scholarly journals The periodic system of chemical elements: A history of the first hundred years (van Spronsen, J. W.)

1970 ◽  
Vol 47 (12) ◽  
pp. A856
Author(s):  
Ralph. E. Oesper
2019 ◽  
Vol 91 (12) ◽  
pp. 1921-1928 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikhail Kurushkin

Abstract The history of chemistry has not once seen representations of the periodic system that have not received proper attention or recognition. The present paper is dedicated to a nearly unknown version of the periodic table published on the occasion of the centenary celebration of Mendeleev’s birth (1934) by V. Romanoff. His periodic table visually merges Werner’s and Janet’s periodic tables and it is essentially the spiral periodic system on a plane. In his 1934 paper, Romanoff was the first one to introduce the idea of the actinide series, a decade before Glenn T. Seaborg, the renowned creator of the actinide concept. As a consequence, another most outstanding thing about Romanoff’s paper occurs towards its very end: he essentially predicted the discovery of elements #106, #111 and #118. He theorized that, had uranium not been the “creative limit”, we would have met element #106, a “legal” member of group 6, element #111, a precious metal, “super-gold” and element #118, a noble gas. In 2019, we take it for granted that elements #106, #111 and #118 indeed exist and they are best known as seaborgium, roentgenium and oganesson. It is fair to say that Romanoff’s success with the prediction of correct placement and chemical properties of seaborgium, roentgenium and oganesson was only made possible due to the introduction of an early version of the actinide series that only had four elements at that time. Sadly, while Professor Romanoff was imprisoned (1938–1943), two new elements, neptunium (element #93) and plutonium (element #94) were discovered. While Professor Romanoff was in exile in Ufa (1943–1953), six further elements were added to the periodic table: americium (element #95), curium (element #96), berkelium (element #97), californium (element #98), einsteinium (element #99) and fermium (element #100). The next year after his death, in 1955, mendelevium (element #101), was discovered. Romanoff’s version of the periodic table is an unparalleled precursor to the contemporary periodic table, and is an example of extraordinary anticipation of the discovery of new chemical elements.


Substantia ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 79-84
Author(s):  
Elena Ginak

This article is timed to the celebration of the International Year of the Periodic Table of Chemical Elements, declared by the UN and UNESCO in connection with the 150th anniversary of the discovery by D. I. Mendeleev of the Periodic Law of Chemical Elements (1869). The article highlights the metrological activity of D. I. Mendeleev and tells about how in the scientific metrological center, he created the Main Chamber of Weights and Measures. Now the D.I. Mendeleyev Institute for Metrology (VNIIM) preserves the memory of the life and activities of the great Russian scientist and encyclopedist. Based on the research carried out in the archives of St. Petersburg and the funds of Metrological Museum, the article for the first time details the history of the formation of the Mendeleev memorial complex on the territory of VNIIM. The contribution of the institute metrologists to the creation of such famous sights of St. Petersburg as the monument to D. I. Mendeleev (sculptor I. Ya. Ginzburg, 1932) and the mural (mosaic) «D. I. Mendeleev Periodic system of elements» (1935) on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the scientist is shown. All peripteries, related to the installation of the monument - table are described: a selection of options for the arrangement of elements, decoration, manufacturer and manufacturing techniques, coordination with various organizations, solving financing issues.


Vestnik RFFI ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 26-45
Author(s):  
Almir S. Gazizov ◽  
Yulia M. Sadykova ◽  
Elmira M. Gibadullina ◽  
Alexander R. Burilov ◽  
Lyudmila K. Kibardina ◽  
...  

In the popular science review, dedicated to the 150th anniversary of the first publication of the Periodic Table of chemical elements by D.I. Mendeleev, the elements of the 5th (main) Group (namely nitrogen, phosphorus, arsenic, antimony, and bismuth) are considered. The history of these elements discovery and some their properties are shortly described. The elements of the fifth group are also called “the elements of life”, which is linked with both the development of living organisms themselves and their compounds importance for human life. The review confirms this thesis in a popular-science form, using the available literature data on the role of chemical compounds of Group 5th elements in the development of living nature as well as in the progress of human civilization.


2011 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
D.C. Hoffman

AbstractThis year (2009) marks the 140th Anniversary of Mendeleev's original 1869 periodic table of the elements based on atomic weights. It also marks the 175th anniversary of his birth in Tolbosk, Siberia. The history of the development of periodic tables of the chemical elements is briefly reviewed beginning with the presentation by Dmitri Mendeleev and his associate Nikolai Menshutkin of their original 1869 table based on atomic weights. The value, as well as the sometimes negative effects, of periodic tables in guiding the discovery of new elements based on their predicted chemical properties is assessed. It is noteworthy that the element with Z=101 (mendelevium) was identified in 1955 using chemical techniques. The discoverers proposed the name mendelevium to honor the predictive power of the Mendeleev Periodic Table. Mendelevium still remains the heaviest element to have been identified first by chemical rather than nuclear or physical techniques. The question concerning whether there will be a future role for the current form of the periodic table in predicting chemical properties and aid in the identification of elements beyond those currently known is considered.


2012 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 345-350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcelo Gleiser

AbstractThe history of life on Earth and in other potential life-bearing planetary platforms is deeply linked to the history of the Universe. Since life, as we know, relies on chemical elements forged in dying heavy stars, the Universe needs to be old enough for stars to form and evolve. The current cosmological theory indicates that the Universe is 13.7 ± 0.13 billion years old and that the first stars formed hundreds of millions of years after the Big Bang. At least some stars formed with stable planetary systems wherein a set of biochemical reactions leading to life could have taken place. In this paper, I argue that we can divide cosmological history into four ages, from the Big Bang to intelligent life. The physical age describes the origin of the Universe, of matter, of cosmic nucleosynthesis, as well as the formation of the first stars and Galaxies. The chemical age began when heavy stars provided the raw ingredients for life through stellar nucleosynthesis and describes how heavier chemical elements collected in nascent planets and Moons gave rise to prebiotic biomolecules. The biological age describes the origin of early life, its evolution through Darwinian natural selection and the emergence of complex multicellular life forms. Finally, the cognitive age describes how complex life evolved into intelligent life capable of self-awareness and of developing technology through the directed manipulation of energy and materials. I conclude discussing whether we are the rule or the exception.


Author(s):  
Anders Lundgren

The reception of Mendeleev’s periodic system in Sweden was not a dramatic episode. The system was accepted almost without discussion, but at the same time with no exclamation marks or any other outbursts of enthusiasm. There are but a few weak short-lived critical remarks. That was all. I will argue that the acceptance of the system had no overwhelming effect on chemical practice in Sweden. At most, it strengthened its characteristics. It is actually possible to argue that chemistry in Sweden was more essential for the periodic system than the other way around. My results might therefore suggest that we perhaps have to reevaluate the role of Mendeleev’s system in the history of chemistry. Chemistry in Sweden at the end of the nineteenth century can be characterized as a classifying science, with chemists very skilled in analysis, and as mainly an atheoretical science, which treated theories at most only as hypothesis—the slogan of many chemists being “facts persist, theories vanish.” Thanks to these characteristics, by the end of the nineteenth century, chemistry in Sweden had developed into, it must be said, a rather boring chemistry. This is obviously not to say that it is boring to study such a chemistry. Rather, it gives us an example of how everyday science, a part of science too often neglected but a part that constitutes the bulk of all science done, is carried out. One purpose of this study is to see how a theory, considered to be important in the history of chemistry, influenced everyday science. One might ask what happened when a daring chemistry met a boring chemistry. What happened when a theory, which had been created by a chemist who has been described as “not a laboratory chemist,” met an atheoretical experimental science of hard laboratory work and, as was said, the establishment of facts? Furthermore, could we learn something about the role of the periodic system per se from the study of such a meeting? Mendeleev’s system has often been considered important for teaching, and his attempts to write a textbook are often taken as the initial step in the chain of thoughts that led to the periodic system.


2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Reedijk ◽  
Natalia Tarasova

Abstract This year we celebrate the Periodic Table of Chemical Elements in the format proposed by Mendeleev in 1869, and its continued development to this day. This issue of CI describes several aspects of the Periodic Table, its history and celebration, and also addresses the pathways to possible new elements. In this preface we address some highlights of the papers and pay attention to the history of events that have led to IYPT2019.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document