Giguère's 3D table (1966)

[Rene]

A nice picture (attached) which can be found here:

https://github.com/groverlab/giguere-3D-periodic-table

Mark has a later version, here...

https://www.meta-synthesis.com/webbook/35_pt/pt_database.php?PT_id=525

...but the shadows make it harder to make out, and it lacks the block letters on the narrow end of each block.

I’ve never considered Giguère’s table at any length, so the following pros and cons are off the top of my head:

Pros

– Elegant and visually appealing overall design

– Offers an impression of continuity through its (almost) spiral layout

Cons

– In practice, it doesn't resolve the discontinuity of periods any better than the conventional table; one still needs to complete one turn of the spiral and then mentally leap to the next, much as one moves from one row to the next in the flat form

– Includes the He-over-Be placement, which remains controversial

– Quantitative comparisons (group or period properties) become less readable; there’s no immediate visual sense of columns

– Despite its elegance, the f-block placement appears somewhat awkward

– Communicates feel more than data

– It seems to imply relationships between groups on opposite sides of the p-, d- and f-blocks (for instance, between Sc-Y-Lu-Lr and Zn-Cd-Hg-Cn), whereas the actual correspondences run the other way—that is, between the early and later transition groups, such as 3–7 and 8–12. As Imyanitov (2018) observed: “In a generalised form, the properties of the early dη (fη) elements and their compounds are similar to those of the late dη + 5 (fη + 7).”

It’s striking that there are only two pros but several cons—perhaps a reflection of the inherent difficulties faced by three-dimensional periodic tables in improving on the conventional form?

René

Imyanitov, N.S. Does the period table appear doubled? Two variants of division of elements into two subsets. Internal and secondary periodicity. Found Chem 21, 255–284 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10698-018-9321-z

[ERIC SCERRI]

The Royal Society also issued a version of this a few years ago.

I have one in my office at UCLA.

Eric 

On Nov 6, 2025, at 8:35 PM, 'Rene' via Periodic table mailing list <PT...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

<PastedGraphic-4.png>

ERIC SCERRI

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

 

[johnmarks9]

Might be better if the sp block were combined ("hybridized"!).

Then you´d get:

H-He-Li-Be backing B-C-N-O

and below:

F-Ne-Na-Mg backing Al-Si-P-S.
Giguère, 2nd edition.

John

[ERIC SCERRI]

It would be interesting to see John Marks’ most recently posted table brought up to date with the official symbols for all elements up to 118.

It would also be useful to see a list of how many groups consist of different elements from the ‘official’ current medium-long form table.

Eric Scerri

--
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/a71d3b92-74d7-44a4-a494-123af4837d96n%40googlegroups.com.

[johnmarks9]

Dear Eric,

Something like this?

IUPAC "official list":

Group 1:  H-Li-Na-K-Rb-Cs-Fr-119

Group 2: Be-Mg-Ca-Sr-Ba-Ra-120

Group 3: Sc-Y-La-Ac

Group 4: Ti-Zr-Hf-Rf

Group 5: V-Nb-Ta-Db

Group 6: Cr-Mo-W-Sg

Group 7: Mn-Tc-Re-Bh

Group 8: Fe-Ru-Os-Hs

Group 9: Co-Rh-Ir-Mt

Group 10: Ni-Pd-Pt-Ds

Group 11: Cu-Ag-Au-Rg

Group 12: Zn-Cd-Hg-Cn

Group 13: B-Al-Ga-In-Tl-Nh

Group 14: C-Si-Ge-Sn-Pb-Fl

Group 15: N-P-As-Sb-Bi-Mc

Group 16: O-S-Se-Te-Po-Lv

Group 17: F-Cl-Br-I-At-Ts

Group 18: He-Ne-Ar-Kr-Xe-Nt-Og

Neither Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sa, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tu, Yb and Lu

nor Th, Pa, U, Np, Pu, Am, Cm, Il, Cf, Ei, Fm, Md, No and Lr ( - some 28 elements! - )

is included in any current IUPAC groups.

Mendeleyev´s groups (as I understand their extrapolation):

Group -1 (or VII): H-F-Cl-Br-J-At-Ts + subgroups VIIA: Mn-Tc-Re-Bh and VIIB: Pm-Np

Group 0 (or VIII): He-Ne-Ar-Kr-Xe-Nt-Og + subgroups VIIIA: Fe-Ru-Os-Hs and VIIIB: Sa-Pu

Group I: Li-Na-K-Rb-Cs-Fr-119 + subgroups IA: Cu-Ag-Au-Rg and IB: Tu-Md

Group II: Be-Mg-Ca-Sr-Ba-Ra-120 + subgroups IIA: Zn-Cd-Hg-Cn and IIB: Yb, No

Group III: B-Al-Ga-In-Tl-Nh + subgroups IIIA: Sc-Y-Lu-Lr and IIIB: La-Ac

Group IV: C-Si-Ge-Sn-Pb-Fl + subgroups IVA: Ti-Zr-Hf-Rf and IVB: Ce-Th

Group V: N-P-As-Sb-Bi-Mc + subgroups VA: V-Nb-Ta-Db and VB: Pr-Pa

Group VI: O-S-Se-Te-Po-Lv + subgroups VIA: Cr-Mo-W-Sg and VIB: Nd-U

Subgroups IX: subgroups IXA: Co-Rh-Ir-Mt + IXB: Eu-Am 

Subgroups X: subgroups XA: Ni-Pd-Pt-Ds + XB: Gd-Cm

Subgroups XI-XIV: XIB: Tb-Il, XIIB: Dy-Cf, XIIIB: Ho-Ei, XIVB: Er-Fm

which I inferred from this:

Does that cut the mustard?

John