Talk:Ununennium: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 09:35, 23 May 2009

Template:Chemical Element

‹See TfM›

Physics Start‑class High‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Some chemist should go through the transuranic elements, including the imaginary ones, and make them read a little better, like I tried to do here. I only came here because I watch the deletion nominations. There are good reasons for naming things that don't exist, but chemists know them better than I do. Probably should explain the derivation of each name from the number too. Ortolan88 15:47 Aug 22, 2002 (PDT)

Another liquid?

Anyone know why it is thought to be a liquid metal?

IA group metals' melting temperature decreases from above to below. Francium's melting point is very close to room temperature already.

In what way is it ionic that it may be more stable than Francium?

Ununbium?

Isn't Ununbium expected to be liquid? Andros 1337 18:31, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

The questuion about the liquid or solid question is answered in the sources. It is said in the sources that it is presumably solid. As well as the Theory of the Intermolecular Forces: Ununennium is tending to be ionic, which means it is likely to be solid. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hopfer25148 (talk • contribs) 01:08, 25 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Name

I hereby a name Plantium (Pl) in honor of powerplant. Cosmium 21:02, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Appearance

Why is this alkali metal predicted to be "colorless"? The others that have been observed are metallic or silver or gold-coloured. Dajwilkinson (talk) 01:03, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Table/text contradiction

The text says that this element would be the first radioactive liquid element, and the table says that it is "presumably solid". 74.37.155.50 05:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then the text is wrong too, as francium is a liquid at room temperature and it is also radioactive. Just too bad that it's so intensely radioactive that it would self-boil. --121.7.203.206 (talk) 09:35, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 03:04, 21 June 2008 edit Headbomb (talk \| contribs) Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors 451,295 edits m {{physics\|class=start\|importance=high}} ← Previous edit		Revision as of 09:35, 23 May 2009 edit undo 121.7.203.206 (talk) No edit summary Next edit →
Line 30:		Line 30:

	The text says that this element would be the first radioactive liquid element, and the table says that it is "presumably solid". [[User:74.37.155.50\|74.37.155.50]] 05:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)		The text says that this element would be the first radioactive liquid element, and the table says that it is "presumably solid". [[User:74.37.155.50\|74.37.155.50]] 05:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

			:Then the text is wrong too, as [[francium]] is a liquid at room temperature and it is also radioactive. Just too bad that it's so intensely [[radioactive]] that it would self-boil. --[[Special:Contributions/121.7.203.206\|121.7.203.206]] ([[User talk:121.7.203.206\|talk]]) 09:35, 23 May 2009 (UTC)