Dictionary.com

On Saturday the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry proposed the names of two new elements. Currently element number 114 and element number 116 do not have official names in the periodic table of elements. The elements were previously known as ununquadium and ununhexium. Those long, unpronounceable words were the temporarily used systematic element names. The names are generated from their atomic number, but like most things in physics, the procedure is incomprehensible to us laypeople. If you’re curious, the guidelines are further explained in Principles of Chemical Nomenclature.

Why is there such confusion over what to call these elements? There wasn’t always such brouhaha over what to name elements. The common elements, like carbon, helium, and iron, were named for common things. Carbon referred to coal or charcoal; helium comes from the Greek word helios meaning sun; iron dates back to the Proto-Germanic meaning “heavy metal.” Unlike common elements, these newer elements were synthesized in a lab; they are not observed in nature. They are very unstable and quickly dissolve into other elements. (What exactly makes an element? It is a pure chemical substance that is distinguished by the number of protons in its nucleus. Hydrogen has 1 proton; helium has 2; and so on.)

Since these new elements were invented, so to speak, their names cannot rely on a clear lineage of vocabulary. Rather, the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry must choose names for them.

For example, the IUPAC honored Pierre and Marie Curie by naming atomic element 96 curium in 1948. And just last month three new elements were christened: Darmstadtium, Roentgenium, Copernicium. Roentgenium and Copernicium were named after influential scientists, and Darmstadtium honors the town in Germany where the element was first discovered.

The proposed names for element number 114 and element number 116 are both based on the laboratories that were essential in their creation. Livermorium was first observed at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, outside of San Francisco, and flerovium was created in Russia’s Flerov Laboratory of Nuclear Reactions. The Flerov Lab was named for a Russian physicist, Georgiy N. Flerov who discovered the spontaneous fission of uranium. The Livermore Labs, on the other hand, were named for the town they are located in: Livermore, California. Livermore received its name from a rancher, Robert Livermore, who immigrated to California from England in 1816. He wasn’t a physicist, but his name is now famous throughout the science community because of the lab that bears it.

Why aren’t these names official yet? The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry has opened the discussion to the public for feedback. According to a press release, “The Provisional Recommendations will be made available in the very near future for Public Comment for five months and will also be sent to expert referees.”

What do you think about the proposed names? What other names should be considered?

Shutterfly Lowered to Neutral – Analyst Blog

Zacks Investment Research – Analyst Blog February 16, 2011 | Zacks Equity Research Shutterfly Lowered to Neutral – Analyst Blog We recently downgraded our rating on Shutterfly Inc. (SFLY) from Outperform to Neutral. The rating was downgraded primarily due to lower seasonal demand, which would lead to losses in the first quarter and siften the impact of the WMSG acquisition.

Fourth Quarter Flashback Shutterfly’s adjusted fourth-quarter 2010 earnings of $1.18 per share fsurpassed the Zacks Consensus Estimate of 95 cents. The company’s earnings also topped its own guidance range of 97 cents to $1.04. this web site shutterfly coupon codes

In the quarter under review, net revenue increased 27% year over year to $166.2 million surpassing the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $154.0 million and the guidance range of $148.5 million to $153.5 million provided by the company. The rise was primarily driven by improved revenues from personalized products.

Increased usage of digital cameras combined with easy accessibility of high-speed Internet provides significant expansion potential for the company. Product innovation, focus on developing a successful commercial printing business, strategic partnerships with retailers and opportunistic acquisition also augur well for its growth.

Moreover, the first half of 2011 will likely see the introduction of a new photo book platform. In fact, post earnings, management indicated that it expects continued improvement in non-holiday growth rates.

On the downside, Shutterfly’s business is highly seasonal, with a large proportion of net revenue, net income and operating cash flows coming during the fourth quarter, which is the holiday season. More than 50% of fiscal net revenue are generated in the fourth quarter.

Since, Shutterfly’s upcoming quarters are seasonally weak, we remain cautious on the stock. Shutterfly expects to post a GAAP loss of 26-30 cents per share for the first quarter. Excluding one-time items, losses are expected to range between 14-17 cents.

The recent WMSG acquisition, which is expected to strengthen Shutterfly’s struggling printing business, is still in the early stages of business development and is likely to take some time to materialize.

Agreement – Estimate Revisions Over the last 30 days, 6 out of 10 analysts lowered their estimates for the first quarter of 2011 while none moved upward. Similarly, 5 out of 11 analysts slashed their estimates for second quarter 2011 to reflect the lower seasonal demand and only one analyst ? raised the same. go to website shutterfly coupon codes

Magnitude – Consensus Estimate Trend During the last 30 days, estimates fell 8 cents and 3 cents, respectively, for the first and second quarters. The current Zacks Consensus Estimates are a loss of 25 cents for the first quarter reflecting a year-over-year decline of 37.22% and a loss of 21 cents for the second quarter reflecting a year-over-year growth of 4.96%.

Shutterfly remains a leading provider of Internet-based social expression and personal publishing service, but we also see faster-than-expected obsolescence of its print photo business due to social media sharing and faster-than-anticipated adoption of home photo printers.

The company’s competitors include LookSmart Ltd. (LOOK), Snapfish owned by Hewlett-Packard Company (HPQ) and Photoworks and Webshots brands of American Greetings Corp. (AM). These companies offer certain services similar to those of Shutterfly and in some cases at lower price points.

“SFLY” Free Stock Analysis: Buy? Sell? Hold?

“HPQ” Free Stock Analysis: Buy? Sell? Hold?

“LOOK” Free Stock Analysis: Buy? Sell? Hold?

“AM” Free Stock Analysis: Buy? Sell? Hold?

Zacks Investment Research Zacks Equity Research

132 Comments

  1. Zane -  January 9, 2012 - 7:00 am

    Great scott! They should at least wait ’til I’m a famous chemist before they go all willy-nilly naming stuff! Don’t they like the sound of “Zanium”? Huh? Eh?

    Reply
  2. Ric Del -  December 19, 2011 - 9:37 pm

    I believe the names are perfect. I mean, there is really only one other option that is naming them after a person because the elements only last for up to less than a second and they take hours just to make an isolated atom of the element so I don’t see many other options

    Reply
  3. DEMACIA!!!!! -  December 18, 2011 - 6:52 pm

    lol Dustin LachlanA and Bookworm all you guys have chemistry in school like me. I’ve always been wondering why they never changed the names of the three-letter symbol elements (UUQ=ununquadium), now i know. My three-year old textbook says ununquadium in it and i was wondering if they had changed the name yet. Funny that the most relevant comments are by eight graders.

    Reply
  4. the guy with the face -  December 15, 2011 - 1:57 pm

    how about “nonexistium?”

    Reply
  5. LachlanA -  December 11, 2011 - 6:10 pm

    @Dustin
    FINALLY! someone, who is practically the same as me has the same opinion as me that these people are being very, very immature.
    and yes Madcom, we both referred to you.

    Reply
  6. ATOM-2-Element | BLOGCHI@mayopia.com -  December 11, 2011 - 10:31 am

    [...] or ‘One Adam Twelve’ should be Elementary to Watson.  — It’s a Shame Tom Lehrer wasn’t Consulted. — Though Harry [...]

    Reply
  7. Raymond -  December 9, 2011 - 10:21 am

    These –as all have been– should be named after the means by which they are readily-rediscoverable… by anybody… Helium wasn’t just discovered in the photospectrum of the sun– it, is always, discoverable, in the photospectrum of the sun, and by anybody anywhere the sun can be seen– which is basically everywhere for scientists on the Earth…

    So, Let’s have it (Let us, have it)… goldaluminumslammonium or aual-slammonium, tevatronium, onepointsixtevatronium … mineblastonium, administronium, sovietunium-288, unobservium-345, impossiblium-346, neversseeyouagainium-337, insanitarium-338, deepseizium-339, politiconium-340….

    Reply
  8. Emoxziita Rodriguez -  December 9, 2011 - 10:18 am

    “Creating “elements” in a lab strikes of creating a baby in a test tube: is it really human?”

    Good point, particularly as they dissolve instantaneously. I’d solve the problem by having a rule that if it isn’t stable enough to exist for longer than a moment, then don’t bother naming it.

    The only that this will do is make high school science schools memorised useless stuff and cause more people to say that science isn’t relevant in the modern education system.

    Reply
  9. Emoxziita Rodriguez -  December 9, 2011 - 10:17 am

    porqe…?

    Reply
  10. Chemistry Major -  December 9, 2011 - 9:58 am

    I would have mentioned this in my chemistry classes if I had the chance. It is pleasing to see my favorite lexicon website merge with the jargon of my career path.

    Reply
  11. Princess Celestia -  December 9, 2011 - 9:32 am

    What about Loyalty, Generosity, Laughter, Honesty, Kindness, and Magic?

    Reply
  12. TheBeatles -  December 9, 2011 - 8:43 am

    iumium would be the best.

    Reply
  13. -TROUBLETIME- -  December 9, 2011 - 7:54 am

    how about naming them mordinium, sibelonium, kristellanium, and lordanium.

    Reply
  14. Jonathan -  December 9, 2011 - 7:52 am

    What about loranium, mordinium, circilium , and kristellanit

    Reply
  15. Radiance -  December 9, 2011 - 7:42 am

    Well, there’s always “Unobtainium”.

    Reply
  16. Emoxziita Rodriguez -  December 9, 2011 - 7:12 am

    why..???

    Reply
  17. SK -  December 9, 2011 - 6:46 am

    The Bookworm’s tip is great to bear in mind!

    Reply
  18. SK -  December 9, 2011 - 6:45 am

    woww, it’s really very interesting!!
    i don’t understand nothing about chemist, hehe. But i enjoyed so much! i read some comments and i liked Bookworm and Dustin’s comments.

    BOOKWORM SAID:

    They need to have the “unun”’s because without them, it changes the meaning of the name. “Ununquadium” means “one one five”, or one-hundred five. “Ununhexium” means “one one six”, or one-hundred six. If it was just “quadium”, it would mean five, which is boron, and if it was just “hexium”, it would be six, which is carbon.

    Good explanation!
    ————————-

    DUSTIN SAID:

    I’m surprised many of these comments are so immaturely phobic of knowledge. (Yes, I’m talking to you “Madcom”). I’m in eighth grade and I find the elements and their naming very relevant and interesting. While I know not everyone may have the same passion for chemistry as I do, but to naively label something as boring because it has a word or two that you may not be able to pronounce is ridiculous. I’m hoping that these people are still children or adolescents and have a chance to grow up a bit.

    It’s important to consider!!

    Reply
  19. UnUnPentium-Nerd -  December 9, 2011 - 5:33 am

    I like the names and the symbolism behind them so i think they should stay the same.

    Reply
  20. MENTORC -  December 9, 2011 - 5:19 am

    what does these two ELEMENTS means to us all, i didn’t found it very EASY to understand, can someone pls more about this ELEMENTS to me

    Reply
  21. ghulam nabi -  December 9, 2011 - 2:28 am

    I would like to named these elements on the basis of the names of those chemists who discovered them rather than on the basis of lab names

    Reply
  22. zek -  December 9, 2011 - 1:53 am

    how about we leave the science to the scientists and just never say anything about this again to avoid the embarrassment of not knowing anything about what youre posting

    Reply
  23. zek -  December 9, 2011 - 1:50 am

    you idiots.

    you cant name an element after its characteristics if it splits apart in less than a second! they cant gather data in so short an amount of time and even if they could, they probably cant produce more than a few atoms! what do you want to call it? explosium?? i think not..

    and the morons that think that removing the “unun” clearly dont know anything about.. gee language i guess. the ununhexium literally means “116th element” if you remove the “unun” it becomes “6th element”

    USE YOUR BRAINS, PEOPLE

    Reply
  24. chemist grace -  December 9, 2011 - 1:24 am

    im a chemist and i was really having fun with you guys writing in here!! salute to @hellboy and to everyone who were saying positive comments! i have learned a lot also! to those who were saying negative things, have a time to read your chem books!! Chemistry is the central science and there will be no everything in this world without chem!

    Reply
  25. David -  December 8, 2011 - 9:40 pm

    o.k. So if you found this article boring I have two questions: 1) Why did you read the article 2) Would you have found the article boring if the element was named after YOU? I didn’t think so.

    Reply
  26. M. Gul -  December 8, 2011 - 7:36 pm

    I think the best way of naming is to name them after the discoverer or place of discovery but the name should be short nd pronouncable, easy to remember.

    Reply
  27. Stupid Smart kid -  December 8, 2011 - 6:26 pm

    hellllllo how about we take out the “ium” from the end. quad and hex sound great now don’t they?

    and enough with explaining the “unun”s. its completely boring and annoyying.
    so fellow homosapiens, how about we appreciate the world and just forget about unun’s and ium’s.
    peace squirrels

    Reply
  28. Dr. Element -  December 8, 2011 - 6:07 pm

    Ha ha. Very funny. Make it more interesting!

    Reply
  29. Alice -  December 8, 2011 - 5:13 pm

    About the elements’ names, I thought I’d mention that the Un- prefix is Greek whereas the bi-, trin-, quad-, pent-, hex-, sept-, oct-, and non- prefixes are Latin.

    Reply
  30. yunus berk -  December 8, 2011 - 5:04 pm

    i am a turkish. did u know that. i love elements. i am a geek. everybody says that. my girlfriend victoria said that too. i love elements. I am a fan of einstein.

    Reply
  31. Victoria Stevens -  December 8, 2011 - 5:00 pm

    i think this element thing is really nerdy anyone who agrees with me comment duh right now ^^

    Reply
  32. Anonymous... duh -  December 8, 2011 - 4:58 pm

    San francisco? i luv san franny! i live there peeps! :P

    Reply
  33. Alfred -  December 8, 2011 - 4:40 pm

    Why do they need names at all? Atomic numbers are pretty specific. Just call them “114″ and “116″!

    Reply
  34. Tashika -  December 8, 2011 - 4:14 pm

    Okay people listen up:

    1. There’s been at least 50 people that have explained that the “unun” is vital to the name. We get it, we’re not stupid, stop repeating it.

    2. As for the ten or so people who are oblivious enough to keep suggesting we take off the “unun,” shut up.

    3. Let’s make some actual progress here–I personally don’t mind some of the elements being named after scientists because they did make some valuable contributions, especially the Curies, but we also don’t need twenty elements with people’s names because they’ll be too hard to keep straight. Naming elements after places works the same way, but other than giving said people and places credit and/or bragging rights, I see no point in doing so. Those should definitely be named for some sort of characteristic. On the other hand, many elements are hard to differentiate and it would be difficult to give them a name based on a unique characteristic. After all, you’ve only just discovered it and know little to nothing about it that’s not extremely similar to other elements.

    4. My suggestion is to stick with the names “Ununquadium” and “Ununhexium” until something truly and significantly unique about the element is found, then base the name off that. It would take some time, and probably need a massive amount of testing and applications to see how the element responds, but waiting isn’t too much to ask considering how long Ununquadium and Ununhexium have had those names as it is.

    5. What do you think? Let’s do this Socratic style

    Reply
  35. Aspiring Chemist -  December 8, 2011 - 3:56 pm

    They should totally name element 117 Spartanium or (if you know your chem name rules) Idiotine

    Reply
  36. science nerd -  December 8, 2011 - 3:42 pm

    i am 13 and this is a very interesting thing about the elements. anyone who disagrees is wrong.

    Reply
  37. Bookworm -  December 8, 2011 - 2:43 pm

    Seriously people, if you don’t find this interesting, why did you click the link in the first place? I am in eighth grade, and I totally enjoy this! Some of us actually enjoy school and chemistry.

    For those who believe elements are not important, wake up! Without elements, you wouldn’t be alive.

    Also, I have made a mistake: “ununquadium” means “one-one-four”, not “one-one-five”…. I’m sorry for that mistake! D:

    @ 1Basuca:

    Yes, the Latin word for iron is “ferrous”. :)

    Reply
  38. Bookworm -  December 8, 2011 - 2:36 pm

    @ science is EPIC don’t insult my name:

    I totally agree!!! I aboslutely love science and learning. :D

    Reply
  39. Anemos -  December 8, 2011 - 2:27 pm

    Eka-lead and eka-polonium. Just like the “old dead guys”, whom my chemistry teacher constantly refers to, did. I think it was Mendeleev who decided on the naming of eka-silicon, now called germanium.

    Reply
  40. Brian Khomsi -  December 8, 2011 - 1:45 pm

    Thanks for the opportunity of voting

    Reply
  41. Brian Khomsi -  December 8, 2011 - 1:43 pm

    I like the choices of naming them:
    Quadium” and “hexium.
    I am taking Chemistry next semester, can’t I get a break

    Reply
  42. Tushar -  December 8, 2011 - 1:33 pm

    Hydrogen gets burns——O2 helps h2 in burning—-when they combine together they extinguise by transforming temselves as H2O.

    H2 and O2 the most imp. element in P.Tables.

    Reply
  43. Cyberquill -  December 8, 2011 - 12:42 pm

    If shortening those names to “quadium” and “hexium” is scientifically indefensible, then let’s call them “quidium” and “hoxium.” These words mean nothing, and therefore they’re not wrong.

    Reply
  44. Chemical Engineering Chick -  December 8, 2011 - 12:31 pm

    @ nick – biology=chemistry=physics=everything. If I’ve learned something in college, it’s that everything is the same. If you are interested in what I mean, you should look into taking some advanced physics (electron wells, etc – or quantum physics if you’re up for it) and math (differential equations is a fun one). You’ll enjoy it!

    I like the idea of naming after their transience: something like “ephemerium” or similar. But if that’s set precedent, then these two and every element in the future (likely) will mean the same thing.

    I say stick to the classics: the element’s origin (either who, where, maybe how – that could make for an interesting meaning).

    Reply
  45. Geek-Grrl -  December 8, 2011 - 12:04 pm

    This is fantastic, thank you for running this article, it’s very interesting to know the linguistic background to scientific terminology.

    Reply
  46. Vikhaari -  December 8, 2011 - 11:57 am

    So helarious some comments! Can’t stop loughing. Love them though how a very serious scientific topic can be so light and delightfully “funny”….

    Like many I agree with Lakhmi. I think 114 & 116 should be kept because of their elemental properties and easy to remember names. And in todays modernity we should be better and bolder to know, learn, and understand things to progression and not o be afraid of even exotic pronunciation; otherwise, it would be sily. Also it is absurd, perhaps, to think that among other galaxy and universe are made up of elements–what about us!, we, humans too, you know!

    Now, should we need to change and give new name/s to new volatile elements. I would prefer them to be after the creater/scientist that has/have discovered and then worked on it especially this new artificial/manmade ones than of a distant someone’s of time and space without havingany knowledge in science, perhaps.

    Reply
  47. hi -  December 8, 2011 - 11:40 am

    @ Joe:
    Did you really have to post all that? You’re not making much sense at all.

    Reply
  48. Rustgold -  December 8, 2011 - 11:35 am

    Quote : bholland on December 7, 2011 at 9:40 am
    “Creating “elements” in a lab strikes of creating a baby in a test tube: is it really human?”

    Good point, particularly as they dissolve instantaneously. I’d solve the problem by having a rule that if it isn’t stable enough to exist for longer than a moment, then don’t bother naming it.

    The only that this will do is make high school science schools memorised useless stuff and cause more people to say that science isn’t relevant in the modern education system.

    Reply
  49. 1Basuca -  December 8, 2011 - 10:53 am

    Iron is actually the common name given to Ferrum. Hence the Fe symbol in the periodic table.The word, I believe, originates from Latin.

    Reply
  50. Sue -  December 8, 2011 - 10:40 am

    I guess the original article wasn’t clear. When a new element, like ununquadium is first synthesized, it is given a latin name as a placeholder, until it is confirmed that it was synthesized, and decided who gets the honor of naming the element (usually the lab that synthesized it). Copernicium was called ununbium until last year. So if you don’t like ununquadium, don’t worry, it won’t be around long (pun intended).

    Reply
  51. Alias -  December 8, 2011 - 9:40 am

    what about “debroglium” and “dominicium”

    Reply
  52. John -  December 8, 2011 - 9:36 am

    why not benladenium or scientologium or Qaddafium

    Reply
  53. mad hater -  December 8, 2011 - 9:32 am

    i agree with christ almighty this incredibly boring

    Reply
  54. Ben Curtis -  December 8, 2011 - 8:49 am

    Sure, “carbon” and “iron” have names that date back to antiquity, but “helium” is new — or newish. Like “hydrogen” (“water gas”) it is a simple element but wasn’t discovered until the 19th century. Helium (“sun metal”) was discovered by looking at the lines in the spectrum of the sun’s light before it was found on Earth. That’s why it’s a gas, but it’s named like a metal — when seen on the sun, no one could tell what it was, they just knew it was there.

    Reply
  55. flor -  December 8, 2011 - 8:34 am

    Its is so ridiculous to try to name elements by the place they were discovered. I agree with those who already stated this “ELEMENTS NAMES SHOULD BE INDICATIVE OF SOME KIND OF PROPERTY OF THE ELEMENT”. Using absolutely anything that deals with the elements, even if not that significant, is way better than just naming them by where/who discovered them. Come on International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry. Don’t you have better brains on your shoulders to not be more creative with the naming?

    Reply
  56. nick -  December 8, 2011 - 8:17 am

    “like most things in physics”… but this is chemistry not physics

    Reply
  57. arakai -  December 8, 2011 - 6:55 am

    How about Muhammedium and Friedchickenium? I am pretty sure I just won.

    Reply
  58. RachelAllison -  December 8, 2011 - 6:16 am

    I agree with Cyberquill as well….. quadium and hexium is easy enough to remember, I should think.

    Reply
  59. Liza with a Z -  December 8, 2011 - 5:50 am

    Tom Lehre did a wonderful, catchy song about the elements. It’s short, but it’s quick (set to “Major General” from Pirates of Penzance) If you want to see all the elements, this is the best site http://www.privatehand.com/flash/elements.html

    Reply
  60. plum -  December 8, 2011 - 5:37 am

    To sort-of answer to both Cyberquill and Lakshmi’s points, ununquadium and ununhexium literally translated mean 114-ium and 116-ium, so they are sort of named after their properties anyway, and calling them quadium or hexium would be like calling them 4-ium or 6-ium. At least the longer words make slightly more sense.

    That’s not to say that they couldn’t or shouldn’t have more interesting or meaningful names, the names ununquadium and ununhexium, whilst not being terribly difficult to remember or pronounce can present a challenge at first glace, and re-naming them something simpler and more symbolic might be a great thing to do to get more people to remember them.

    Speaking practically though, there are very few situations in which you’d need to use either word, so really I think it’s got to be down to the scientists who actually use them on a more regular basis.

    Reply
  61. RickyP -  December 8, 2011 - 4:46 am

    How about “alium” and “goreum” to honor the Nobel Laureate Al Gore?

    Reply
  62. LooseFroot -  December 8, 2011 - 3:54 am

    I agree with Cyberquill. Why not simply drop the “unun?” I mean, c’mon! “Quadium” and “hexium” sound like great names.

    Reply
  63. Quinn Bartlett -  December 8, 2011 - 2:31 am

    @Cyberquill the “unun” refers to the 11, “quad” is simply 4
    So “ununquadium” = 114
    So quadium would have 4 protons, aka Berylium

    @Lakshmi These elements can only exist for a couple thousandths of a second at the most, so they don’t have any observable properties

    Reply
  64. cs_szabo -  December 8, 2011 - 1:43 am

    Flerov, definitely. But his name should be rather spelt as Flyorov, according to its right pronunciation. But it would be even harder to pronunciate for a native English speaker.

    Reply
  65. Hydrogen -  December 8, 2011 - 12:43 am

    Helium is my brother.

    Reply
  66. dumvivamus -  December 7, 2011 - 11:38 pm

    how bout, “blowupium” or “dumvivamusium”. the last being obscurely latin enough to refer to the short but volatile life of these elements; candles that burn millionths as long but millions of times brighter, burning out instead of fading away, bust instead of rust, mere teens in the lifespan of elements, loving hard losing fast.
    “poofium”?

    Reply
  67. Dubee -  December 7, 2011 - 11:24 pm

    @Cyberquill

    Quadium might mean atomic number 4, and hexium, 6. Un-un-quad-ium and un-un-hex-ium might mean 1-1-4-[suffix for elements(?)] and 1-1-6-suffix respectively. It’s just my guess, since there’s got to be some kind of pattern for naming them as such. So based on this, the scientific community may not want to drop the un-uns.

    Regarding the topic’s main question, I’m fine with the suggested names. Property-based names can be used as common names, in my opinion. Aurum’s common name was gold, before it became obsolete.

    I just have an extra question. Why make new elements? I like Madom’s proposal, notsoveryrelevantium somehow fascinating because I am so curious about the uses of elements on the lower part of the periodic table. I don’t even hear them being used that much. I guess I’m not reading enough? Hehe. It would be great to know what we use these elements for. Gives us something more to repress down the iceberg. :D

    Reply
  68. Erin Smith -  December 7, 2011 - 10:59 pm

    As exciting as those unpronounceable element names sound,(Darmstadtium, Roentgenium, Copernicium. Really?) I would stick to the person who said to just drop the unun and call them quadium and hexium. Couldn’t get any easier than that.

    Reply
  69. Love in W -  December 7, 2011 - 10:41 pm

    @Cyberquill

    Remember the words quadruple, quadrant, etc. and what they mean? What does “quad” mean?
    How about hexagon? What does the “hex” mean?
    And unicycle, un (in French, e.g.)

    And what could be the relation between 114 and116 and these root words be?

    Ununquadrium is one one four (or maybe one hundred ten four.)
    Ununhexium is therefore one one six (one hundred ten six.)
    All I know in Greek are the roots of some common words–this is where we got them from–and the Latin is derived from there as well and, e.g. the French numbers are derived from Latin: un/une. quatre, six (unum, quattour, sex.)

    Reply
  70. Rereke Whakaaro -  December 7, 2011 - 10:21 pm

    “Why not simply drop the “unun” and call them quadium and hexium?”

    Because it is Latin. Un is one in Latin. Quad is four and Hex is six.

    So Ununquadium means One-one-four-”ium” – the elements atomic number.

    You can figure out the rest.

    Reply
  71. Chantal -  December 7, 2011 - 10:08 pm

    Very funny, Madcom. So funny it made me forget to laugh.

    Reply
  72. Hamachisn't -  December 7, 2011 - 9:52 pm

    In reply to Cyberquill, about dropping the “unun” and calling them, instead, quadium and hexium:

    Quadium would be element #4 and hexium would be element #6. Those are already named Beryllium and Carbon, respectively. The “unun” refers to the 11 in their atomic numbers: 114 and 116.

    –H

    Reply
  73. Capthaeth -  December 7, 2011 - 9:49 pm

    “Unobtainium”

    Reply
  74. ankit jain -  December 7, 2011 - 9:20 pm

    i like this site because he is improve knowledge

    Reply
  75. shar -  December 7, 2011 - 8:45 pm

    madame Curie!

    Reply
  76. Book Worm :) -  December 7, 2011 - 8:18 pm

    This very interesting stuff!! Listen people!! I’m with Cyberquil – drop the unun.

    Reply
  77. c -  December 7, 2011 - 8:16 pm

    I don’t think these elements are “cheating.” Although they don’t exist here on Earth, they may be found naturally in universe under specific conditions.

    Reply
  78. Dustin -  December 7, 2011 - 7:56 pm

    Grammatical error in my last comment, take out the “While” in my third sentence.

    Reply
  79. Dustin -  December 7, 2011 - 7:54 pm

    I’m surprised many of these comments are so immaturely phobic of knowledge. (Yes, I’m talking to you “Madcom”). I’m in eighth grade and I find the elements and their naming very relevant and interesting. While I know not everyone may have the same passion for chemistry as I do, but to naively label something as boring because it has a word or two that you may not be able to pronounce is ridiculous. I’m hoping that these people are still children or adolescents and have a chance to grow up a bit.

    Reply
  80. LachlanA -  December 7, 2011 - 7:44 pm

    @whomever may call this article ‘boring’.
    it may not appeal to you, and if you hated/hate chemistry then why did you choose to read something titled “Why is a new element named after a suburb of San Francisco?” im 14 and LOVE chemistry with a passion knowing all elements electron configuration (at least the ones that are known), attomic weight, attomic number, isotopes, and names (obviously), so an article like this was VERY interesting, albeit now i have to replace names with newer names…
    oh also they can’t just be called “Hexium” instead of Ununhexium because Ununhexium is derived from 116 and hexium derives from 6.
    “Madcom” when you said ‘borington’ there is an element with a similar name “bohrium” (number 107). just thought I would mention that just for giggles.

    Reply
  81. zac -  December 7, 2011 - 7:00 pm

    how about unstablium?

    Reply
  82. Sami -  December 7, 2011 - 6:27 pm

    this article was very boring why not name them 114 and 116? that would make life so much easier

    Reply
  83. SciPro -  December 7, 2011 - 6:13 pm

    @Lian

    The target audience of this site probably don’t have a background in science, and maybe not even language (considering they don’t know the definition of a word to come here)

    What im trying to say is, the author “dumbed” it down so that everyone, including trolls like you, could understand.

    Reply
  84. Justin -  December 7, 2011 - 6:10 pm

    It should be named Justinium, after the person who named it (me).

    Reply
  85. David GG -  December 7, 2011 - 6:09 pm

    i have to admit thes are some frikin’ hard ass words to read but i agree with Cyberquill to drop the “unum”

    Reply
  86. Justin -  December 7, 2011 - 6:08 pm

    @bholland lol…are any elements really human?

    Reply
  87. John the idiot -  December 7, 2011 - 5:58 pm

    mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmn

    Reply
  88. Ambiguous User -  December 7, 2011 - 5:51 pm

    Thank you for writing this fascinating article. I needed a refreshing take on this stuff.

    That guy who commented saying it’s unimportant is wrong! Without uranium in the world, for instance, the dinosaurs may still have been roaming the earth (underground uranium deposits, maybe?), or the Axis powers have taken over the Earth! Many other stories and accounts can be made to defend the knowledge of the heavier-than-iodine elements.

    Also, I Also think it is a beauty to use ‘dissolve’. Transform is another good word. Some physicists Even use the word ‘destroy’ too rather!: “The X element atom is destroyed, creating element atom Y, plus some particle and wave radiation, and kinetic energy.”

    Reply
  89. science is EPIC don't insult my name -  December 7, 2011 - 5:35 pm

    i agree with deepak and a teacher……. i didn’t even get close 2 screaming

    Reply
  90. Carbonated Chocolate Cake -  December 7, 2011 - 5:31 pm

    @Lakshmi thanks! it would be so much easier! I never thought of that. I heard from someone that the government should just put chips in our brains so we already have the info.Lol, i thought that would be very creative…and COOLSOME!

    Reply
  91. Sue -  December 7, 2011 - 5:27 pm

    Unfortunately, the “un-un” is essential in the names. Each “un” stands for one of the “1″s in the atomic number (think of “Uno”). Calling the chemical “quadium” is equivalent to calling it “four-ium” instead of “one-one-four-ium” (un-un-quad-ium”). Not so hard to pronounce after all.

    And, also unfortunately, since these elements are synthesized in the lab, and aren’t stable (most only exist a few seconds), not much is known about their properties, especially properties that they could be named after, and that could distinguish them from other elements not yet discovered. There is a theory, though, that elements with even higher atomic numbers (not yet discovered) may be more stable, with half-lives of minutes or days, instead of seconds, which is one of the reasons so many labs are interested in generating these elements.

    I found this article very interesting, and think it is cool that we are now naming elements after locations that have themselves been named after someone. I’m sure rancher Robert Livermore never dreamed an element might someday bear his name.

    Reply
  92. Nshera -  December 7, 2011 - 5:24 pm

    I would love to have a suburb named after me!!!!!! :) :) :) :)

    Reply
  93. Logistics -  December 7, 2011 - 5:11 pm

    whats with the “unun”

    Reply
  94. Vanessa -  December 7, 2011 - 4:40 pm

    @Madcom: HAHAHAHAHA

    Reply
  95. xyz -  December 7, 2011 - 4:31 pm

    First off i would like to let Cyberquill and Mr.D to know that the word “unum” stands for one one, i believe. i.e: one one four or the atomic number of ununquadium: 114 gave it its temporary name. I also a gree with Lakshmi in that the names of these elements should be named for their chemical properties so it will be easier for us students to remember.

    p.s. you other guys should really show at least SOME respect here by not commenting at all if the article bored you. the question wasn’t whether this article bored you or if you didn’t think it was interesting. they asked us if they liked the names, or if we didn’t, to suggest new ones.

    Reply
  96. HAK -  December 7, 2011 - 4:26 pm

    Name them Pikachu and Charmander

    Reply
  97. random guy -  December 7, 2011 - 4:21 pm

    The reason they will not delete the “unun” because quadium is Beryllium and hexium is Carbon.

    Reply
  98. science is EPIC don't insult my name -  December 7, 2011 - 4:11 pm

    I LUV SCIENCE :3 and I’m 10 o3o oh and madcom if there was no elements there would be no earth cuz hydrogen and helium make stars and galaxies oh and read this ———->3: sıɥʇ buıpɐǝɹ ʎɹʇ puɐ ʎpoq ɹn uı (uoɹı ǝʞıן) sʇuǝɯǝןǝ sǝɹǝɥʇ ʇɔɐɟ uı ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡buıɹoq ʇou ǝɹɐ sʇuǝɯǝןǝ

    Reply
  99. Bookworm -  December 7, 2011 - 4:09 pm

    @ Cyberquill:

    They need to have the “unun”‘s because without them, it changes the meaning of the name. “Ununquadium” means “one one five”, or one-hundred five. “Ununhexium” means “one one six”, or one-hundred six. If it was just “quadium”, it would mean five, which is boron, and if it was just “hexium”, it would be six, which is carbon.

    That’s why they need the “unun”.

    @ Madcom:

    Elements are very important to the world; indeed, they make up everyday objects. There would be no computers or airplanes or ships or even people without elements, so perhaps you should think twice before saying that elements aren’t important.

    And finally:

    @ Lakshmi:

    That’s a great idea. It would definitely help students remember! :D

    Reply
  100. Dr.Chemist -  December 7, 2011 - 4:05 pm

    The naming of elements is important. Although these elements are not observed outside of a laboratory setting, naming them after the place they were discovered is not a new phenomenon (Californium and Berkelium). It is a privilege to be in a place that has synthesized a new element.
    FYI: The unun is the prefix for 11 in element number 114 and 116. If the unun was removed then all that would be left is quadium and hexium which means only 4 and 6 so the names are not descriptive enough.

    Reply
  101. Alice -  December 7, 2011 - 4:02 pm

    Dropping the Unun prefix is a great idea as it would clear confusion between the elements beginning with 110 (UUU). Is there an upward limit to the periodic table? Also, I think that, with all respect to their work, scientists are becoming overly selfish in demanding that elements be named after them (cough, cough, Mr. Seaborg who has the element Seaborgium named for him…) as Lakshmi mentioned, the elements should be named for their properties. It’s only right.

    Reply
  102. lolo123 -  December 7, 2011 - 3:47 pm

    This is very interesting one that there are more elements, two that they trying to name them and these maybe something that people in everyday life may want to bring reference to but they can’t pronounce it.

    Reply
  103. Mrs. Tvia -  December 7, 2011 - 3:45 pm

    wow very interesting. I would very like to learn more.

    Reply
  104. Mrs. Tvia -  December 7, 2011 - 3:45 pm

    wow, very interesting. i would very much like to learn more

    Reply
  105. anonymous -  December 7, 2011 - 3:12 pm

    Oh, and Madcom you are completely wrong. Elements are the MOST important things in the world because they are not just in everything, but they ARE everything, including you and me. I would say that is relevant enough. But I get what you are saying. Why do you need to know about this? Well, if it’s so boring, then why did you click on the link to it on the front page?

    Reply
  106. anonymous -  December 7, 2011 - 3:07 pm

    You can’t drop the unun because it is part of the name that means “11″ as in 114 (ununquadium) or 116 (ununhexium). Quadium and Hexium would be completely different elements that already have names. Also, you can’t name a very heavy element after one of it’s uses because it doesn’t have any yet. Most of the heavier elements only exist for a fraction of a second and are extremely hard to produce.

    Reply
  107. Sameena Ahmed -  December 7, 2011 - 2:13 pm

    @Madcom : Your comment was so funny that I just had to compliment you :-).

    Reply
  108. Dr. Davis -  December 7, 2011 - 2:11 pm

    I say the new elements are named after some characteristic or behavior of the elements. It will make it much easier for us students to remember the element’s name and their behavior. Why the heck would we care about where they were invented?? It will make life easier if they named the elements according to their behavior!

    Reply
  109. Hellboy Shibboleth Funkenstein -  December 7, 2011 - 1:43 pm

    @Cyberquill and Mr. D:

    Without the unun, scientists and laypeople wouldn’t know which elements they were referring to. Well, actually, they would. Quadium would correspond to element 4 and Hexium would correspond to element 6. Both already have names: Beryllium and Carbon.

    The elements that have yet to be created/discovered are assigned a name based on their atomic number, using a table of prefixes that correspond to a one-digit number, and that end in the suffix -ium. The un- prefix is one. The quad- prefix is four. Therefore, element 114 is ununquadium (1+1+4) and element 116 is ununhexium (1+1+6). If scientists were ever able to synthesize element 444, it would be called quadquadquadium until they figured out something easier to call it.

    A list of the prefixes can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systematic_element_name

    Hope this helps. Cheers!

    Reply
  110. Zontar -  December 7, 2011 - 1:24 pm

    A buddy of mine who taught Chemistry came up with what I think would be a good idea for introducing new elements to the Periodic Table. You say you’ve discovered a new element? Cool. Bring us one pound of it. Put it on the table over there, and leave your name and phone number at the front desk. We’ll get back with you. And if it can only be found in one of rings of Saturn, forgeddaboudit.

    Reply
  111. aedwards -  December 7, 2011 - 1:14 pm

    Whatever they name these elements their names should depict the fact that they are unreal and not natural elements of the universe. Please don’t confuse future generations with such thing as man made, unnatural elements.

    Reply
  112. sherryyu -  December 7, 2011 - 12:58 pm

    wat a good article i also argee with Cyberquill

    Reply
  113. Mr. D [A.K.A] Elysian -  December 7, 2011 - 11:37 am

    I’d like to start by saying @Cyberquill I enjoy reading your comments, also i agree with Cyberquill just drop then Unun lol. . .

    Reply
  114. Svenjamin -  December 7, 2011 - 9:45 am

    Is it Flerov, ot Ferlov? Flerov, I suspect. Seems that the new names should be chosen based on some hint of the elements use or composition and not for the lab in which they were 1st manufactured. Also, I think that to suggest that some of the elements are unpronounceable is preposterous! That gives people an excuse to not even try. The American people could be an intelligent group if our thoughts weren’t so dilluted by the internet, cable TV , video games, and computer crutches that do all of our thinking for us.

    Reply
  115. bholland -  December 7, 2011 - 9:40 am

    Creating “elements” in a lab strikes of creating a baby in a test tube: is it really human?

    Reply
  116. Lian -  December 7, 2011 - 8:56 am

    For a linguist who may not have chemistry or physics background, it is a beauty to use “dissolve” in this sentence : “They are very unstable and quickly dissolve into other elements.” in your second paragraph.

    A chemist or physicist may use a different word, “decompose” or “decay”, maybe?

    Reply
  117. A teacher -  December 7, 2011 - 7:22 am

    This is more than enough to mak any one scream.

    Reply
  118. Lakshmi -  December 7, 2011 - 7:14 am

    How about naming the elements (114 & 116) based on their properties, it would make more sense to the students and would be easier to remember.

    Reply
  119. Rathin Dasgupta -  December 7, 2011 - 6:34 am

    I like the two names.

    Reply
  120. Cyberquill -  December 7, 2011 - 4:51 am

    Why not simply drop the “unun” and call them quadium and hexium?

    Reply
  121. Madcom -  December 6, 2011 - 3:22 pm

    What about:

    Yawnium, Boringium, Notsoveryrelevantium, Obscurium—because of the very unimportance of the elements to the world … OR

    Madium or Crazium—because they are so unstable …

    Reply

Leave A Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked (required):

Related articles

Back to Top