1.5 electron? you mean like exciton with half of its time in  
dissociation? Average half electron?
On Sep 3, 2017, at 10:15 AM, Bev Christian wrote:

> Doug,
> Looking at the periodic table, for its periodicity, one can see  
> that likely common oxidation numbers for Livermorium could be -2  
> and +6, the latter being more likely, since all the elements in the  
> Ga/Uut/Lv triangle have or are predicted to have metallic  
> properties.  But Wikipedia says that due to the inert pair effect  
> that livermorium's most stable oxidation state should be +2.
>
> Again in Wikipedia, moscovium (removing reference numbers for clarity)
> "is a member of group 15, the pnictogens, below nitrogen,  
> phosphorus, arsenic, antimony, and bismuth. Every previous  
> pnictogen has five electrons in its valence shell, forming a  
> valence electron configuration of ns2np3(the 2 and 3 should be  
> superscripts). In moscovium's case, the trend should be continued  
> and the valence electron configuration is predicted to be 7s27p3;  
> therefore, moscovium will behave similarly to its lighter congeners  
> in many respects. However, notable differences are likely to arise;  
> a largely contributing effect is the spin–orbit (SO) interaction— 
> the mutual interaction between the electrons' motion and spin. It  
> is especially strong for the superheavy elements, because their  
> electrons move much faster than in lighter atoms, at velocities  
> comparable to the speed of light. In relation to moscovium atoms,  
> it lowers the 7s and the 7p electron energy levels (stabilizing the  
> corresponding electrons), but two of the 7p electron energy levels  
> are stabilized more than the other four. The stabilization of the  
> 7s electrons is called the inert pair effect, and the effect  
> "tearing" the 7p subshell into the more stabilized and the less  
> stabilized parts is called subshell splitting. Computation chemists  
> see the split as a change of the second (azimuthal) quantum number  
> l from 1 to  1⁄2 and  3⁄2 for the more stabilized and less  
> stabilized parts of the 7p subshell, respectively. For many  
> theoretical purposes, the valence electron configuration may be  
> represented to reflect the 7p subshell split as 7s2 7p21/2 7p13/2.  
> These effects cause moscovium's chemistry to be somewhat different  
> from that of its lighter congeners.
>
> The valence electrons of moscovium fall into three subshells: 7s  
> (two electrons), 7p1/2 (two electrons), and 7p3/2 (one electron).  
> The first two of these are relativistically stabilized and hence  
> behave as inert pairs, while the last is relativistically  
> destabilized and can easily participate in chemistry. (The 6d  
> electrons are not destabilized enough to participate chemically,  
> although this may still be possible in the two previous elements  
> nihonium and flerovium.) Thus, the +1 oxidation state should be  
> favored, like Tl+, and consistent with this the first ionization  
> potential of moscovium should be around 5.58 eV, continuing the  
> trend towards lower ionization potentials down the pnictogens."
>
> Therefore, IF it exists, Spleenium should have a common oxidation  
> number of +1.5.  I would be curious to know what that half electron  
> looks like - just a hemisphere, half the size of a normal one or if  
> we could really see it, some weird shape that just looking at it  
> would turn my mind to jelly.
>
> Regards,
> Bev
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Douglas Pauls
> Sent: Friday, September 1, 2017 11:54 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] Element Quiz Question
>
> My esteemed colleague seems to be somewhat inconsistent.  He has no  
> information to create clues, yet disqualifies my answers on  
> similarly limited information.
>
>
>
> My esteemed colleague is referring to another of the Half  
> Fractional (note the spelling Dean) elements, Spleenium  
> (Sp-115.5).  Spleenium, a p-block transactanide element, was  
> discovered in the same research effort that identified Livermorium,  
> between the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the United  
> States, which collaborated with the Joint Institute for Nuclear  
> Research in Dubna, Russia.  The naming of the two materials was  
> actually the result of unprofessional name calling between the two  
> research groups.  The American team, witnessing the prodigious  
> vodka consumption of the Russian team, said the Russian’s livers  
> would have a half life about the same as the first element, and so  
> called it Livermorium.  The Russian team, witnessing the regular  
> “venting of the spleen” of the excitable American researchers  
> called the second element Spleenium.  When the IUPAC met on May 30,  
> they ruled that Spleenium was more likely one of the isotopes of  
> Livermorium, but the Russian team members with the pertinent  
> alternative data could not be located.  It was whispered that the  
> CIA made a late night visit to that team on May 29th.  The IUPAC is  
> known to have an anti-Russian bias.  Since Spleenium only has a  
> half life of about 59 milliseconds, no one knows what valence state  
> it would be (sorry Bev).
>
>
>
> So Dave, what do I win this week?
>
>
>
>
> Doug Pauls
> Principal Materials and Process Engineer Rockwell Collins
>
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 9:09 AM, David Hillman <  
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Here is the Element Quiz Question:
>>
>> The Question:
>> There is nearly no information on this element from which I can  
>> create
>> clues so we are going to see who has an up to date Periodic Table at
>> their desk. This element has an atomic weight of 293. What is the
>> IUPAC approved name of the element as of May, 2012.
>>
>>
>> The winner of the quiz will get the services of Clumpy and Kloumpios
>> for the week.
>>
>>
>> So far Clumpy and Kloumpios have done the following:
>>
>> Past Quiz winners/tasks:
>> Week 1 Ravinder Ajmani, Western Digital Week 1 Ron Feyereisen,
>> SigmaTron Intl.
>> Week 2 Louis Hart, Compunetics
>> Week 3 Mark Kostinovsky, Schlumberger Ltd.
>> Week 3 John Burke
>> Week 4 Drew Meyer, Benchmark Electronics Week 5 No Winner - no  
>> correct
>> responses!
>> Week 6 Bhanu Sood, NASA
>> Week 7 Keith Calhoun, Sopark Corp
>> Week 7 Ian Fox, Rolls Royce
>> Week 8 Leland Woodall
>> Week 8 David Bealer, SMT
>> Week 9 Tom Carroll, Boeing
>> Week 10 Louis Hart, Compunetics
>> Week 11 Tom Carroll, Boeing
>> Week 11 Scott Decker, UTAS
>> Week 12 Matthias Mansfeld, Mansfeld Elektronik PCB Design and  
>> Assembly
>> Week 13 No Quiz, Week 14 Matthias Mansfeld, Mansfeld Elektronik PCB
>> Design and Assembly Week 15 Bhanu Sood, NASA Week 16 John Maxwell  
>> Week
>> 17 Leland Woodall Week 18 Leland Woodall Week 19 Tom Carroll, Boeing
>> Week 20 Robert Kondner Week 21 Tom Brendlinger, ClearMotion Inc.
>> Week 22 Carl Van Wormer, Cipher Engineering LCC Week 23 Juliano
>> Ribeiro, DATACOM Week 24 Gerry Gagnon, FLIR Commercial Systems  
>> Week 25
>> Graham Collins, Sunsel Systems Week 26 Joyce Koo, IPC International
>> Week 26 Todd MacFadden, Bose Week 27 Bhanu Sood, NASA Week 28 Leland
>> Woodall Week 29 Mordechai Kirshenbaum Week 30 Leland Woodall Week 31
>> Leland Woodall Week 32 Steve Gregory Week 33 Leland Woodall
>>
>> Week 34 Jerry Dengler, Pergamon Corp
>> - You can have the boys fly into Philadelphia.  They can help load  
>> the
>> Calibration Certificates into our system and update the Cal date.
>> After that maybe they can help audit work instructions.
>>
>> Week 35 ????
>> - assisted with ????
>>
>>
>> I hope everyone has a awesome week.
>>
>> Dave Hillman
>> Rockwell Collins
>> [log in to unmask]
>>