Periodic Table The Elements Chart Long Form. Periodic Table The Elements Chart Long: Fill & Download for Free

This is the easiest to understand if we answer your questions in a different order.1: It seems to me likely that there are many elements we haven't even discovered.So, this is the fundamental misunderstanding here. You see, there aren’t elements that we haven’t discovered (not stable ones anyway).An element is a very simple thing: it is an atom with a certain number of protons in it. An atom with one proton is Hydrogen. An atom with two protons is Helium. Three, is lithium.This is very important, because it means that the elements are enumerable (countable). There isn’t anything “between” hydrogen and helium. There’s no room to squeeze in any other element, any more than there’s room to squeeze in an integer between one and two. (And no, that’s not what an isotope is. Stoppit.)If you look at the table below, the atomic number is listed above each element:As you can see, all the elements are accounted for, from 1 to 118.Now, due to a number of factors (electrostatic repulsion, radioactive decay, and orbital levels respectively), elements further down the chart are:Less stable (The last stable element is considered to be Lead (Element 82).)Rarer (75% of the universe is Hydrogen, and just under 25% is Helium. The rest fall in a fraction of a percent.)Less chemically reactiveFor example, Oganesson, element 118, has a half life of under a millisecond. It is so rare that it has never been found in nature, and it doesn’t even last long enough to form chemical bonds.Therefore, even if there are elements above 118, there can be no creatures made of those elements, because you would never find enough of that element to make them, and they wouldn’t last long enough to be considered alive even if you did.2: Isn't this a very Earth-centric view?Unless aliens aren’t made of matter at all, then no, this is not Earth-centered at all. Since all the matter we have ever seen is made of elements, there’s no reason to suppose that aliens ought to be built of anything else.We might as well say “aliens are made of magic,” if you’re going to claim they’re made of something we’ve never even heard of and don’t believe exists.Since we are aware of all the stable elements, the question is not “could an alien be made of something else,” but rather “what else could an alien be made of?”3: Why do we assume that extraterrestrial life is carbon-based?Now, this is where the question gets fascinating.It turns out that the creators of the periodic table weren’t idiots. They grouped the elements very deliberately based on their chemical properties. Simplistically, they grouped the elements by column, each indicating roughly the number of chemical bonds available.The rightmost column has no available bonds, the ones to either side have 1 (the table wraps around), the ones to either side of those have 2, and so on.Let’s start by looking at why Carbon works:As you can see, Carbon is very versatile because it has 4 open “connectors” (it is tetravalent). To form any sort of stable chain (necessary for structures larger than a few atoms long), you need two slots dedicated to holding on to your neighbors.Think about it like making a human chain:If every person has only 1 hand, they can only make pairs of two (I hold your hand, you hold mine, and neither of us has any hands left over).If every person has 2 hands, they can can make a long chain, but that’s it. No variety, no way to change things up.Three hands is better than either of the other two, because it can make chains with variations held in the third hand. But having three hands is strictly worse than4 hands. This is the jackpot.Look back at the periodic table. You’ll see that Carbon has 4 slots in either direction. It’s exactly halfway away from the rightmost column, whichever way you count. (B, Be, Li, He), or (N, O, F, Ne).This is why the most complex structures are made out of Carbon.Now, if you look at the table, you’ll see that there’s only one other element which matches the criterion we’re looking for.This is why most scientists theorize that, if we ever discover a non-carbon life form, it will be made of silicon chains.Functionally, however, this is all irrelevant. Few people who are not trained biochemists (including myself) could tell you the difference between a Silicon-based life-form and a Carbon-based one.The truth is, you’re grasping for some deep fundamental redesign of reality when a few minor tweaks will do.For example, why not carbon? What, exactly, are you hoping that silicon will do that carbon won’t? As you can see from even a quick glance at the life on earth, carbon is capable of a helluva lot.CarbonCarbonCarbonCarbonAs I said, aside from a very select few biochemists, nobody even knows what carbon-based implies.It’s pointless trying to pretend that finding silicon-based will “change everything” when nobody even really understands what “everything” means to begin with.99% of the really cool species you’re thinking of are either entirely possible with carbon-based creatures, or else violate some other law of physics.Either way, switching to silicon won’t help you very much.EDIT:Lots of people are asking me about Germanium, Lead, and Tin.Although these are in the same column as carbon, if you look at the table, you'll see that none of those three elements are four from the left side. There is an entirely new section to their left.This is related to the orbital levels I mentioned briefly at the top. Lower rows of the periodic table have more charge, and consequently require more complex geometries in order to achieve stability. But this also limits the number of strong bonds they can form, making them less ideal as a basis for life.

So that elements with similar properties fall into easily recognizeable groups. There are amny ways to arrange a list of elements, but the now common, "long form periodic table" is most useful to chemists. When I went to school, the short dorm was most common and made little sense to me. There were both "A" and "B" groups of each number. Then I found a long form periodic chart and many things made a lot more sense to me. The long form gradually beame more popular. One year I had students make other arrangements of the periodic chart and defend them. (That was back when teaching was about helping students with basic comprehension, not just test coaching.) Many useful arrangements are possible, but the one common today is the most useful for most chemists.

Chemical formulas are shorthand ways to represent the number and type of atoms in a compound or molecule, such as H2O for water or NaCl for sodium chloride, or salt. There are several rules to follow when writing chemical formulas, so the process can be rather complex. The more you familiarize yourself with the periodic table and the names of common compounds, the easier it will be to learn how to write chemical formulas.Use the Periodic TableTo write chemical formulas, acquaint yourself with chemical symbols, most easily found on the periodic table of elements. The periodic table is a chart of all the known elements, and it often includes both the full name of each element and its symbol, such as H for hydrogen or Cl for chlorine. Some of these symbols are obvious, such as O for oxygen, while others are not quite as intuitive with their English name; Na, for example, stands for sodium, but the symbol derives from natrium, the Latin word for sodium. You can use a periodic table to reference the symbols you can’t memorize.Identifying Chemical SymbolsBefore you can write your chemical formula, you need to write down the symbol of each atom present in your molecule or compound. You might be given a name of a compound, such as sodium chloride, and you must determine which atoms are present. Write Na for sodium and Cl for chloride, a form of the element chlorine, which combined create the formula NaCl for sodium chloride, or salt. Covalent compounds created from two nonmetals are easy to write from their name. Prefixes might be present to indicate more than one atom. For example, carbon dioxide’s formula is CO2 because di specifies two atoms.Determining the ValenceIonic compounds, created from a metal and a nonmetal, are more complex than covalent compounds because they involve charged atoms. You might notice that some periodic tables list valences, or a positive or negative charge. Cations, or positive ions, are found in group 1, with a +1 charge; group 2, with a +2 charge; and the transition elements, found in groups 3 through 12. Groups 13, 14 and 18 have variable charges, and groups 15 through 17 are anions, meaning they have negative charges.Balancing the ChargesFinding the valence of each element is essential because you need to balance your chemical formula, so it has no charge. For example, write the symbols for magnesium oxide along with their respective charges. Magnesium, or Mg, has a +2 charge, and oxide, which refers to oxygen, has a -2 charge. Since the sum of +2 and -2 is O, you end up with only one atom each of magnesium and oxygen. Combine the symbols to form MgO, the formula for magnesium oxide.Writing the FormulaChemical formulas use subscripts to tell how many of each atom are present in a molecule or compound. In the previous example, you would write MgO because there is only one atom of each element; notice you do not use the subscript 1 for only one atom. On the other hand, to balance magnesium chloride, written MgCl2, you need two chlorine atoms per one magnesium atom; the 2 is written as a subscript next to Cl to indicate two chlorine atoms.Additional TipsAs you practice writing chemical formulas, you will become familiar with chemical nomenclature, or terms used to describe compounds. Elements ending in -ide, for example, can be found in groups 15 through 17 on the table. Roman numerals in parentheses, as seen in iron(II), denote charges, a +2 in this case. When polyatomic ions, or groups of atoms like hydroxide, written OH, are combined in a compound, they are put in parentheses in chemical formulas, as seen in Al(OH)3, the formula for aluminum hydroxide.