BromicAcid
International Hazard
Posts: 3237
Registered: 13-7-2003
Location: Wisconsin
Member Is Offline
Mood: Rock n' Roll
|
|
Atomic weights to be revised
Haven't seen this posted here but starting soon periodic tables will include a range for atomic weight for 10 of our favorite elements. I am thinking
this might be a pain in the butt for people like me that like to calculate out my molecular weights to the umpteenth decimal place since I will now
have a range to work with.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=mass-migrat...
|
|
|
psychokinetic
National Hazard
Posts: 558
Registered: 30-8-2009
Location: Nouveau Sheepelande.
Member Is Offline
Mood: Constantly missing equilibrium
|
|
Damn scientific progress. 
“If Edison had a needle to find in a haystack, he would proceed at once with the diligence of the bee to examine straw after straw until he found
the object of his search.
I was a sorry witness of such doings, knowing that a little theory and calculation would have saved him ninety per cent of his labor.”
-Tesla
|
|
|
TheOrbit
Hazard to Self
Posts: 59
Registered: 4-4-2009
Location: deepth point of a black hole
Member Is Offline
Mood: manic bipolar science dis/order
|
|
oh no that will be a severe headache to all of us
|
|
|
bquirky
Hazard to Others
Posts: 316
Registered: 22-10-2008
Location: Perth Western Australia
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I haven't been able to get a good grasp on what this is about.
Is the issue that the mass of the neutrons and protons fluctuating ?
or is it as the linked artical says and an acnolagement that nature abhors a perfectionist and a 'pure' sample of something will contain a few
different isotopes in varying amounts?
if the mass of the particals is changing that whould be (to me at least) quite impressive
|
|
|
woelen
Super Administrator
Posts: 8005
Registered: 20-8-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline
Mood: interested
|
|
No, masses are not fluctuating, this news actually does not really surprise me.
As an example I take chlorine. It has two isotopes, 35Cl and 37Cl. Both have a certain mass, which can be determined with high precision. In nature,
however, we always have mixes of both isotopes. And what they have found now, is that these mixes are not the same on every place on earth. The ratio
of 35Cl : 37Cl is not constant throughout the whole of the earth, but there are small variations. A sample takes on place X may have a somewhat higher
relative amount of 37Cl than a sample taken on place Y on earth. So, the average atomic mass of the sample from place X is somewhat higher than the
sample from place Y.
This problem already is known for a longer time for uranium and lithium. From both of these elements we artificially separate isotopes and the effect
of this on global distribution of the isotopes is rather striking. Especially for the lithium this has become a nuisance, because the uncertainty in
atomic mass is so large that stoichiometrically precise reactions become more and more cumbersome to be carried out at high precision.
|
|
|
smuv
National Hazard
Posts: 842
Registered: 2-5-2007
Member Is Offline
Mood: Jingoistic
|
|
This actually has real world consequences, I one worked at a nuclear power plant, we got a shipment of boric acid (used as neutron moderator) from a
different location than we usually do. It was more potent than had ever been observed in the (looong) life of the plant, we attributed this to a
higher Boron-10 composition than our other source.
EDIT: "Boron-10 content may be as low as 19.1% and as
high as 20.3% in natural samples" (wikipedia)
[Edited on 12-17-2010 by smuv]
|
|
|
blogfast25
International Hazard
Posts: 10562
Registered: 3-2-2008
Location: Neverland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Not a big problem if your best scale is 0.001 g, I'd imagine 
|
|
|
psychokinetic
National Hazard
Posts: 558
Registered: 30-8-2009
Location: Nouveau Sheepelande.
Member Is Offline
Mood: Constantly missing equilibrium
|
|
A fluctuation wouldn't surprise me, really. Just because we have always measured something at a certain measurement doesn't mean they all are or
always will be.
“If Edison had a needle to find in a haystack, he would proceed at once with the diligence of the bee to examine straw after straw until he found
the object of his search.
I was a sorry witness of such doings, knowing that a little theory and calculation would have saved him ninety per cent of his labor.”
-Tesla
|
|
|
Saerynide
National Hazard
Posts: 954
Registered: 17-11-2003
Location: The Void
Member Is Offline
Mood: Ionic
|
|
What??? So Cl is no longer 335.453 as I have engrained in my memory from my youngin' days? Darn scientists!
"Microsoft reserves the right at all times to monitor communications on the Service and disclose any information Microsoft deems necessary to...
satisfy any applicable law, regulation or legal process"
|
|
|
garage chemist
chemical wizard
Posts: 1803
Registered: 16-8-2004
Location: Germany
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The fluctuation in the atomic weights of elements from chemical suppliers is most often caused by isotope separating companies selling off "depleted"
elements from which a wanted isotope has been partially removed. This is true not only for the generally known example of uranium, but also for
lithium and boron. Lithium-6 is needed for breeding tritium and for hydrogen bombs.
Boron-10 is needed in the form of enriched BF3 gas for neutron counter tubes.
The depleted Li and B are perfectly suitable for all non-nuclear applications, but their atomic weight is significantly different from the natural
substance. If exact stochiometry is wanted, determining the isotope composition of your material is the only solution.
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
