Element Zero

[BigMoosie]

Does it make sence to say that elemet zero of:

• Isotope 0 is a vacuum?
  
• Isotope 1 is a neutron?
  
• Isotope 2 is a dineutron?
  
• Isotope [math]\infty[/math] is a neutron star?
  

 

I propose we call them goneMoosium, smallMoosium, bigMoosium and massiveMoosium respectively.

[swansont]

No. How can I tell if I have a mole of element zero or just one particle?

[BigMoosie]

I dont remember that being part of the definition of an element, the ability to count it.

[budullewraagh]

could you define this "element zero?"

 

protons? electrons?

[swansont]

I dont remember that being part of the definition of an element, the ability to count it.

 

An element is a substance that cannot be broken down by chemical means. Substance implies it's matter, and the amount can be quantified. Nothingness, or the vacuum, is not matter.

[BigMoosie]

could you define this "element zero?"

 

protons? electrons?

 

Element 1 has 1 proton' date=' element 2 has 2 protons. It just makes sense to say element 0 has 0 protons. Neutrons however may be of any quantity (isotopes). I hadnt considered an electron but I guess that too could be an atom of element zero. Heck, even a quark or a higgs boson would work.

 

An element is a substance that cannot be broken down by chemical means. Substance implies it's matter, and the amount can be quantified. Nothingness, or the vacuum, is not matter.

 

Space is zero matter, which is a quantity. OK I admit, the vacuum thing may be pushing it, but what about the other suggestions?

[ydoaPs]

iirc, old periodic tables had Neutronium before H.

[insane_alien]

yeah it is called netronium but neutrons in that state tend to decay very rapidly (except in netron stars for some strange unknown reason.) so isotope one would decay to hydrogen fairly quickly isotope 2 to deuterium isotope 3 to tritium then helium-3 isotope 4 to hydrogen-4 then helium-4 .... ad infinitum get the drift? the bigger the isotope the shorter the thing stays element zero

[jdurg]

Please explain to me how you can have a chargeless neutron with a negatively charged electron hanging around it?

[Mendelejev]

Yes, indeed, it could NEVER form a stable element. So, we could remove the electron. Problem solved, but you obtain just a neutron, and that is indeed just an elemental particle, NOT an element.

[akcapr]

plus it couldnt form any compounds

[insane_alien]

you couldn't have any electrons so it wouldn't form any ions or molecules even van der waals forces so it would be a sort of gas (or a plasma) at any temperature except maybe absolute zero. thats if you can get it to be stable

[Crash]

I remember reading in a new scientist afew years back and it had element zero as its cover story, something about four neutrons together, nothing else, i think it started with T.

 

Found these too...

http://home.earthlink.net/~quade/elementzero.html

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg17623694.700

[Crash]

Lol, how stupid was i. Tetraneutron, found a few more links but damnd Windows crashed (yet again, damn XP)

[BigMoosie]

...it wouldn't form any ions or moleculese...

 

And:

 

plus it couldnt form any compounds

 

Niether can any of the Noble gases.

[BenSon]

Niether can any of the Noble gases.

Incorrect, I'm sure google can help you with this one.

 

~Scott

[budullewraagh]

"Niether can any of the Noble gases."

xenon forms a number of fluorides, namely the di, tetra and hexafluoride as well as XeF7-, XeF8-2, [XeF5]+[AsF6]-, [XeF]+[AsF6]-, XeOF4, XeO2F2, XeO3F2, XeO4, XeO6-4, and Ba2XeO6.

 

also, don't forget about krypton difluoride.

 

also, argon forms clathrates such as Ar8(H2O)46 and Ar(quinol)3. krypton forms clathrates as well; Kr8(H2O)46, Kr(quinol)3. also, [KrF]+[AsF6]- exists. xenon forms clathrates such as Xe8(H2O)46. Xe(quinol)3.

[jdurg]

Not to mention that given enough energy, it is theoretically possible to form compounds with all of the noble gases as you can form ions with each of them. With an electronless species with no charge, it is absolutely impossible to form any type of chemical compound no matter what you do. With helium and neon, it's VERY difficult but theoretically it can be done. With the element zero proposed in this thread, it is IMPOSSIBLE in every sense of the word.

[Crash]

So just because it cant form molecules does that make it not an element? is that what you define as an element?

[swansont]

My main objection was the "isotope 0" part, which is really undefined, but I agree that a neutron probably doesn't interact chemically and so shouldn't be considered an element.

[jdurg]

So just because it cant form molecules does that make it not an element? is that what you define as an element?

 

Yes. I define an 'element' as a basic part of matter which is comprised of a central, positively charged nucleus and an external cloud of negatively charged particles. This 'element' is also able to react in such a way with other elements as to transfer electrons from one species to another. A single neutron does not meet any of these criteria. (Also, as mentioned earlier, Helium doesn't react to any known degree, but theoretically it is possible to make a helium compound. It is not possible at all to make a neutron react chemically).