Talk:Flerovium

(Redirected from Talk:Ununquadium)
Latest comment: 2 months ago by Double sharp in topic Flerovium-290
Good articleFlerovium has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 24, 2004Articles for deletionKept
September 12, 2014Good article nomineeListed
In the newsNews items involving this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on June 1, 2012, and June 8, 2011.
Current status: Good article

Prospects for studying Fl and Mc chemistry

edit

Link. Double sharp (talk) 06:44, 13 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Also this and this. Double sharp (talk) 15:34, 26 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Nonmetalloid

edit

As per the present article, the element is listed as a possible metalloid. Metalloids are elements which resemble metals in appearance, but chemically they are more like nonmetals. I here by define a new term, 'Nonmetalloid' which is just the opposite to 'Metalloid'. ie. a Nonmetalloid physically resembles a nonmetal but chemically resembles a metal. Anoop Manakkalath (talk) 10:09, 18 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

Has any reliable source ever used this term? Wikipedia is not for things made up one day, so if unsourced, this cannot be added in the article. Sorry. ComplexRational (talk) 10:49, 18 October 2019 (UTC)Reply
No. That's why I try to introduce a new term 'Nonmetalloid'. Anoop Manakkalath (talk) 06:38, 27 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
If you're introducing it, then it definitely is original research and is inappropriate to include. Wikipedia is not the place for you to introduce stuff. ComplexRational (talk) 13:17, 27 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Zintl anions?

edit

Are there any predictions so far about Flerovium's (in)ability to form anions?

It would be interesting to study the possibility of anion formation in elements like Nh, Fl, Mc, Lv and Ts, and in case that anions can be formed, whether they act similarly to their lighter homologues. Since most Zintl-type anions follow the classical octet rule, and since the "full" electron shell of Og is expected to be far less stable than that of its lighter homologues, anions of the elements 113-117 may not neccessarily follow this principle. On the other hand, Ts- and Lv2- are predicted to exist with their expected stability roughly following group trends. McH3 and Mc5- (analogues of ammonia and pentazolide) seem to be possible as well. By contrast, FlH4 is expected to be extremely unstable, much more so than PbH4. But what about e.g. Fl4- or Fl44-? Do relativistic effects move the position of the Zintl line from element 113/114 to the right? Or is there a "new chemistry" appearing with anions like monomeric Nh- adopting the electronic structure of Fl instead of Og?

(I have summed up information about predictions cited in other Wikipedia articles about these elements. I don't expect any satisfying answers to my questions in the second text block, as most of them will still be insufficiently studied to give really good answers. They are only there to explain my motive for asking about Zintl anions of Fl. I mean, anions of superheavy elements are no less interesting than cations, so I ask if there are any studies about Fl (and also Cp, Nh, Mc) occurring in negative oxidation states.) --2003:E0:7F07:54B5:B536:BD88:CD75:3D8E (talk) 15:46, 25 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia is not a discussion forum. We also don't engage in speculation. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 17:08, 25 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
Why exactly is this unscientific speculation? It is just a summary of theoretical calculations which have been cited in various Wikipedia articles. Besides, Nh- is expected to be possible. See the article on Nihonium. --93.195.28.183 (talk) 15:07, 26 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
We need an academic source abut this specific prediction. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 17:21, 30 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
Hg is probably the best guide we have for how Fl should behave. But extending it to clusters is still OR. Double sharp (talk) 01:20, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Flerovium-290

edit

A paper published in 2023 seems to disfavor an interpretation of an empirical result which attributes a 1999 decay chain to 290Fl:

Såmark-Roth, A.; Cox, D. M.; Rudolph, D.; Sarmiento, L. G.; Albertsson, M.; Carlsson, B. G.; Egido, J. L.; Golubev, P.; Heery, J.; Yakushev, A.; Åberg, S.; Albers, H. M.; Block, M.; Brand, H.; Calverley, T.; Cantemir, R.; Clark, R. M.; Düllmann, Ch. E.; Eberth, J.; Fahlander, C.; Forsberg, U.; Gates, J. M.; Giacoppo, F.; Götz, M.; Götz, S.; Herzberg, R.-D.; Hrabar, Y.; Jäger, E.; Judson, D.; Khuyagbaatar, J.; Kindler, B.; Kojouharov, I.; Kratz, J. V.; Krier, J.; Kurz, N.; Lens, L.; Ljungberg, J.; Lommel, B.; Louko, J.; Meyer, C.-C.; Mistry, A.; Mokry, C.; Papadakis, P.; Parr, E.; Pore, J. L.; Ragnarsson, I.; Runke, J.; Schädel, M.; Schaffner, H.; Schausten, B.; Shaughnessy, D. A.; Thörle-Pospiech, P.; Trautmann, N.; Uusitalo, J. (6 February 2023). "Spectroscopy along flerovium decay chains. III. Details on experiment, analysis, Cn 282 , and spontaneous fission branches". Physical Review C. 107 (2). doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.107.024301.

The isotope is also marked as undiscovered in the Discovery of Nuclides Project.[1]LaundryPizza03 (d) 07:53, 30 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Isn't this about chain 17 from a 2022 study (pub. 2023)? Double sharp (talk) 17:54, 30 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
  1. ^ FRIB Nuclear Data Group. "Discovery of Nuclides Project — 290Fl" (PDF). doi:10.11578/frib/2279152. Retrieved 30 September 2024.