Visit brilliant.org/scishow/ to get started learning STEM for free. The first 200 people will get 20% off their annual premium subscription and a 30-day free trial.

@mudfossiluniversity

3 ай бұрын

Periodic table is wrong COMPLETELY....all matter is made of dipoles and protons are 1823 dipoles....half are dark matter. "The Search for the Sterile Muon Appears to be Over and it is Dark Matter and Gravity it Seems" on my channel gives details from experiments.

@roberthobbs6318

3 ай бұрын

This makes me wonder if all of water's "special properties" is because of the hydrogen...

@kylorobb

3 ай бұрын

"There are at least three legitimate places you can stick it"😅😅😅

@SeaJay_Oceans

3 ай бұрын

The Periodic Table is only HALF of the true Periodic Table... To have the full table you need to list all the Anti-Elements of Antimatter and their properties.

@mudfossiluniversity

3 ай бұрын

My light experiments show acceleration and particles using CMOS and lasers with a tuned venturi. I will GLADLY show my research if you will allow it? Protons are made of 1823 dipoles not anything else. The new model is DIPOLE ELECTRON FLOOD..... Click my logo and watch the video explaining it. "Higgs Boson Physics Disaster".

What I was most surprised to learn is that H+ ions are literally just a single proton floating around like “look at me, I’m an atom too!”

@garavonhoiwkenzoiber

3 ай бұрын

interestingly, it's also why the theoretical Proton Star simply can't exist. Protons would push each other away stronger than gravity pulls them together.

@Khetroid

3 ай бұрын

In nuclear physics we tend to use Hydrogen and proton interchangeably. Which one we use usually depends on context. (We also fully strip many atoms of all their electrons, leaving balls of just protons and neutrons [shortly before they are crashed into whatever target we have in the way])

@codyfourman3326

3 ай бұрын

I can't really speak for what happens in outer space, but H+ does not exist by itself in solution. Rather, it exists as H3O+, or the hydronium ion. We just simplify it when we talk about it in chemistry 🙂

@Khetroid

3 ай бұрын

@@codyfourman3326 ionized hydrogen is found in massive quantities in stars. It is effectively just loose protons.

@inkryption3386

3 ай бұрын

​@@richdobbs6595 That statement has a lot of pathetic sounding baggage

"There are at least three credible places you can stick it" will be my new fave insult.

@Dan-Simms

3 ай бұрын

I think it would make a great T-shirt

@JamesSpeiser

3 ай бұрын

haha

@aaronpolinard1473

3 ай бұрын

you read my mind

@Acceleronics

3 ай бұрын

It may even replace "What would you do with a brain if you had one?" -Dorothy

@Bildgesmythe

3 ай бұрын

Love it❤

Feels like the periodic table is like a Mercator projection and Hydrogen is at one of the poles.

@SamusUy

3 ай бұрын

I'm surprised there was no mention to alternative periodic tables, there's definitely more than one "projection"

@Jana-ho9mu

2 ай бұрын

@@SamusUyright? Alternate periodic tables are so fascinating, an easy rabbit hole to fall into

@LuisAldamiz

Ай бұрын

Good one!

@thespudlord686

Ай бұрын

@@Jana-ho9mu A pointless one The one that's widely used makes the most sense

It reminds me of the argument about whether or not 1 is a prime number

@magnesiumswift

3 ай бұрын

And hydrogen's atomic number is 1 😮

@Volvoman90

3 ай бұрын

It's not though, it only has one factor.

@dlfjessup

3 ай бұрын

As mathematicians studied other algebraic structures, they realized the concept of an element being prime or composite only makes sense in the context of elements that have no multiplicative inverse. Numbers that do have an inverse are called units. 1 is a unit (as it is its own inverse: 1 * 1 = 1, the multiplicative identity); hence, it is neither prime nor composite.

@tarunyadav3567

3 ай бұрын

There is no argument. It is not

@estebson

3 ай бұрын

On the one hand, it's only factors are 1 and itself (1), which is why medieval and mid 2nd millennium mathematicians often classified it as a prime. On the other hand, it simply does not match up with many of the other properties exhibited by all the other primes, thus its inclusion as a prime would create many exceptions across the broad mathematical field. Ultimately, it is due to this latter point that mathematicians decided 1 to be neither prime nor composite, but its own thing. A unit.

Hydrogen should be all on its own IMO. Being a single proton makes it extremely unique and more over it's a primordial element.

@thejontao

3 ай бұрын

I’ve seen periodic tables where hydrogen is on its own, placed above Lithium, but with a gap. Or in a different color. There are multiple periodic tables, actually, and the Wikipedia article on the periodic table shows some variants. In very limited contexts, hydrogen can be called either protium (the nucleus being just a proton) and duterium (a proton and neutron) or tritium (a proton and two neutrons).

@Chris-hx3om

3 ай бұрын

Is being 'extremely unique' different from just 'unique'?

@TheFredmac

3 ай бұрын

​@@Chris-hx3omone is ordinarily unique and the other is uniquely unique.

@isaiahschmitt8680

3 ай бұрын

@@Chris-hx3om Well, all elements are unique in that they all have their own physical and chemical properties, but hydrogen is extremely unique because it's properties have no close analogues.

@mr.boomguy

3 ай бұрын

I agree. Just wrote a comment about it

Many years ago, when I was first learning Science (1965), the Noble gases were classified into Group 0 (at that time, there were VERY few compounds of these gases, so their valency was believed to be 0). Later, this was changed to Group 8, now 18. So now we have an unused Group 0. Put both Hydrogen and Helium in there, since Helium does not completely share the properties of the Inert - sorry - Noble gases and stick them top middle. This should at least keep the astronomers happy...

@safebox36

3 ай бұрын

Ok, now I need to go google an old periodic table.

@ds27315

3 ай бұрын

Besides having only 2 electrons in its outer valence shell, how does Helium differ in its properties to the other noble gases radically enough to deserve to be re-classified?

@KozelPraiseGOELRO

3 ай бұрын

No

@zombiasnow15

3 ай бұрын

I like your idea! It makes sense.😊

@ShirinRose

3 ай бұрын

In the Periodic Tables used for GCSE Chemistry exams in England, the noble gases are labelled as being in Group 0

Hydrogen walks into a bar and asked sodium hypobromite for a date. Sodium hypobromite said: NaBrO.

@rheiagreenland4714

3 ай бұрын

congratulations sir you win

@ZeroOneInfinity

3 ай бұрын

Sodium Hypobromite says that to everyone that walks into that bar. It's why I don't drink there any more 😜

@Lowseeds

3 ай бұрын

@@ZeroOneInfinity He's Bro mine's brother

@stocktonnash

3 ай бұрын

@@ZeroOneInfinity “but I’ll happily swap wives with Potash, KBro!”

@garethdean6382

3 ай бұрын

But can anyone tell me the formula for nitrogen monoxide?

I've heard of sticking with both the alkali metals and the halogens, never with group 14. But when you say the outer shell is half full in both, then it makes sense.

@scaper8

3 ай бұрын

Same. I first thought, "I have never heard that! That sounds insane." But as soon as he said, "Their outer shells are half full," I immediately thought, "Of course! They can all readily gain _or_ lose elections as needed!" Crazy interesting how that stuff works.

@DraigBlackCat

3 ай бұрын

Except that the half full hydrogen shell is an S-shell, rather than a P-shell. That's why I've never seen a periodic table place Hydrogen anywhere but above the Alkaline Metals of the S block.

@Two_Trick

3 ай бұрын

@@DraigBlackCat Sure but by that logic why not shove He in Group 2 above Mg. It's also in the S block.

@zackkertzman7709

3 ай бұрын

Electronegativity is pretty important in organic chemistry, especially relative to hydrogen - it influences which reactions happen, and how/how much/when, and also some of the properties of different compounds. In that context placing hydrogen relative to its electronegativity makes sense...

@DraigBlackCat

3 ай бұрын

@zackkertzman7709 Electronegativity is only one trait and the periodic table groups elements using a number of properties, the primary one being electron shell. The periodic table of the elements is a general ready reckoner so if you are just interested in a solitary trait, like electronegativity, then consult a separate table. Arguably the periodic table's greatest use is as an educational so it would be hard to justify positioning of Hydrogen in a group where you'd need a more advanced knowledge of chemistry to justify. Try explaining electron shells and valency to a pupil just starting out on their chemistry education at junior high with Hydrogen positioned above the halogens.

"There are at least three credible places that you can stick it". Wasn't expecting that this time of night...! 🤣

@cfltheman

3 ай бұрын

Sounds like something the chemistry teacher Walter White would say.

@kidnamedfinguh

3 ай бұрын

​@@cfltheman*breaking bad intro theme plays*

Its probably worth noting that the properties of a chemical metal actually come from electron degeneracy which is a function of both temperature pressure and technically electron density. To get a metal you just need there to be more electrons than can/will settle into an energetically stable energy configuration. If you change the temperature and pressure within the equation of state this will allow you to change the properties of an element making nearly every element able to behave as a metal for example. The metallic luster, the high thermal and electrical conductivities, and even the near incompressibility are all properties of the Fermi sea that forms around a metal. On that note the element Beryllium also breaks a bunch of rules namely that it really only behaves as a metal in a pure state otherwise it prefers to bond covalently and has a strong grip on its valence electrons second only to Helium which makes sense when you realize it has two full s orbital shells. It should be noted that Florine is only the most electronegative element in its electrically neutral valence state Helium and Neon are the two most electronegative elements if missing a valence electron able to basically steal an electron from anything else on the periodic table. This is one of the ways alpha particles cause so much damage as they more or less steal the first two electrons they come across. Nothing but Helium can steal an electron from helium if you want to ionize Helium you need to use high energy ionizing radiation. Helium also has a net spin state of zero meaning it tends to act like a boson particularly under low temperatures. So rule breaking is pretty much a thing for all the really light elements.

@justinklenk

3 ай бұрын

Wow, thanks for that! Makes sense...

@pixerpinecone

3 ай бұрын

Thanks for all of that info, that was interesting to read.

@Dragrath1

3 ай бұрын

@@pixerpinecone Glad I could help it was one of the most memorable things we learned in my graduate Statistical mechanics class as it made so many things suddenly click for me. Physics wise this threshold is also the reason semiconductors exist and can be chemically doped by replacing an atom in the lattice by an adjacent element with one or or less valence electron since you are dealing with an element right at the threshold between exhibiting electron degeneracy and its absence by toggling the state on or off with an external source of electron current density. Mathematically we model this by treating these degenerate electrons as a fluid which flows around the associated elements which goes by the names electron sea or fermi gas(though its not really a liquid or a gas in a conventional sense)

@OmnipotentNoodle

3 ай бұрын

Worth noting that metallic hydrogen, unlike other chemicals becoming chemically metallic under extreme conditions, is theorized to be metastable. Also just a fun little tidbit that Helium-3, while exceptionally rare in nature, is actually perfectly stable, and with an atomic spin of 1/2, instead acts as a fermion :)

@calebkaminski6951

3 ай бұрын

I do want to ask Do the things that start acting like metal turn to plasma? My understanding is limited, from what I know in metal electrons flow somewhat freely and in a plasma electrons completely freely just wondering if I'm corrector what other distinctions their are@@Dragrath1

3:22 my chemistry teacher went one better - he turned the lights off, dropped MAGNESIUM into a beaker of water, and warned us to not look directly at the beaker because the blindingly white flashing light could literally blind us - just not in that order X-D This guy also lit a hydrogen balloon on fire with a candle that he had glued onto the end of a meterstick - in the classroom, no less - and placed a certain chemical which reacts spectacularly with hydrochloric acid into a beaker of hydrochloric acid and some carcinogenic dish soap (leftover from before the government banned carcinogenic soaps and the school stopped using it for cleaning), placed a ceramic jack-o-lantern over it, and said, "this is why you don't eat the chemicals" (paraphrasing) as the jack-o-lantern vomited so hard it came out its nose and eyes! Loved this guy!

@DawnDavidson

3 ай бұрын

HS Chem teachers are the best. My HS Chem teacher had us do a lab that involved polysaccharides and protein inclusions. We were making peanut brittle, 😂 YUM!

@thunderacrossthereef3323

3 ай бұрын

magniesum does not react violently with water. what you are describing is impossible.

@pandapip1

3 ай бұрын

​@@thunderacrossthereef3323 He problably meant burning magnesium, not dropping it in water.

@brandongaines1731

3 ай бұрын

@@thunderacrossthereef3323 he must've set it on fire, instead, based on what I've found on my end. I guess that it's true that your memories get distorted over time, something which I wasn't quite ready to believe until now :-/

@technophobian2962

3 ай бұрын

​@@brandongaines1731You're probably also getting the water part from the sodium metal in water experiment, which creates some nice sparks if you use a large enough piece (though not as bright as burning magnesium).

Giving up and letting graphic designers "do their thing" is also why we often end up with Lutetium and Lawrencium, which are transition metals, being stuck out there with the Lanthanides and Actinides. Although unlike Hydrogen, there isn't an accompanying debate concerning their chemical properties.

I think we should treat hydrogen like an element of it's own class. No one element is exactly like it, and is the first element, the building block if you will. Slap it up in the middle above the rest, on it's own, in it's singular superiority.

@karlvalteroja4675

3 ай бұрын

No element is exactly like any other

@SoWhat1221

3 ай бұрын

@@karlvalteroja4675 That's a tautology. Otherwise it'd be the same element.

@stefangadshijew1682

3 ай бұрын

@@SoWhat1221 The point made is that uniqueness doesn't warrant an own group designation. H and He are elements in period 1, having only the 1s shell for electrons to occupy, which perfectly explains the "uniqueness" of that period. The whole of period 2 also behaves kind of "quirky" compared to other elements in the same group. Maybe Li, Be, O and F less so, but Boron and Carbon are definitely very weird elements. But they all have the valency that you would expect, and fit neatly into their respective groups in that regard. I don't really see how Hydrogens uniqueness justifies removing it from Group 1.

@andrewhammel8218

3 ай бұрын

hydrogen IS just one cut above being a subatomic particle. So...its kinda missing link between atoms and non atoms.

@stefangadshijew1682

3 ай бұрын

@@andrewhammel8218 Hydrogen is an atom, an electron orbiting a proton and maybe some neutrons. It is absolutely a chemical element, there really is no question about that.

I always liked checking the different versions of the periodic table, and the one thing that always stood out to me is just how... nobody would (or could, even) agree where to place hydrogen. My favourite by far was the one version that just gave up and put it literally *_on the border_* (on the top left corner), a little away from all other rows and columns of the table.

@duckrutt

3 ай бұрын

I pulled out my copy of Chemistry in Everyday Life (1928) to see what they did. According to the index the periodic classification of elements is on 538 ff. Which is not PAGE 538 but section 538 on page 390. Thanks index you're very helpful. Anywho they put Hydrogen in series 1 (out of 12 rows) group 1 (out of 9! columns). I won't hold missing elements against them but the whole thing is slightly inaccurate.

@Engy_Wuck

3 ай бұрын

I've even once seen one which included a single neutron. *Technically* it sort-of belongs there: it's sort-of a nucleus with zero electrons in its (non-existing) shell 😛

I'm certain I was never taught the periodic table's meaning/purpose; I just learned more than I did in 5 years of secondary school.

@StYxXx

3 ай бұрын

That's a sad school then :(

@TessaBain

3 ай бұрын

Yeah, I took chemistry and earth science (which included some degree of chemistry as well as almost every other biology and geology related science) and I definitely did not hear that ever mentioned in any class either. That was something I read myself years prior.

The periodic tables back when I was doing high school chemistry just had hydrogen sitting above left of fluorine to show that it was kind of similar to the halogens but not the same. Something else to note is that the transition metals (the light pink in your periodic chart) and the lanthanide and actinide series don't really behave in a periodic fashion either. And one final thing, the electron shells are actually probability orbits and are usually shaded in a particular way with the darker areas being where the electrons are most likely to be if you were to look for them at any particular point in time.

@DanielMWJ

Ай бұрын

Mine had it like that above fluorine AND above the alkalines, then with a bracket bar attaching them.

My wife says ,when I'm in my element . I don't belong either.

Rather than moving Hydrogen, I'd suggest moving the noble gases to the left of all the alkali metals. It'd be like starting to count from zero instead of counting from 1 - when you consider the nobles as fully empty s orbital, not a full p orbital. Then H is all alone, which it really should be. This makes sense with thr many wrap-around depictions of the Table also.

@omargoodman2999

3 ай бұрын

Another thing to take into consideration is the hidden 3-D aspect of the table. Most don't realize it because of how it's typically displayed, but the two rows along the bottom *actually* jut _straight forward_ from the table. You have rotate that entire row 90° out into the space in front/above (depending on its orientation); but since having a "popup book periodic table" is a bit inconvenient in most settings, they were content to just saw it off and display it along the bottom. Perhaps Hydrogen is in a similar sort of situation; it ought to be utilizing the extra dimensions of the table that aren't available due to it being projected in a measly two. In other words, it's distorted just like the map of a globe projected in 2D. Maybe Hydrogen is something like the "Pole" of the Periodic Globe (or paraboloid, hyperboloid, or whatever other such shape it might actually be). At the North Pole, *every* direction is South; and at Hydrogen, you could just as well go "down" to either Group I, Group IV, or Group VII. That's on the basis of its Valence shell being "up by 1", "half full" and "short by 1" all simultaneously.

@red.aries1444

3 ай бұрын

Even if you move the noble gases to the left side, neutral Hydrogen would still keep it's place on top of the column with the alkaline metals. Only the H+ Proton could have a place on top of the noble gases, but ions are not elements. It wouldn't solve any problem.

@SunlightonMoon

3 ай бұрын

Aren't the s orbitals filled first, so helium would have a full s orbital and every other noble gases have a full p orbital, so I don't get what you are infering with the statement "when you consider the nobles as fully empty s orbital, not a full p orbital. Doesn't make sense in the slightest tbh

@jeezuhskriste5759

3 ай бұрын

You’re counting up to a full shell. The noble gasses aren’t 0s, they’re more like 10s.

@SunlightonMoon

3 ай бұрын

@@omargoodman2999 Interesting, if hydrogen is the north pole of sorts ,now the goal is to find the south pole of the periodic globe XD.

Great episode. I I've seen that chart many times and tried to figure out why things are where they are. You've given me whole year of chemistry in 8 minutes. This will also be one I'll come back to when I get confused about something. Thanks so much for stuffing my brain with more stuff.

The placement of Hydrogen in Group one is based on its electron configuration rather than its metallic characteristics. The term 'Alkali Metals' would seem to serve as a collective nickname for the elements within the group, as it highlights the obvious (their shared characteristic of forming alkaline solutions when reacting with water), but even if Hydrogen doesn’t exhibit such a trait, it doesn’t discount it from the group, as the actual name for the group is just 'group one'. I could, of course, be wrong, but that's my interpretation on this matter.

@Rocketsong

3 ай бұрын

Agreed, it's in Group 1 because it has 1 electron in the s sub-shell.

@AManWithAGODComplex

3 ай бұрын

​@@RocketsongAlso correct. I neglected to mention it.

In astronomy, anything besides hydrogen and helium is considered a metal. Also the shells are Hamiltonian for the Schrodinger equation, which gets messier as you add more protons Edit: matthewhafner in the comments pointed out that the Hamiltonian gets messy beyond h-1 (1 proton and 1 electron) as adding anything else creates a n-body problem which has to be solved numerically

@doktormcnasty

3 ай бұрын

I heard this about astronomy too but can't remember why it is the case.

@juliagreen423

3 ай бұрын

Woah what a fact! Do you have any more information or a source i could look up to learn more?:)

@silviavalentine3812

3 ай бұрын

@@doktormcnasty from what I can remember, there's two things. Hydrogen and helium are the only two that give a viable net energy output in fusion. That and a main sequence star with a higher proportion of these metals indicates that they're relatively young seeing as they were made from a prior generation of star's material (which have fused at the end of their life)

@darkstar.357

3 ай бұрын

Jupiter is full of metallic hydrogen

@ZeroOneInfinity

3 ай бұрын

In music, anything involving electric guitars and heavy drums is also known as metal

"There are at least three credible places you can stick it." is a great nerdy clap back.

That graphic of the periodic table at 1:00 confirmed that I'm not just gaslighting myself, within my 18 yearlife there did in fact use to be a bunch of elements without names

We did a project in high school AP chemistry where we re-arranged the Periodic table into a more circular, spiral shape, with hydrogen at the center. Which allowed hydrogen to be connected to all three groups.

3:12 yeah no my hs chemistry teacher ignored our complaints about the classroom smelling like gas and left us unattended when lighting Bunsen burners… surprised nothing ever went wrong in that class

6:14 Awesome Video! I do want to mention however that on this periodic table you are missing the most recent additions that have been known for a few years now, like Oganesson being element 118, etc.

This is something I remembered from elementary school, but completely forgot the details. It was great to be reminded of, so thank you! Great video!

Very good topic. Bravo. Its good to see Scishow still has unexplored topics 🎉

"There are at least three credible places you can stick it"

My perspective, understanding and knowledge of these dynamics all really just took a big bump upwards, with this breakdown/elucidation - BIG thanks for this gem. 👍

What about a big merged cell like a whole line of H Is this just a formatting problem? 🙆🏻‍♂️ Rules of the table mean that H has to go before everything else so a line maybe dashed border ☺️ Edit: this would be above He

“There are at least three credible places you can stick it.” That’s what she said.

@yashaswini1208

3 ай бұрын

👀😂

In 8th grade I objected to dissociation of water, complaining that H+ is a subatomic particle. Mr Rose studied me carefully for a moment then proceeded to explain about the Hydronium ion. Made an impression on him, he took me far beyond the regular lessons LOL.

You guys should do a video on neutronium. The former(?) Element Zero

@nickjc1999

3 ай бұрын

while neutrons absolutely detest forming bonds with other neutrons only (this is what neutronium is), we actually DO have something that serves as element 0! its when you get an electron to orbit a positively charged antimuon (muons are the heavier cousins of the electron) It doesnt exist for very long because muons are unstable, but it has 0 protons and would be able to do chemistry!

@nightwishlover8913

3 ай бұрын

They already have: kzread.info/dash/bejne/faaVxMmunLGXfJs.html&

As someone in chemistry teachers education, i was physically hurt by the graphic at 1:52, please fix that, it gives a very wring impression of how ionic compounds work and is a mental picture we actively want to prevent! Arguing for including it in the halogen group on the bounds that it "can form an H- Ion" is also bizarre. Hydrogen barely ever does that, and even Sodium *can* form a negative Ion. The chemical behaviour argument is way more solid imo

@janAlekantuwa

3 ай бұрын

Hydride occurs more often than hydrogen cations. The former exists in multiple reactive salts, while the latter only exists in particle accelerators and hydrogen plasma. "H+" is just a shorthand for "protonated solvent molecule," as naked protons don't exist if there is any atom with a lone electron pair nearby. Meanwhile, hydride actually exists as an ion

@gracetriendl721

3 ай бұрын

@@janAlekantuwa Thats a good point! Over all i still feel like the occurrence of hydride is way too low to make that a worthwhile argument.

@janAlekantuwa

3 ай бұрын

@@gracetriendl721 Yeah, it's definitely more of a supporting point rather than the main point of why hydrogen shouldn't be grouped with the alkali metals. I personally believe that the best way to tackle the Hydrogen Problem is to have it completely detached from the table entirely, as it really is in a category of its own. If we want to insist on having hydrogen be attached to the table because of the table's usefulness in showing periodic trends, then I would have to say that it belongs above carbon in group 14. Hydrogen is marginally more electronegative than carbon, the average carbanion has a pKb similar to that of hydride, and the character of bonds involving hydrogen is very similar to bonds involving carbon (covalent bonds to nonmetals and metalloids, highly polar covalent bonds to halogens, ionic bonds with most metals, and bonds teetering on the covalent/ionic boundary with lithium, beryllium, magnesium, and all metals in group 13, 14, and 15) Hell, I could even argue for hydrogen and helium to both be detached from the table, as helium is the only noble gas without a full p orbital, but helium shares enough properties with the other noble gases to warrant its placement atop group 18.

@Olympiadmaxx

3 ай бұрын

Could you please explain why that's a bad graphic, and perhaps even provide a better understanding?

@gracetriendl721

3 ай бұрын

@@janAlekantuwa Personally i think that its best left as it is, to keep the electrons in outer shell = Row of table rule (Except He, but bc that is so irrelevant in chemistry it doesnt matter imo), and in my experience understanding that hydrogen is just not like the other alkali metals is pretty intuitive. My point of view is very heavily influenced by me going into chemistry teaching tho

Only now does it finally occur to me why it's called a _periodic_ table. The repeating pattern of of the orbitals.

@tschadschi1010

3 ай бұрын

Public education has to be really shitty in your country...

"There are at least three credible places you can stick it." - Hydrogen, the rudest crudest element

I love how humans keep trying to define the universe and it keeps defying definition.

@stanpines9011

3 ай бұрын

that's usually what happens when you categorize stuff you don't fully understand yet though

@user-sd3ik9rt6d

3 ай бұрын

Where has science failed?

@NicholasHay1982

3 ай бұрын

"I love how humans keep trying to define the universe only to come up with even better definitions a little while later." There I fixed it for you.

@saladparfait

3 ай бұрын

​​@@user-sd3ik9rt6d Well to be fair, it was believed that lobotomy was a legitimate solution to some mental conditions and even some standard human characteristics previously misjudged as such.

@joao_gomes

3 ай бұрын

We just love patterns man

SciShow is one of my favourites. Great science, explained well. 👍

"There are 3 credible places you can stick it" lol,that made me giggle

Hey SciShow, can you do a video about the alternate types of graphics for organizing the elements?

@scaper8

3 ай бұрын

I'd have to look it up, but I'm pretty sure they have done a video on alternate periodic table forms.

@scaper8

3 ай бұрын

So, I was slightly right. They did do a video on some alternate tables and one on Mendeleev's table. Sadly, it was a pretty short list and a short run-down of each. If you want, though, I'll tey to link them (here's to hoping KZread's auto filters down cut me down): kzread.info/dash/bejne/oJ9hj7RmeardptI.htmlsi=_3GCIY-OBaMn8icM kzread.info/dash/bejne/X6upkq6iqLaooM4.htmlsi=wuCo85vejIz1JNji

I have always thought that helium was the element in the wrong position.

@sib3155

3 ай бұрын

Yea but healium acts like the rest of the group that it doesnt want to make compounds with other elements becouse its last plane with electrons is full

@lafamillecarrington

3 ай бұрын

I know that, but I was considering the electron configuration. Elements at the right of the periodic table have full p subshells, helium doesn't. @@sib3155

I lol'd at "electrons fill the shells in specific patterns". Back in the school my chemistry teacher, a retired researcher, taught me a "bus seating rule" which perfectly described these specific patterns. Later at the university, during the quantum mechanics crash course, I got very ill and spent almost a month recovering. So our prof decided to get me up to speed during the lab, she called me to the chalkboard and tasked me with finding out the electronic formula of Thorium. I had no idea in the slightest how to, but after a quick look at the periodic table in the lab I remembered my chemistry classes and, with a little bit of math just wrote the damned formula down. The prof was shocked, then she complained about "those blasted chemists who just can't learn" and we spent till the end of the class solving equations to come to the same formula. She also demanded me to teach her this "bus seating rule". I came out of that class feeling enlightened. Good times.

Thanks, I will use this vider as a revision of Periodicity in elements

This video reminds me of why I struggled with chemistry so much.

I wonder if the periodic table will have to change shape to more of a circular design around the hydrogen? Or some other arrangement.

And I continue to love your flamingo shirt!

I love and absolutely want that Flamingo Shirt.

Well, not to mention humorously, done!

The real reason it’s in the very top-left corner is because it would look ugly anywhere else.

Nice video, but a couple of comments (from a chemist): (1) There is really no such thing in chemistry as a H+ ion floating around, as that would be simply a proton. What we call "hydrogen ions" are usually solvated species. e.g. a "hydrogen ion" attaches itself covalently to a water molecule to form a hydronium ion, H3O+. (2)The periodic table is organized into blocks, according to where the outermost electron is found. The alkali and alkali earth metals are in the "s" block, the transition elements are in the "d" block, the lanthanides and actinides are in the "f" block, and the (mostly) non-metals to the right of the table are in the "p" block. The misfit is not so much hydrogen as it is helium. Helium is usually lumped with the other "inert gases" because it is, well, inert. But Ne, Ar, Kr, etc are p-block elements, whereas helium has no p-electrons: its electron configuration is 1s2. One could then argue that if H (1s1) is to be placed above lithium (2s1) based on electron configuration, then helium (1s2) should be placed above beryllium (2s2) beside hydrogen in the s block.

@benjaminmargulies1853

2 ай бұрын

leave hydrogen and helium as "islands" since they don't belong with the rest of the s block and hydrogen is the apex of the periodic table cone (though helium is decidedly a noble gas rather than an alkaline earth metal, hydrogen is just a loner)

You had me at "there are three credible places you can stick it."

Thanks!

@Ilovepaneer

Ай бұрын

How does this have no comments😂

So the stick that is (in the graphic)vbetween the elements is a bond, which is the sharing of an electron between the two? The swapping on electrons must also be simultaneous as well, because taking an electron out of the atom produces certain reactions, such as radiation etc.

Actually on my highschool table of elements H and He sat at the top in the middle, like a King and Queen :D

I have a doctorate and even though I knew what he was going to say, I came just to close my eyes and listen to white Neil DeGrasse Tyson

@SciShow - while I know a little humour should be allowed: What is going on with elements 110 to 115 @1:00 in this video?

@FishOfTheSea

3 ай бұрын

That's actually their names lol

@idjles

3 ай бұрын

@@FishOfTheSeaold stock photo.

@FishOfTheSea

3 ай бұрын

@@idjles they've been updated?

@CerberusTenshi

3 ай бұрын

​​​@@FishOfTheSea Yes, they have been. Darmstadtium. Ds 110. Roentgenium. Rg 111. Copernicium. Cn 112. Nihonium. Nh 113. Flerovium. Fl 114. Moscovium. Mc 115. Livermorium. Lv 116. Tennessine. Ts 117. Oganesson. Of 118. These are elements that have only been ever created in labs, often with a lifetime of milliseconds. And like a few atoms at a time. 110 used to Ununnillium, 111 Unununium, etc. Basically justLatin for "element 110" etc.

@Okapi8

3 ай бұрын

Those were placeholder names for undiscovered/ unamed elements. The last 4 elements were only named in 2016!

I watched a video a while back that said the original periodic table was more of an expanding spiral, and trying to arrange that into a rectangular grid doesn't fully capture it's relation to the elements around it. I see hydrogen as kinda stretching across the entire periodic table over to helium.

Great video. I never heard any of this and I even failed college chemistry.

Hydrogen moment

Fits perfectly. The beautiful symmetry of one proton and one electron is a very belonging element at the beginning that we see how it's symmetry is broken with all its isotopes and all other elements following it. Hydrogen is the mother of Periodic table

I have a teaching model sized periodic table in my room. It's always gonna be there!!

If you layed on a big concrete block that was on top of 100 mattresses, would it be softer than laying on the concrete on the ground? You would still be laying on concrete so would you feel lighter on the one with the mattresses underneath?

Hydrogen is the single duplo block. You can pit it anywhere.

Solution: Put hydrogen in the middle and colour it in 3 different colours to show that it can be in the alkaline halogens and carbon groups.

0:42 I've tried that argument before. Didn't work too well.

It’s just organized by energy level and orbitals. Hydrogen is the least filled 1s valence element, so it’s on the left. Helium is the most filled 1s valence element, so it’s on the right. The trends on the table are helpful but the placements are not due to extrinsic properties of the elements

Hydrogen is under no obligation to make sense to us.

I AM SO SORRY TO TELL YOU, THIS VIDEO HAS 56 VIEWS AND I AM NOT FIRST!!

Ah, my high school textbook, 20 years ago, had a really crafty solution: H was in the upper period, of course... but it was in the middle, as it was being used as the example of what the different numbers and symbols around each element meant, and so it needed the extra space. And it wasn't centered, so hydrogen didn't quite fall within any group.

Something I’ve learned through my limited years of science is the fact humans greatest weakness is the need to put everything in neat categories. Hydrogen is the best example. None of us can accept that hydrogen definition without fighting that it’s not mentioning something important. Science just boils down to “this is the easiest way for us to do something. So that’s how we do it” which is why hydrogen ions (and basic electrons) just show up in every type of science. Hydrogen deserves its own cataglory. Not because it can’t fit into a single definition, but because we are so obsessed with defining things that hydrogen is limited by our ability to define it. We need to accept things are multifaceted. And if we need a defintion, we need to describe “this is the practical (insert science) definition” and elaborate on it.

Also carbon. What even is carbon?

@patfre

3 ай бұрын

Carbon is life

@AquibMohammedAyman

3 ай бұрын

Carbon is us. We are Carbon. It's a way of life. It is the life

@B.D.F.

3 ай бұрын

It’s element #6 because it has 6 protons and 6 electrons (and typically 6 neutrons, although sometimes more).

@mikeoxmall69420

3 ай бұрын

Carbon is my cooking

@samstarlight160

3 ай бұрын

Why? Who's asking? Who sent you!?

I'm not convinced hydrogen is an element. It's a lone, wandering proton that picked up an electron buddy (which is very easy to do in our universe). "Hydrogen" is how protons act left to their own devices.

@rheiagreenland4714

3 ай бұрын

Ah, but what about deuterium or protium? By the way both can be true

I did a whole degree in Chemistry and ever thought of or seen this side of Hydrogen before. Very interesting!

That's because there's room for two electrons in the s shell, and six electrons in the p shell... and ten in d, and fourteen in f. So Hydrogen, with one out of two electrons, has one extra from zero (like lithium), is missing one from two (like fluorine) and has as many extra as it is missing, since one is half of two (like carbon, because four is half of eight, two plus six, because the s and p shells are both going in its row). The d shell makes the transition metals, and the f shell makes the rare earths, so it's not like the shape of the periodic table only changes for Hydrogen.

You should use the WQuantum Periodic Table. The 4 parameters that determine the properties of an element: The size of the ion. the charge, relatin between the former anmd finally the type of electon orbital involved.

Hydride ions are fairly rare, as chemists do experiments where water is a solvent or reagent, in which case we're talking about H+ (the hydrogen ion or Brønsted-Lowry acid ion). However, it is correct that hydrogen is the odd man out as it only has one orbital to fill electrons; the 1S orbital. However, hydrogen alone can act as an acid or base, and often is found with period 2 non-metal atoms with covalent bonds; beryllium hydride (BeH2), methane; CH4, ammonia NH3, water H2O and the extremely potent mineral acid, hydrofluoric acid HF. The weird thing is that the extremely common water is quite stable and relatively unreactive next to highly caustic ammonia and the even more powerfully reactive (and dangerous to handle) hydrofluoric acid. Hydrogen is by far the most abundant atom in your body and the most abundant element in the universe.

I knew that Hydrogen was both listed sometimes above the Halogens instead of Alkali metals, but I didn’t know people were also suggesting trying to put it above Carbon. It’s definitely a bit weird, but totally makes sense

I mean, these are just combinatorial problems in a way. the s-Orbital is special in that there is only one "orientation" of it (it's spherically symmetric, so the corresponding orientation is just "does not apply") so there are fewer possibilities than for all higher orbitals which *do* have multiple possible orientations (px, py, pz for the next shell, each orthogonal to the others) In terms of electrons, hydrogen is sorta its own opposite partner (in the same sense as, like, Lithium and Fluorite being opposite, one loving to give away its electron, the other being super electron greedy) which also is why it ends up *in the middle* between those two groups in terms of how much it likes to give or take electrons. It's "more symmetric" than all other atoms in that combinatorial sense, so there are fewer *unique* ways of connecting up to it than with anything else. So imo the "right" answer would essentially be a Venn-diagram between those three groups, where there are *no* elements in two groups (those parts of the venn are just empty) but hydrogen is in the middle with all three. Of course, that's tricky to design for in an otherwise really neat table. Though I like the fully expanded helical wraparound version of that table. Perhaps in that version, which is embedded into 3D space anyways, the hydrogen atom could essentially "cap off" the top of that table such that it's connected to all three groups.

I think hovering it above carbon with dotted lines to Groups 1 and 17 makes the most sense functionally but also prolly the lease sense visually. I think hovering over Group 1 (but not touching) makes the most sense visually.

"You have a whole row! might as well fill all of it yourself!"

Thanks. If things always fit neatly into our attempts to categorize them, that would be really weird. tavi.

Fantastic video

It's a conundrum like the number 2, being both prime and even.

It's like Lego enthusiast having a philosophical question about the 1x1 block, because it can fit with an L-shape block to form a 2x2 block, or go at the end of a 1x3 block to make it an even 1x4 block. 🤔 It's just a handy little "gap filler" that we owe our existence to.

6:16 > Says stuff about Dubnium > Shows a table with Dubnium with a provisional name

you should be doing voice -overs for animated movies

I thought this video would either be about technician (the only isolated radioactive element) or neutonium (atomic number 0 and debatable whether or not it even should be considered an element)

The Law of Small Numbers strikes again

"There are at least 3, credible places you can stick it." 😂😂😂 True on so many levels.

This was really interesting.

What always gets me is now think about if we find a new state of matter or something else wild like that do these elements then hold all their properties or does it turn into a random cluster cluck and no one knows what's a noble gas or reactive anymore.

@jaspertuin2073

3 ай бұрын

Well, the thing is as long as it doesn't get too exotic, it will always be like stuff we find on the periodic table. But at a certain point the elements will become too heavy to be practical in any sense. By Exotic matter I meant stuff like dark matter (which we dont know much about) or nuclear/degenerate matter, predicted in things like neutron stars.. The latter might be interesting to learn more about since it really stretches the concept of elements and matter in general :)

One of the first things we had to do for AP chemistry was memorize most of the periodic table (think anything after like uranium or lead forget which was basically extra credit) and as the year went on I realized how important it was and yeah, hydrogen is definitely a weird element.

There's a fourth credible place you could stick it depending on how angry you've made a chemist that day.

Ended up degree in EE and career in Aerospace. But I owe it all to teachers like Mr Rose who recognize and cultivate my insatiable desire to Know an Understand :)

Anyone else say "Giggity!" Out loud when he said "There are at least 3 credible places where you can stick it."? 🤔 No...? Just me...? Ok...

About 01:45 _All chemical reactions are just electrons swapping places._ No. This only holds for the redox reactions where "ox" stands for oxidation i.e. one partner giving electrons partly or wholly away and "red" stands for reduction i.e. another partner taking them partly or wholly. There are still other reactions like protolysis where protons are exchanged.

AQA (an exam board in the UK) put it above iron. Absolutely no clue why.

1:21 Anyone got a good explanation of this I can listen to at work? Genuinely curious about why this is.