A Structural Table of the Elements

[elas]

i'm not regularly viewing, i just don't care anymore, everytime we try to give you feed back its like talking to a brick wall.

 

Take a look at what you call feed back; It is not what I would call constructive criticism merely adverse opinion which I will leave the judgement to others.

 

your wasting your time, elas doesn't really consider reality to matter all hat much and just goes away on his own little path. its best just to ignore him.

yeah, he'll post some of his crap, disappear for a few weeks and then return spouting the same old rubbish. i'm surprised he hasn't been given his marching orders already.

frankly i'm surprised this thread is still open, i'm quite sure this isn't the first he's opened on it and i'm sure a few of the older ones were locked.

try sticking to accepted science in the non speculation forums then.

some energy is photons. not all of it. same way some dogs are terriers but you wouldn't say all dogs are terriers.

yet again you spout wild speculation as if it were a fact known and acepted for thousands of years like 'things fall down'

toasty, there is a particular brand of nutjob out there who believe that monatomic gold has magical properties.

 

also, if you atomize gold it will be black and not white.

 

there's a bunch of hooey about the electrons being in a special configuration that changes the shape of the nucleus into a line of nucleons or some other magic shape of the week.

 

the guy who 'invented it' also claims that he can extract 50kg of rare earth metals per tonne of any soil. if there really was 50kg of rare earth metals per tonne of soil then they would not be rare earth metals and they wouldn't even be a tenth the price they are.

 

elas, that has bugger all to do with isotope separation. answer his bloody question instead of skirting it like usual.

[insane_alien]

your wasting your time, elas doesn't really consider reality to matter all hat much and just goes away on his own little path. its best just to ignore him.

yeah, he'll post some of his crap, disappear for a few weeks and then return spouting the same old rubbish. i'm surprised he hasn't been given his marching orders already.

frankly i'm surprised this thread is still open, i'm quite sure this isn't the first he's opened on it and i'm sure a few of the older ones were locked.

 

elas, that has bugger all to do with isotope separation. answer his bloody question instead of skirting it like usual.

 

these are the only ones that had anything to do with this thread. funny how you had to go to other threads to find enough stuff to claim i'm persecuting you. i'm off to bed.

[elas]

"Secondly to establish a date of publication."

I doubt that many people will be trying to claim precedence on this.

 

At least a polite opinion but still no constructive criticism. When I first proposed explaining the structure of atomic elements using the same method I used to explain particle structure; I was asked why another Table of Elements was needed. I have replied to that question on this thread by showing that my proposed explanation of the existing table (not another table) can be used to connect atoms with the FQHE results and with Mott insulator results. This provides a conection with Quantum physics to a greater degree of accururacy than does the current explanation see:

http://www.chem.ucla.edu/dept/Faculty/scerri/pdf/How_Good_is.pdf

As far as I am aware no one has shown that atoms are constructed using (proton:electron) mesons or that there is a similarity between particle and atomic structure, but Newton wrote that it would be a matter of "great simplicity", my aim is to find that 'great simplicity'.

 

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

these are the only ones that had anything to do with this thread. funny how you had to go to other threads to find enough stuff to claim i'm persecuting you. i'm off to bed.

 

Pleasant dreams!

elas the persecutor (I like that; it's original)

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

In Chemical Education Today, (http://www.chem.ucla.edu/dept/Faculty/scerri/pdf/How_Good_is.pdf)

Scerri writes:

 

However, Pauli’s Nobel Prize-winning work did not provide a solution to the question which I shall call the “closing of the periods”—that is why the periods end, in the sense of achieving a full-shell configuration, at atomic numbers 2, 10, 18, 36, 54, and so forth. This is a separate question from the

closing of the shells. For example, if the shells were to fill sequentially, Pauli’s scheme would predict that the second period should end with element number 28 or nickel, which of course it does not. Now, this feature is important in chemical education since it implies that quantum mechanics cannot strictly predict where chemical properties recur in the periodic table. It would seem that quantum mechanics does not fully explain the single most important aspect of the periodic table as far as general chemistry is concerned.

 

The structure of atomic elements proposed on this forum points the way to a possible solution by showing that:

In any two consecutive shells the number of elements with the same number of electrons in the outer shells are equal and that one shell in each pair of shells (2:3, 4:5 and 6:7) ends with 1/3 and 2/3 fractions. As the fractions are found by magnetic compression the same as the magnetic compression in Fractional Quantum Hall Experiments then the similarity can be said to be a Quantum similarity.

 

Edited February 7, 2010 by elas
Consecutive posts merged.

[elas]

Atomic fractions

Hall fractions are considered to be wave related, but within atoms the fractions are field related as shown by a graph of atomic shell fractions (below). As the number of electrons increase the shells are compressed along the force lines. Each peak marks the change from nuclear force dominance to external G force dominance. Where the nuclear force is equal or near to equal it is the external G force that determines the compression state; the superiority of the G force is explained in the opening submission on:

http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=46643

G force prevents particle and atomic collapse and ensures that all particles and atoms expand in unison with universal expansion.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

The sum of all the fractions of an atom of each atomic element is 1 and the same approximate fraction can be repeated in a number of atoms; this makes it difficult to produce mathematical tables for different types of elements, but the following graph clearly shows the underlying fractional structure that decides the nature of the elements. Atoms of elements 1 and 2 have been omitted purely for reasons of scale.

 

 

There is an error on Atomic No. 19 where the lower symbol has the wrong colour, will correct when time permits.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

PS Error has been corrected

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

I apologise for the muddled entries, unfortunately the edit button has vanished.

 

The Transition metals were extracted from the last graph above and are shown (enlarged) below. The key changes to the shell force fields are circled (red) ande clearly show the compression of the transition metals and how the nature of the transition metals is determined. Similar patterns for other types of elements will follow.

 

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

The graph labelled ‘Fractional Compression of Atomic Shells’ Shows that Transition Metals only occur where the inner fields (lines from lower left to upper right) occur between the outer fields of shells 2 and 3. Rare Earths only occur where inner fields occur between the outer shells of shells 3 and 4.

 

Non-metals and Alkaline Earths are the first two elements on shells 2-7; extracting Non-metals and Alkaline Earths from a graph of all fractions (graph A) shows that Non-metals and Alkaline Earths form a wave pattern on second shell force field (graph B). Similar wave patterns are visible elsewhere, these will be developed latter.

 

Electrons of atoms of elements 1 and 2 appear on the same level because the nuclear shell is not complete until it has two electrons, therefore there is no difference in compression between the structures of elements 1and 2. (It could be said that atoms of element 1 are a two particle composite and atomic structure proper does not begin until the nucleus contains neutrons).

 

Halogens, Other Metals, Metalloids, Alkali Earths and Noble Gases form the last 6 elements on all non-nuclear shells, this can be seen on the six graphs where the increase in compression in the final six elements of each shell is clearly apparent and the increase in compression caused by the increase in the number of shells causes a gradual change in the nature of the elements from the inside outwards.

 

There are other avenues to be explored when time permits, for now one example only will be given:

Of the Alkali Earths only one (3Li) reacts slowly with Oxygen, it is also the only Alkali Earth that does not have a fraction (i.e. electron) below the lowest force line suggesting that an electron inside the inner force field is the cause of increased oxygenation.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

The simplest way to observe the basic atomic structure is to use the ‘Z’ pattern where the diagonal that runs from lower left to upper right is positioned as follows:

 

A) For the first two elements (Alkali and Alkaline Earths) on each shell the lower horizontal line is missing.

 

B) For the last six elements on each shell (Halogens, Other Metals, Metalloids, Alkali Earths and Noble Gases) the diagonal runs from shell 1 force line, up to the shell 2 force line.

 

C) Between (A) and (B) the diagonal of Transition elements lies between shell 2 and 3 force lines.

 

D) The diagonal for Rare Earths lies between shell 3 and shell 4 force lines.

 

From this it can be proposed that Halogens, Other Metals, Metalloids, Alkali Earths and Noble Gases should be regarded as sub-groups of an unnamed group and that Alkali and Alkaline Earths are also sub-groups of a separate unnamed group.

 

The correct position for 1H (an end group element) on a diagram of the elements is with the end group elements above 8O. Atomic construction begins with the nucleus, 1H and 2He are end group elements that is the end of a force field that starts within the nucleus.

Edited February 16, 2010 by elas
Consecutive posts merged.

[swansont]

A sound critic of the current model is given on:

 

http://www.chem.ucla.edu/dept/Faculty/scerri/pdf/How_Good_is.pdf

 

How is that a "sound critic (sic) of the current model?" It shows that naively invoking the Pauli exclusion principle does not explain the filling order, but that is not an application of QM, it is an application solely of spin statistics. QM is more than spin statistics.

 

It then goes on to explain that the Madelung rule has exceptions, too, but

 

As the eminent quantum chemist Löwdin (among

others) has pointed out, this filling order has never been derived

from quantum mechanics

 

So how are things not derived from QM a critique of QM?

[elas]

 

Thank-you for the correction, I will have to find another way of making my point which is that the method I am proposing to explain atomic structure does not contain exceptions, but does explain cause as in the following graph that illustrates how a section of shell 2 is compressed as other shells are added (thicker dash lines contain fractions of two shells). This is an enlargement of sections of the Fractional Compression of Atomic Shells graph.

 

Edited February 16, 2010 by elas

[elas]

Atomic Nuclei

 

The force lines shown in the ‘Fractional Compression of Atomic Shells’ graph is shown in circular form in fig A below (i.e. atoms without nuclear particles, as in FQHE);

 

 

each electron is paired with a nuclear proton that contains three elementary particles, therefore each proton has three times the fractional value of the elementary. Plotting the proton fractions (blue lines) and the electron fractions (red lines) in a single graph (Fig B below) shows how the nuclear force fields compress the weaker electron force fields against the atomic surface.

 

 

Neutral particles do not have force fields and therefore can be treated as single particles for the purpose of finding a fractional value. The fractional value of neutrons is shown in magenta in the above graph.

 

The sum of all fractions for those elements for which the data is available shows that as the number of particles increases, the atomic structure becomes more regular in form:

 

 

A graph of the average fractional value of each shell reveals that the non-nuclear electron shell structure forms a shallow wave pattern on a force field line. An extension to the base line reveals that the force field is balanced with one half of the linear force either side of the point of maximum force (as previously shown for all elementary charged particles).

 

[John Cuthber]

I think I might get the first of those printed on a T shirt.

[elas]

If they go on sale I'll buy one.

[iPeppers]

Add it to the list.

 

Personally I agree that the most popular view of the periodic table isn't the best for everything. So, if it isn't cutting it for you then go right ahead and make something that does, but you don't have to feel bad if not everyone else wants to use it.

 

I personally enjoy the elephant:

 

[John Cuthber]

I see that this thread contains a white elephant.

[elas]

A bit blank, blows its own trumpet and does not obey the rules (notice in background); a wonderfully apt artistic representation of the current table. Thanks.

[elas]

A pdf on the foregoing with additional data, diagrams and tables can be found on:

http://69.5.17.59/Frctnl Atmc Strctr.pdf