Misplaced Pages

Transfermium Wars: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:38, 31 July 2002 editMav (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users77,874 edits wikified← Previous edit Revision as of 23:39, 31 July 2002 edit undoJeronimo (talk | contribs)8,556 editsm Niels Bohr -> nielsbohrium, right?Next edit →
Line 13: Line 13:
The names preferred by the Russians were The names preferred by the Russians were
:104 - kurchatovium :104 - kurchatovium
:105 - neilsbohrium :105 - nielsbohrium


In 1994, the IUPAC proposed the following names In 1994, the IUPAC proposed the following names

Revision as of 23:39, 31 July 2002

The names for the chemical elements 104 to 108 have been the subject of a major controversy starting in the 1960s which was only finally resolved in 1997. At issue was the convention that elements are named by their discoverers which led to controversy when multiple groups claimed discovery simulatenously. The three groups which conflicted over elemental naming were an American group in Berkeley, a Russian group at Dubna, and a German group.

The names preferred by the Americans were

104 - rutherfordium
105 - hahnium
106 - seaborgium

The names preferred by the Russians were

104 - kurchatovium
105 - nielsbohrium

In 1994, the IUPAC proposed the following names

104 - dubnium
105 - joliotiumm
106 - rutherfordium
107 - bohrium
108 - hahnium
109 - meitnerium

This was objected to by the American Chemical Society.

Finally in 1997, the following names were agreed to

104 - rutherfordium
105 - dubnium
106 - seaborgium
107 - bohrium
108 - hassium
109 - meitnerium