Quote me:
| “ | What would Mendeleev do (WWMD)? | ” |
| — -DePiep (talk) 07:24, 18 November 2013 (UTC) | ||
| “ | Reconstructing the PT from 18 to 32 columns† is the IKEA experience. It falls apart when watching the result, and in the end there are still some elements on the floor. | ” |
"Seaborg began constructing forms ... 32 col" [1]
- Every person born or educated in this 21st century should learn the 32-column Periodic Table
- The 18-column Periodic Table is the 1946 version, IKEA breakdown
- Footnote elements in the Periodic Table, like with lanthanides and actinides, are misleading our future scholars and abusing their mind
- Periodic table (large cells) (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
- [2] Nottingham, folding paper. YouTube
Nomenclature
- long form, 32 column
- medium-long, 18-column
- "large" (enwiki)
- Recent_attempts_to_change_the_periodic_table (Scerri, 2020)
Good and bad
edit- Mendeleev in 1871 already did get his graph right in the group VIII presentation.
- The statement "group 3 = Sc/Y/*/** (32)" was introduced by Seaborg, to accommodate all the LNs and ANs as such.
- I'm happy to see that Scerri now uses "18-column" and "32-column" graph identifiers , instead of the outdated, ambiguous and confusing "long form" and "medium long form" wordings 2012, and in his The PT, Its Story and Its Significance [2007], fig 6.7.
- A fourth, confusing, statement is: draw a Sc/Y/*/** table, and leave out the number "3" completely. That states: "group 3 has unknown composition". This might be a solution on which form to present say on WP, but has the most annoying aspect of avoiding the issue. Shown in Scerri 2012, fig 5 and 6.
Scerri and 32-col
edit"I suggest that any reluctance to accept this group-ing as opposed to the more frequently seen group-ing of Sc, Y, La, and Ac (as shown in figure 5) stems entirely from a reluctance to display the periodic table in its 32-column format. If this obstacle is removed and the rare earths are taken up into the main body of the table the choice of how to do so is almost entirely in favor of a group 3 consisting by Sc, Y, Lu, and Lr." p11 and [3]
IUPAC Task Force (Scerri)
edit- IUPAC project The constitution of group 3 of the periodic table (2015):
| “ | This project will deliver a recommendation in favor of the composition of group 3 of the periodic table as consisting either of
The task group does not intend to recommend the use of a 32-column periodic table or an 18-column. This choice which is a matter of convention, rather than a scientific one, should be left to individual authors and educators. The task group will only concern itselve with the constitution of group 3. Once this is established, one is free to represent the periodic table in an 18 or 32 column format. |
” |
References
edit |