Talk:Lawrencium

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Chemistry Portal This article is supported by the Elements WikiProject, which gives a central approach to the chemical elements on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing this article, or visit the project page for more details. This article has also been selected for the Version 0.5 release of Wikipedia.
	This article is also supported by WikiProject Chemistry.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Article changed over to new Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements format by maveric149. Elementbox converted 10:14, 15 July 2005 by Femto (previous revision was that of 04:47, 23 June 2005).

Contents 1 Information Sources 2 Talk 3 Electron configuration typo? 4 Decay of 262-Lr 5 speculative chemical/physical properties

[edit] Information Sources

Some of the text in this entry was rewritten from Los Alamos National Laboratory - Lawrencium. Additional text was taken directly from the Elements database 20001107 (via dict.org), and WordNet (r) 1.7 (via dict.org). Data for the table were obtained from the sources listed on the subject page and Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements but were reformatted and converted into SI units.

---

[edit] Talk

---

Why did the symbol change from Lw to Lr in '63?

[edit] Electron configuration typo?

Shouldn't the electron configuration for Lawrencium be [Rn]5f¹⁴ 6d¹ 7s²? I'm not a chemist (just studying it en route to an engineering degree), but that is how it is shown on other chemistry sites.--H-ko 04:55, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Reference is electron configurations of the elements (data page). They're all more or less educated guesses, I guess. NIST's data seems the most recent and reliable. Femto 10:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the information; I suppose the differences are due to the uncertainty.--H-ko 09:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the first comment : Lr has an electronic configuration 7s2 5f14 6d1, according to Klechkowsky rule, and not 6p1. I think there is a mistake in electron configurations of the elements (data page). Darrigan

There is no mistake: the electron configuration is the one reported in Phys. Rev. A 52, 291-296 (1995) and comes from relativistic ab initio calculations. The Klechkowsky rule is empirical and has exceptions. Real electron configurations normally come from spectroscopic observations, but in this case the best we have, as far as I know, are these ab initio calculations. --Itub 17:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Decay of 262-Lr

I removed the statement that ²⁶²Lr decays to ²⁵⁶No. Perhaps it should be ²⁵⁸Md (alpha decay) but in any case emission of significant/majority amounts of ⁶H in spontaneous fissions seems very improbable. Dajwilkinson 01:50, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] speculative chemical/physical properties

I've deleted the following text:

(in elementbox) appearance: unknown, probably silvery
white or metallic gray

(in elementbox) phase: presumably a solid

(under Notable characteristics, appearance is), however it is most likely silvery-white or gray and metallic

Since ability to produce more than a few atoms is so limited, these are mostly untestable assertions (and furthermore, there is no citation even for the speculations).Kingdon 21:44, 11 February 2007 (UTC)