-, d- and f-blocks to pander to every whim of the vagaries of electron-filling.

Thanks John.

As you rightly say, it’s impractical to cater to all the vagaries of electron-filling.

However, there is some regularity in observing that each new block starts with, and is subtended by, the appearance of the first related differentiating electron:

s-block H

p-block B

d-block Sc

f-block Ce

Eric further wrote that, “…for the purpose of selecting an optimal periodic table we prefer to consider block membership as a global property in which we focus on the predominant differentiating electron.” (Scerri and Parsons 2018, p. 151).

In this case, differentiating electrons are relevant from a chemistry perspective since they enable the periodic table to be parsed into four major blocks according to the predominant differentiating electron in each block, and each block shows distinctive physical and chemical properties (Stewart 2018, p. 118).

Here, a table with Sc-Y-La-Ac has one less differentiating electron discrepancy than a table with Sc-Y-Lu-Lr.

And the average smoothness of physicochemical trendlines going down B-Al-Sc-Y-La is better than for B-Al-Sc-Y-Lu.

Ten more electron configuration-based arguments supporting group 3 as Sc-Y-La-Ac can be found here:

https://chemrxiv.org/engage/api-gateway/chemrxiv/assets/orp/resource/item/644f5f5f80f4b75b5369fbff/original/electron-configurations-and-the-group-3-question.pdf

René

• Scerri, E.R., Parsons, W.: What elements belong in Group 3 of the periodic table? In: Scerri, E., Restrepo, G. (eds.) Mendeleev to Oganesson: A multidisciplinary perspective on the periodic table, pp. 140–151. Oxford University Press, New York (2018)
• Stewart, P.J.: Amateurs and professionals in chemistry. In: Scerri, E., Restrepo, G. (eds.) Mendeleev to Oganesson: A Multidisciplinary Perspective on the Periodic Table, pp. 66–79. Oxford University Press, New York (2018)

[Julio gutierrez samanez]

Dear René

In the tble that you present there is such confusion, that you yourself do not know how to organize it in a coherent way. I think this problem is overcome just by “doubling the periods” and making them even, like in Janet. Then, everything appears in its place, as in the Aufbau principle. The new periods or “binodes” could be considered as pairs of semi-periods.

The table made on the fly that I send you, with the colors for s, p, d, f... clearly shows a fundamental property of matter: Every two periods or at the end of a “binode”,  appears (emerges or is generated) a new function (a new color) that remains for the following binodes, which are lengthened with the new functions. This is only noticeable if we see the process in a “horizontal” way, the “vertical” or group conception (“this” over “that”) hinders the possibility of seeing thise other growing and dual behavior of matter and Periodic Law.

I know that to “fight” Janet, you have a heavy artillery that you sent me, I think, ten times already (With Hakala, its coronium and nebulium, with the neutron and the electron before H, He, etc. etc.) But , you still have not understood that my proposal is not: “This” about “that”. (H/Li; He/Be) but rather: “This” followed by “that”, that is, a “horizontal” proposal that is very different from just “Janet” or the like of it.

Placing the periods in series or in “single row” for each binode number (n), I obtained the exact parabolic function Y = 4 n^2 = 4, 16, 36, 64... Which provides the size of the Binodes. Likewise, a function emerges that I can name: W = 2 n^2 = 2, 8, 18, 32... Which would be the size of the periods.

But neither Y nor W are as important as Z, the series of atomic numbers, which has been the main objective of my studies. And that is produced by adding n^2. In the first expression. Where does it come from:

  Z = 4 (∑n^2) = 0, 4, 20, 56, 120...

Graphing this sequence with the colors that Bent added to the chemical properties of the elements, we obtain the graph that I am just working on. In which the sequentiality of the properties of the elements is clearly shown, as functions of the “principal quantum number Z”, (this is what we know since someone corrected the atomic weight by the atomic number, to what was established by DIM). The tangential points to the growing spirals coincide with the repetitions of those chemical properties, that is, precisely, “they are functions of the atomic number.”

With the addition that there is a functional correspondence between the Atomic Number (Z) and the principal quantum number n (modified or understood as equal to the binode number, or the number of the pair of periods with the same number of elements) and that the Periodic and progressive growth of these pairs of periods is determined by the appearance of a new “transition” or new azimuthal quantum number or a new type of atomic suborbital.

A hug from Peru

Julio

--
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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PT-L/D37E8D86-7898-4FF6-AF75-AD98054797F6%40webone.com.au.

[Julio gutierrez samanez]

This photo is better

Julio Antonio Gutiérrez Samanez

[Julio gutierrez samanez]

This second photo is better than the one I sent you before

Julio

 Tabla Binodica3.tif222.tif

[johnmarks9]

Present for you, Julio:

John