Talk:Untriseptium

Last possible element?
I read that there cannot be any more element past this one (according to our current understanding of physics, of course). May a have an answer on this? David Latapie (✒ | @) 14:36, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Solve the equation for a nucleus of atomic number 138, noting that the 1s e- velocity now exceeds the speed of light in a vacuum c, which is a no-no for ordinary particles. Snarfevs 14:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * If you view things non-relativistically, there is nothing wrong with exceeding c. If you view things relativistically, you don't use the Schrödinger equation in the first place; you use the Dirac equation. If you mix up non-relativistic and relativistic argumentation, it's no wonder that there will be inconsistencies. Icek (talk) 09:10, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Does it make any sense to extrapolate the Bohr model to conclude that Z=137 is the limit? Seems that a QED analysis is required. After all, the "velocity of an electron" is non-sensical in an atom. This is a classical notion. 65.119.39.220 20:59, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I think it make sense, if you speak in terms of energy levels instead of "velocities". The energy level of 1s orbital when Z=137, becomes of the order of the rest mass of the electron or positron (511 keV). The dense electric field near a nucleus with Z >= 137, easily produces electron/positron pairs, with electron capture and positron emission (see "virtual particle" and "pair production" ). Furthermore, the high Coulomb electric repulsive energy within the nucleus needs to be screened by more and more neutrons, which destabilises it (see Why nuclei decay?, see also the growing electrostatic term in the Bethe-Weizsäcker formula). Actually I suspect the effect may appear even before, say from Z > 128, because of the greater value for the Fine Structure Constant at high energy levels. Philip Dalleur Phdalleur 17:48, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Requested move 20 October 2016

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Technical close. Untriseptium is a redirect. See WP:RfD if you're serious, but I think I smell a troll. wbm1058 (talk) 17:30, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Untriseptium → Feynmanium – Official name 108.65.81.208 (talk) 17:03, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose. Where is your reliable citation for this? Actually this just doesn't make sense anyway. The current page is a redirect anyway. Both pages mentioned redirect to sections of Extended periodic table. If you suggest that this page should redirect to the target that Feynmanium redirects to, consider WP:RFD instead. — Andy W. ( talk ) 18:50, 20 October 2016 (UTC) struck and amended 23:01, 20 October 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.