Copernicium - Periodic Table of Videos

[stratikeo]

Right now I'm taking Organic Chemistry for my pre-med course, and I can honestly say though I know oodles and oodles about Biology, it seems that Chemistry will always be the most interesting science for me. :)

[NathnaelShenkute]

The most stable known isotope, copernicium-285, has a half-life of approximately 29 seconds; source Wikipedia

[GuitarsOfVideoGames]

I didn't know Lead was pronounced as Led, I thoguht it was the same as lead (leader). :)

[xato909]

3:36 whooosh!! :D

[Plur307]

It's probably wise not to name it cp. You don't want to be searching for cp...

[ThatHaloGuy117]

Scientists arguing

[GLWillaims]

watch,dont fish and drive!

[evanperryg]

There are some elements below uranium that are unstable:

Polonium astatine radon francium radium actinium thorium protactinium

Technetium and promethium are also radioactive, but they are too far down the periodic table to be in many decay chains.

[Dozzer]

I've always wondered how to make these "new" elements. I always figured it was something to that extent. Awesome video!

[IggySeeker]

WOOSH!!! so funny xD

[iSynOSX]

My question is why do we try to synthesize elements if they decay and never last? I mean I know its exciting that we can do that but what's the purpose? just research to see if we can do it or have we gotten something else from it that I'm not aware of?

[Xc31]

@iSynOSX nuclear power for instance?

[iSynOSX]

@Xc31 these elements degrade to quickly and are too unstable to be used as fuel for Nuclear Power.

[Xc31]

@iSynOSX plutonium was created in the same way as they create these elements in 1940

[iSynOSX]

@Xc31 this might be true but it isn't commonly used the most common fuel is Uranium. It also doesn't degrade in a matter of seconds like most all of these elements. also certain isotopes of plutonium have been found in nature.

[Xc31]

@iSynOSX trace quantity's of Pu-244 becouse it has a halflife of 80 million years, Pu for nuclear reactors and weapons is created. I awnsered your question twice you didnt talk about particular elements but just asked if synthesizing elements brought us something you were not aware of, and aperently that is nuclear power.

[iSynOSX]

@Xc31 your right you answered it, incorrectly, I'm not talking about an element that is sometimes found in nature that is mainly synthesized, that isn't widely used. I'm asking about 104-118. which are NOT used in Nuclear Power. Your not doing any good by saying Nuclear Power when the element degrades in a matter of seconds.

[Xc31]

@iSynOSX dream on sucker.

[iSynOSX]

@Xc31 ohh god! your rapier like wit has mortally wounded me! grow up.

[HWGuyEG]

Search for Cp on the internet? No thanks.

[MrJoBilly]

I'm not english or a student of them but i like these videos and I learn really something. And they are funny.

[Rayden440]

Scientist: hmm I wonder what Cn taste like

*makes mistake and tasted CN*

[corih97]

@Rayden440 LOL

Extra Extra Scientist poisons self due to element confusion :S

Yeah i know CN isn't a element.

[Unumbium]

Finally, I have a name! :D

[KanonXD]

Woosh!

[master9716]

I like these videos. Glad chemist got high tech and found youtube.

[matthewdcroft]

I love his tie in this video.

[danylaley]

wow the guy looks like a real eistain lol!!!

[HectorJW2007]

They should have called it "kirsteyalleicum"

[uut0]

how come that it very rarely makes a new nucleus? i mean it forms one or it doesnt

[SpaceTime4D]

@uut0 It's like this: the two atoms must combine to each other at such the precise amount of force their nuclei join, but not too little (the miss) or too much, where they are blown to bits. Not to mention they have to be going at each other perfectly, which is very unlikely.

[nmkalen]

no, it could be like bismuth, which is below uranium

[PEA1222]

what? below the mass of uranium? it shoud be below bismuth insted.

[TikanTehGreat]

are you... a man... or a woman?

[benmuskler]

i wanna touch your hair :D

[tmuffin23]

@benmuskler hmm... :?

do all scientists have hair like these? :D

[benmuskler]

@tmuffin23 At least the professional ones :D

[frogman1171]

@benmuskler Its like a jewish cloud

[DerAnstifter]

@benmuskler For some reason I rather feel like setting it up on fire with some sort of chemical reaction as a bad prank and wishing he doesn't feel offended but rather finds it funny.

[the81stviewer]

@benmuskler I have begun growing my hair to look like his for the last two years. Unsuccessful so far.

[rafay40]

@vandaahll LOLLOLOLOLOL :P

[delmorgano]

Lol periodic table-tie

[TzerMaan]

I would like to have that too XD

[pepsibookcat]

My son will be 11 next month. He's always been into science, and he now has a burgeoning passion for chemistry which was sparked by your videos. I enjoy watching them, and he got hooked through me.

He had to write a compare and contrast paper for the gifted program class at his school, and he chose Cs and Cn. He read quite a bit on those elements. The only problem was narrowing down the information to a short enough essay! His teacher was pleased, and his classmates were confused. LOL

[Notyouraverageperson]

What a way to show your jealousy to an 11-year old.

[HighLordConz]

I'm glade I'm not the only one annoyed by this comment, Send him a PM, don't make yourself look like an ass.

[CarnalDiafragma]

@pepsibookcat

Your son is awesome, and will be a great chemist later.

[feuchster]

@pepsibookcat You're a perfect example of what parents should do. I hate parents that don't take part in their kids education.

[YamiPoyo]

Why is uranium at or over the stable atomic number then.

Why does it not step down like the heavy experimental elements?

[gonya33]

Uranium has the highest atomic weight of naturally the occurring elements. Any elements with more protons in it's nucleus than that of Uranium (which is 92) are unstable and will decay until they reach stability (atomic mass equal to or less than Uranium, depending how it decays).

[YamiPoyo]

So then while making heavy unnatural elements there is a chance to create radioactive explosive uranium?

[gonya33]

Possibly.. it depends what you collide with what. If you take 2 elements whose atomic mass numbers add up to 92 you could potentially create Uranium. Which isotope you create would depend on the isotopes of the collision atoms. But Uranium is not exactly 'explosive.' Uranium is fissile and causes a chain reaction that creates an explosion. It won't just blow up.

[sirbarksalot195]

I have never understood why they continue to try to make new elements which lasts such a short time you can't do anything with it. What's the point, other than to see if you can make a heavy element that lasts a thousanths of a second. Not even long enough to confirm you have an element. Actually, you can do the same thing by theoretically conbine Two elements and then just call it something.

[AlmightScoop]

Sibarksalot,

There are good reasons why heavier elements should be created. They are the incremental footsteps towards the 'island of stability', where there are theoretically stable superheavy elements. They would be facinating to characterise. Also, generation of superheavy elements may allow us to test our understanding of their physics - how well can we predict their decay rates? What nuclear states are there? Do they have any features which furrow our brow or could point to new physics?

[YamiPoyo]

They are trying to make one that is heavy and stable it will possibly help with free power.

[archaedemos]

i am not trying to play they why game but , its still weird that they (the bigger elements) dont desire ANY larger form entropically(word?) or maybe we needs to keep smashin' ie; making bigger elements to find one yet.

[archaedemos]

whats the deal with why those elements decay so rapidly? i mean really why dont/cant they stay in our world?

[Attackgoat2]

We can have an energetically rich enough environment for them to form but ass energy spreads out, and/or entropy takes hold of the system, the elements revert back to the entropically desired states, which are lower in energy.

[GrafPara]

You can imagine: For instance Helium, a very small atom, isn't that big and doesn't need that much magnetic field engery to keep the protons and neutrons in its nuclei.

Copernicium is, compared to helium extremly big and the magnetic energy isn't big enought to hold the protons and neutrons => radioactive decay

[puncheex]

@GrafPara: Let's think about this. You've crammed two protons (for your helium) in a very small space. The positive charges want to repel each other magnetically, and that force goes up with the square of the decrease in distance between them. So they want to fly apart, very much. The force that prevents it is called the strong force. It's attractive, and operates within just a few protons radius of a proton. It binds helium nucleii together very strongly in spite of the magnetic force.

[puncheex]

... When the nuclei gets to several proton widths in radius, however, the strong force is essentially played out. Adding another particle causes the nuclei to become unstable, such that any little disturbance of the nuclei push part of the nucleus outside the limit, and the magnetic repulsive force immediately tears the nucleus apart. At the edge this tends to happen when an odd number of nucleons becomes even; thus U235 fissions easily, while U238 doesn't.

[puncheex]

... PS: This isn't a very accurate description of the strong force; it is a lot wierder than this; for example, it actually operates between colored quarks, not nucleons, which are actually held together by the nuclear force, which is a residual of the strong force that "leaks out" beyond a bound hadron. But it suffices for an illustration.

[bobbyt2012]

...I want that hair. Also, I want the periodic table that he used to show which two atoms are used to make a new atom. That one had all of the electron configurations on it.

[edrianquintos]

why not make it 3 letter? after all this a new addition so lets break the line

[ASKaPHYSICIST]

Cn, CN ... seems pretty easy to misake to me ... could be a fatal misatake

[shadowraptor888]

that was what I was thinking ;-)

but I guess I'll start worrying about that when I start drinking/eating stuff with Cn in it, and since that's unlikely to happen anytime soon...

[dylz]

i would prefer Cn because it's less ambiguous than Cp. Cp is also specific heat for isobaric processes

[RavnoUK]

woooooooshhh!!

[lilmarine93]

Cp all the way!

[MSI2k]

I luv his tie!

[b1u3too]

I like Cn better, not only because of the other elements and organic chem, but also because the internet has done MUCH more for Cp than we realise. xD

That Q idea is pretty cool too though. =o

[Quasi84]

What are the long strings of letters and numbers below each element in the periodic table?

[Retsam19]

You mean at 1:01? The combination of letters [Xe] 4f 5d 6s is the electron configuration of the atom. It tells us what orbitals within the atom are filled with electrons.

[Xe] means that the first shells have the same arrangement as Xe. The 4f 5d 6s describes the extra 17 electrons that Lu contains. Xe has 54, wheras Lu has 71.

4f^14 - This means there are 14 electrons in the f orbital in the 4th shell of the atom

[Retsam19]

The orbitals have general energies in increasing order: s,p,d,f Just think of them as energy arrangements that the electrons can exist in.

The orbitals are actually solutions of the wave equation from quantum mechanics. If you do an image search for electron orbitals you can get some pictures, you will see several balloon like objects connected to oneanother. Basically the electrons can exist within the space of the balloons but not outside of them.

[rroge5]

very cool element

[EzaroWorld]

I love these videos.. they make learning fun!

[AtomicCactus]

I think Cn is a better choice. At first I wasn't impressed with naming this element after Copernicus, but as they say atoms and astronomy have a lot in common! Makes me feel better about it :-).

[culwin]

Why not just use "Q" since that letter isn't used in the table.

[leporidus]

I think the one-letter elements have to be the "old", light ones with low atomic numbers. Obvious exception: »He«, because Helium has been discovered much later than the other light elements, since Helium is a noble gas.

Also, »Q« could get mixed up with the Symbol for electrical charge, as in »Q = 1 Coulomb«.

As a nerd, I'm reminded of the almighty, capricious Q from Star Trek. Maybe some day we will discover an element worth bearing the Symbol Q! (-;

[kativilaga]

Thank you Professor!

Thank you Brady!

:))

[RX1519]

If the element decays from 112 (Copernicium) -> 110 (Darmstadtium) would this mean that element 112 emits beta radiation?

[AtomicCactus]

It has been some time since I've done this kind of chemistry, but beta particles are electrons, so they are essentially without mass. The loss of two protons (which is accompanied with two neutrons) is an alpha particle which is a helium ion. Decay of one alpha particle will bring 112 down to 110.

[liam7morris]

no because beta radiation is an electron

[puncheex]

@RX1519No. Beta radiation is electrons. Emitting an electron from a nucleus implies that a neutron has changed to a proton (conservation of charge). That is not a change in atomic weight (the electron weighs nearly nothing compared to a nucleon) but rather a change in atomic number upwards by one. A change in atomic number downwards by two is indicative of the release of a helium nucleus particle (an "alpha" particle). These are the only particle changes in normal radioactive decay.

[puncheex]

... For a a complete rundown on isotope decay modes, see this drawing: enDOT wikipediaDOT org/wiki/File:Table_isotopes_e­n.svg

[hyunchoi98]

How about Cm?

[sc0rpi0n0]

They should name it Cz

[juggliac]

I see now, ignore my previous comment... I think Cc would be the best symbol though, personally, but I don't care too much on what they decide.

[SETHHIKARU]

No it is not Cyanide is CN. The only way you can confuse it is by some idiot capitalizing the letters wrong. Otherwise I see it too much of a hassle to name it Cp.

Plus it would cause much confusion also.

[juggliac]

I swear i deleted that post, but apparently not... but whatever, I guess it doesn't matter what they name it.

[dot1337]

awesome

[mboylan74]

One of the defining characteristics of an element are its electrons as they contribute greatly to its properties. Whats the point in creating an element with no electrons that exists for less than a second? Are there any practical uses for such a thing?

[sirnlawson]

Not yet. Doesn't mean there won't be in the future though - so it's useful to have it categorized just in case in a few thousand year we work out how to stabilise it.

We had a device called the Aeolipile (basically a ball that spins due to steam power) before 10AD, but we didn't find a proper application for steam until over 1500. Even if it doesn't have a use right now - it might someday spark some new technology.

That would be cool ^_^

[SETHHIKARU]

Honestly dude I'm sure there is absoluetly no way for them to be practical. Unless we happen to find one that is stable and doesn't decay very quickly like at the rate of gold or something. Then it could be very practical.

[puncheex]

@mboylan74: Well, not yet. Principally it is done because doing so is a traditional way to get a mention in history, it garners 15 minutes of glory, and verification of some properties (such as matching the predicted rate of decay) is used to validate the "standard model" of atoms and particles.

[mboylan74]

@puncheex My God, you must really like reading the comments. I made mine over a year ago. Thanks all the same :)

[klutz22]

i love CP

[Anonymouzor]

oh you

[thisIStheARTofRUIN]

...why dont you take a seat over here...

[cookiecamp]

how about

BOB

[Chrazycat]

what about Cc? (do they already have one?)

Copper and the C in Nicium

Don't argue with me cuz im only 13 :)

[Marimori91]

but even with the age of 13 you should know who copernicus is

[bereal666]

OK... he was Polish, Niclas Koppernigk or Mikołaj Kopernik .... so why not NK or MK????!!!!!

[JaksProductions]

Below the mass of Uranium is stable?maybe below the mass of Bismuth?Am I right?

[qwAirGear]

It's really how you're defining stability in each case. I'm pretty sure uranium is sometimes considered "stable" since its longest-lived isotope has a half-life of over 4 billion years; lead is the heaviest truly stable element as far as we know, though bismuth sometimes gets the nod due to its half-life being over a billion times the age of the universe (so yes, folks, it's perfectly safe to drink those bismuth compounds for your stomach).

[KvantnaFizika]

well, radioactive elements below uranium have extremely long half-lives (even few milion years), except astatine and polonium, so you can tell that they are relatively stable

[falafel1995]

Stability and radioactivity are different things... I dunno.

[cmcshane06]

You are right, but it's pretty pedantic. Bismuth is an alpha emitter I believe. However, it has such an extremely long half-life it can be regarded as being stable.

[JaksProductions]

I know.thats why I said below the mass of bismuth... not below the mass of Polonium....=) I luv radioactivity I know everythin' xD

[puncheex]

@JaksProductions: Yeah, but there is some conjecture that no atom is truly stable in the very long run, so the dichotomy of stable vs unstable, while practical, may not be one of degree rather than solid.

wiki: "Bismuth has classically been considered to be the heaviest naturally-occurring stable element. Recently, however, it has been found to be very slightly radioactive: its only non-synthetic isotope bismuth-209 decays ... with a half-life of more than [14 billion billion years]."

[PartVIII]

How long does it usually take for elements like Cn (hehehe) to fully decay to a stable Isotope?

[poptya]

It usually depends on which elements it decays into. If all of them have extremely short half-lives, it could be in the area of a hundredth of a second, or if it goes through a slightly more stable element, (for example Plutonium), then the time for FULLY stabilizing could be many tens of thousands of years.

[bereal666]

It´s namend after Nikolaus Kopernikus, isnt it? Why not NK?

[JaksProductions]

Cmon... Nk for Copernicium... that wouldnt match at all!but Cn for Copernicium ... thats more like it. :)

[ADisasterpiece]

Why not? Sodium is Na, gold is Au, silver is Ag, lead is Pb, Potassium is K, etc.

(... I forget which one is gold and which is silver and don't feel like looking it up :P )

I suppose that nowadays it doesn't really matter since most of those odd ones come from the latin names of those elements, but still. Idk, lol

[Chaosblade777]

And mercury is Hg, and tungsten is just W. Odd names indeed..

[jestertru]

_H_ydra_g_yrum - the Latin word for mercury

_W_olfram - the German word for tungsten

No so odd as long as you realize there are and have been languages other than English!

[jestertru]

_H_ydra_gyrum - Latin for mercury

_W_olfram - German for tungsten

There are and have been languages other than English...

[puncheex]

@jestertru: ...relatively useless ones.

NO! Don't! Ow!  Ouch! I'll just grab my coat and leave...

:) and I mean it!

[socer777]

It's because the symbols for those elements is an abbreviation of their Latin names.

[Pyrotecnican]

Old or latin names...

[qsdftfdsq]

Copernicus.......

[petercourt]

Loving the tie

[solomsolomol]

"it is unlikely to be confused cyanide which is CN and it's also nice for Chinese colleagues 'cause CN is the domain name for chinese websites "

If that was sarcasm , then you prof. are a comical god !!!

[pHzerodotcom]

Doesnt Cn undergo spontaneous fission, rather than decaying by alpha and positron emission?

[xlrv1]

How appropriate! In astrological abbreviations Cp is Capricorn and Cn is Cancer. They are opposed - 180° apart. Tradition has the Moon (Lu in Latin countries, but also Lutetium in chemistry) ruling Cancer. Sometime between the time this video was uploaded and the time I wrote this, Jupiter (exalted in Cn) rose over England while the Part of Fortune passed through that sign.

[koolitaliano]

whAt?

[buzzausa]

Cn works for Copernicium

Didn't know about Lutetium being called Cassiopeium in some countries...very interesting.

[mecrazy5]

I watched all the his videos when revising for my GCSE's. i got an A in chem, B in Bio and B in Phys

Videos are a godsend!

[Cloudff7yaoi]

contraaverrsy I love the way the prof. talks. Thank from the depths of my heart for these videos. Chemistry brings me a very deep since of happiness.

[Gomka1000]

A question, if you keep doing this wouldnt you need to eventually fuse things like lawrencium and copernicium to make the 200+ elements?

[Ch3mG33k]

Unfortunately, there is an upper limit on how high you can go. If you have too many electrons orbiting too big a nucleus, the electrons would have to theoretically go faster than the speed of light to orbit the nucleus which of course is impossible. As a result, at a certain atomic number, the atoms would no longer be able to be neutral and would thus be very unstable.

[Gomka1000]

Ah, crap

[benkettle]

electrons don't go around in circular orbits so their velocity would not have to constantly increase to keep the nucleus stable. the nucleus becomes unstable due to the positive charge density being so high

[puncheex]

@Ch3mG33k: chemically unstable, though, not nuclearly. They would be enforced ions.

[Ch3mG33k]

@puncheex The nuclear binding energy required to hold all those protons together would also go up though. Therefore, the nucleus would also decay as well.

[puncheex]

@Ch3mG33k: because it was ionized? I don't think so. If it does go up it's only by a very small amount. I've never heard of any nucleus become more unstable just because the atom was ionized.

Certainly the nucleus is getting unstable as its size increases, but that isn't what you were talking about.

[jkcason]

Awesome info on nucleus decay. I'd always assumed since it went together with a bang, it came apart with one. Cheers!

[WardleVonAwesome]

Cp = Child Porn... Theres a reason to change it...

[mecrazy5]

Get the book, look up Psychotherapy.

[GetMeThere1]

Apparently...chemists are very easily excited. Could they have a very low activation energy?

[LokkenJester]

oh lol

[buzzausa]

Yes we do :D :D

[SammySamff1]

I'm not a scientist by any means so maybe this is why I am confused but I have to wonder why this is such a big deal.

I don't mean naming the new element either, I mean making it in the first place. Yes I do understand the whole idea of progressing science, by why make this a new element if it doesn't occur in nature? I always thought the periodic table was in place to categorize the elements we have around us on earth. If this element can only last for a few seconds then why is it categorized?

[3doog]

as long as half a second, sounds very long lol

[simon4360]

hello, a question for periodicvideos. Copernicium has a proton number of 112 but the periodic table on my wall here only goes up to Lawrencium, 103. Have the elements between been named yet?

[periodicvideos]

@simon4360: Indeed... Check out our main website for the full table with all our videos...

[sciencoking]

Same with actinium and the acetate ion. What about it? What´s the problem?

[winterstellar]

Great! 5 stars as usual:)

[RupertsCrystals]

New tie, professor?

[chemiealex]

Very good video! Like all your videos! :)

Thanks!

[T1carus]

first :) great videos and it should be called copernicum

[Abengoshis]

Wouldn't it be a bit out of place next to all of the "-iums"?

[qqstar999]

Last.