Didn’t the British Museum once have a huge Periodic Table featuring all the (known, natural) elements on it? Or am I imagining it?
It is possible-but not easy.
see: The Wooden Periodic Table Table
several of the element have to be taken on faith.
Plutonium is present in Uranium ore, but in very small amounts…
I thought about this some more last night, and I came up with an idea:
I think the OP’s son’s teacher may have designed this as a thought experiment. She doesn’t actually expect the lad to complete the assignment; rather, she assigned the project so that the lad would leard about the rarity, instability, radioactivity, and other unique properties of many of the elements that make them impractical for him to obtain. IOW, she assigned it so he would admit defeat and, in the process, learn some cool facts about the elements.
That’s my theory, anyway.
Curse you, J Cubed.
That sounds good but it seems to me after 5 minutes into the project you’d find this out and give up.
That sounds familiar. I’m thinking I read it in either Primo Levi’s book on elements or Oliver Sacks’ book on same.
So, a lump of granite for uranium, a soda can for aluminum, a can of tuna for mercury…what about neon and the other noble gases? Ooh, a wristwatch with glowy hands for radium!
I think there is probably a priority in terms of points for elements. Something like X points for a pure element, Y points for a pure compound containing it and Z points for a mixture.
There is also likely a list of elements that are more or less required. A kid without carbon would have to have not tried at all.
I personally would deduct points for samples that daddy obviously purchased from a supplier.
Concur. I think the best possible result here is going to be a physical table comprising:
Samples of elements where practically obtainable (iron, copper, carbon, etc)
Samples of compounds containing elements that are hard/expensive to obtain, or are difficult or dangerous to handle (so bicarbonate of soda could represent Sodium, table salt could represent chlorine, etc) - along with an explanation of the reason for presenting a compound, rather than the element.
Pictures or descriptions of elements that are difficult or expensive to obtain, keep or handle, along with reasoning/excuses for not having them physically there (you could get quite clever with these excuses and invoke school policy, homeland security, etc.)
Precisely. I envision a display board of 118 little rocks picked up off the street, painted in various colors.
Side note, when did there get to be so many elements? In high school, if you’d suggest to the teacher that there might be more than the 102 elements that were displayed at the front of the class, why, you’d get a switchin’ behind the woodshed.
And for extra credit, a description of fictional elements.
Think he could pass granite off as hydrogen?
I’ve got to hijack this for a minute. Is this style of teaching proper? My daughter came home from school once with a word problem that she asked for help with. I looked at it and told her that you just had to get everything in terms of X and solve the quadratic. She had no idea what I was talking about. Don’t be silly, I replied, it can’t be solved any other way, you must have been taught the quadratic, so I spent the next hour or so teaching it to her.
It turns out my daughter was right, she had never learned the quadratic equation. The teacher expected everyone to guess. If I hadn’t taught her how to do it, she’d have driven herself crazy trying to solve an unsolvable problem, or at least unsolvable with the tools she had. Some kids are guessers, and some are not. I generally disapprove of giving kids impossible assignments.
It’s not a thought experiment. The student is actually supposed to come up with as many of the elements as possible. I’m sure any reasonable attempt will be graded fairly.
Most glow-in-the-dark things nowadays are just phosphorescent, with no radioactive materials, and need to be recharged by bright light to glow for a few minutes, and even those few that do use radioactive materials usually use tritium now, not radium. The Radioactive Boy Scout had a great stroke of luck (no comment on whether it was good luck or bad) to find an old stash of radium-based paint somewhere, but any given student probably won’t be able to find such a stash.
Granite contains uranium. U-235 is a neutron source and neutrons decay to hydrogen in about 15 minutes or so. So there’s some hydrogen there. (Also some radium, thorium, protactinium, and radon.)
Of course, there’s lots more hydrogen in water. Perhaps the teacher wants the kid to do some electrolysis and get both H and O.
Dang. There’s no romance left in the world any more, I tell you.
I suggest you bring in some mercury, fluorine, potassium (more reactive with water than sodium), and maybe some beryllium for a lesser known but nice and toxic twist (let me know if you need some help obtaining these). The positive is that you might get the teacher fired for assigning such a stupid assignment. Unfortunately, your kid might get suspended, but that is a risk I am willing to take.
If it’s any comfort, my scout troop had (and probably still has, for all I know) a sign we hung over our campsites announcing what troop we were and from where. It was painted in the old-style, lasts forever, radium-based paint. I used to always joke that we had nuclear-powered camping gear.
And no, before you ask, I wasn’t in the same troop as David Hahn.
Easily.
Everyone would take hydrogen for granite.