This article is supported by WikiProject Elements, which gives a central approach to the chemical elements and their isotopes on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing this article, or visit the project page for more details.ElementsWikipedia:WikiProject ElementsTemplate:WikiProject Elementschemical elements
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to University of California, its history, accomplishments and other topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject University of CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject University of CaliforniaUniversity of California
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
"Plutonium is the element with the highest atomic number known to occur in nature" - not true, see the WIKIPEDIA sites on (1) natural nuclear reactors in Gabon, (2) the Przybylski star...Eudialytos (talk) 19:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is correct that Pu is the element with the highest atomic number that is known to occur today on Earth. All the transplutoniums created at Oklo have long since decayed. Off Earth it is indeed a different story, and it seems likely that a lot more of period 7 is accounted for every time an r-process event happens. But it's not really clear how much. Double sharp (talk) 01:47, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is nonsense. First, "occur in nature" and "occur on Earth" are enormously different. Second "now exist on Earth" and "have ever existed on Earth" are enormously different. How about, oh, I don't know, how about actually articulating the actual fact that it's likely that higher At No. elements have existed on Earth AND even today it's likely that an occasional cosmic ray creates some 95 (Am) or 96 (Cm) ON EARTH (just not in measurable quantities ...or I should say such collisions have to be exceedingly rare, random and almost impossible to document.) Not only that, but there are several natural radioactive processes that CAN make (and almost certainly DO make) higher AN elements (one atom here, one atom there) on Earth. Let alone stellar, neutron star, supernova processes (and how about the accretion disk of SagA*? ...It doesn't only blast out gamma rays...) And my comments have tried to ignore the various Atomic and H- bomb tests.) occur "in nature" is problematic.98.17.180.146 (talk) 20:25, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pluto is a planet. The IAU classifies it as a minor planet. The sentence:"Since uranium had been named after the planet Uranus and neptunium after the planet Neptune, element 94 was named after Pluto, which at the time was also considered a planet." is misleading. It suggest it is no longer "considered a planet", which is false. Sure it's not, by (current) definition, a major planet but the phrase "which at the time was also considered a planet" is misleading and completely unnecessary! How about just:"Since uranium had been named after the planet Uranus and neptunium after the planet Neptune, element 94 was named after the (minor) planet Pluto." Or, I think, even better:"Since uranium and neptunium were named after the planets Uranus and Neptune, element 94 was named after Pluto, discovered just a decade earlier." YMMV98.17.180.146 (talk) 20:55, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In general, unqualified "planet" connotes "major planet" in today's astronomical parlance. And in fact, your first suggested wording is problematic for exactly this reason: in the 1940s Pluto was certainly thought to be the ninth major planet. Double sharp (talk) 04:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: Seaborg and Perlman found plutonium in nature in 1942, but it was synthesized in 1941, which I suspect is why Perlman isn't generally listed as a discoverer. PianoDan (talk) 17:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-4 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Not done: Seaborg and Perlman found plutonium in nature in 1942, but it was synthesized in 1941, which I suspect is why Perlman isn't generally listed as a discoverer. PianoDan (talk) 17:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
