This Element Doesn't Fit the Periodic Table

[@SciShow]

Visit brilliant.org/scishow/ to get started learning STEM for free. The first 200 people will get 20% off their annual premium subscription and a 30-day free trial.

[@mudfossiluniversity]

Periodic table is wrong COMPLETELY....all matter is made of dipoles and protons are 1823 dipoles....half are dark matter. "The Search for the Sterile Muon Appears to be Over and it is Dark Matter and Gravity it Seems" on my channel gives details from experiments.

[@roberthobbs6318]

This makes me wonder if all of water's "special properties" is because of the hydrogen...

[@kylorobb]

"There are at least three legitimate places you can stick it"😅😅😅

[@SeaJay_Oceans]

The Periodic Table is only HALF of the true Periodic Table... To have the full table you need to list all the Anti-Elements of Antimatter and their properties.

[@mudfossiluniversity]

My light experiments show acceleration and particles using CMOS and lasers with a tuned venturi. I will GLADLY show my research if you will allow it? Protons are made of 1823 dipoles not anything else. The new model is DIPOLE ELECTRON FLOOD..... Click my logo and watch the video explaining it. "Higgs Boson Physics Disaster".

[@whamases]

"There are at least three credible places you can stick it" will be my new fave insult.

[@Dan-Simms]

I think it would make a great T-shirt

[@JamesSpeiser]

haha

[@aaronpolinard1473]

you read my mind

[@Acceleronics]

It may even replace "What would you do with a brain if you had one?" -Dorothy

[@Bildgesmythe]

Love it❤

[@ezekieldaniels5846]

What I was most surprised to learn is that H+ ions are literally just a single proton floating around like “look at me, I’m an atom too!”

[@garavonhoiwkenzoiber]

interestingly, it's also why the theoretical Proton Star simply can't exist. Protons would push each other away stronger than gravity pulls them together.

[@Khetroid]

In nuclear physics we tend to use Hydrogen and proton interchangeably. Which one we use usually depends on context. (We also fully strip many atoms of all their electrons, leaving balls of just protons and neutrons [shortly before they are crashed into whatever target we have in the way])

[@codyfourman3326]

I can't really speak for what happens in outer space, but H+ does not exist by itself in solution. Rather, it exists as H3O+, or the hydronium ion. We just simplify it when we talk about it in chemistry 🙂

[@Khetroid]

@@codyfourman3326 ionized hydrogen is found in massive quantities in stars. It is effectively just loose protons.

[@inkryption3386]

​@@richdobbs6595 That statement has a lot of pathetic sounding baggage

[@theemissary1313]

Feels like the periodic table is like a Mercator projection and Hydrogen is at one of the poles.

[@SamusUy]

I'm surprised there was no mention to alternative periodic tables, there's definitely more than one "projection"

[@Jana-ho9mu]

@@SamusUyright? Alternate periodic tables are so fascinating, an easy rabbit hole to fall into

[@LuisAldamiz]

Good one!

[@thespudlord686]

@@Jana-ho9mu A pointless one The one that's widely used makes the most sense

[@telanis9]

@@thespudlord686 That _entirely_ depends on the particular application.

[@dem0n0maniac]

It reminds me of the argument about whether or not 1 is a prime number

[@magnesiumswift]

And hydrogen's atomic number is 1 😮

[@Volvoman90]

It's not though, it only has one factor.

[@dlfjessup]

As mathematicians studied other algebraic structures, they realized the concept of an element being prime or composite only makes sense in the context of elements that have no multiplicative inverse. Numbers that do have an inverse are called units. 1 is a unit (as it is its own inverse: 1 * 1 = 1, the multiplicative identity); hence, it is neither prime nor composite.

[@tarunyadav3567]

There is no argument. It is not

[@estebson]

On the one hand, it's only factors are 1 and itself (1), which is why medieval and mid 2nd millennium mathematicians often classified it as a prime. On the other hand, it simply does not match up with many of the other properties exhibited by all the other primes, thus its inclusion as a prime would create many exceptions across the broad mathematical field. Ultimately, it is due to this latter point that mathematicians decided 1 to be neither prime nor composite, but its own thing. A unit.

[@hgbugalou]

Hydrogen should be all on its own IMO. Being a single proton makes it extremely unique and more over it's a primordial element.

[@thejontao]

I’ve seen periodic tables where hydrogen is on its own, placed above Lithium, but with a gap. Or in a different color. There are multiple periodic tables, actually, and the Wikipedia article on the periodic table shows some variants. In very limited contexts, hydrogen can be called either protium (the nucleus being just a proton) and duterium (a proton and neutron) or tritium (a proton and two neutrons).

[@Chris-hx3om]

Is being 'extremely unique' different from just 'unique'?

[@TheFredmac]

​@@Chris-hx3omone is ordinarily unique and the other is uniquely unique.

[@isaiahschmitt8680]

@@Chris-hx3om Well, all elements are unique in that they all have their own physical and chemical properties, but hydrogen is extremely unique because it's properties have no close analogues.

[@mr.boomguy]

I agree. Just wrote a comment about it

[@nightwishlover8913]

Many years ago, when I was first learning Science (1965), the Noble gases were classified into Group 0 (at that time, there were VERY few compounds of these gases, so their valency was believed to be 0). Later, this was changed to Group 8, now 18. So now we have an unused Group 0. Put both Hydrogen and Helium in there, since Helium does not completely share the properties of the Inert - sorry - Noble gases and stick them top middle. This should at least keep the astronomers happy...

[@safebox36]

Ok, now I need to go google an old periodic table.

[@ds27315]

Besides having only 2 electrons in its outer valence shell, how does Helium differ in its properties to the other noble gases radically enough to deserve to be re-classified?

[@KozelPraiseGOELRO]

No

[@zombiasnow15]

I like your idea! It makes sense.😊

[@ShirinRose]

In the Periodic Tables used for GCSE Chemistry exams in England, the noble gases are labelled as being in Group 0

[@Dragrath1]

Its probably worth noting that the properties of a chemical metal actually come from electron degeneracy which is a function of both temperature pressure and technically electron density. To get a metal you just need there to be more electrons than can/will settle into an energetically stable energy configuration. If you change the temperature and pressure within the equation of state this will allow you to change the properties of an element making nearly every element able to behave as a metal for example. The metallic luster, the high thermal and electrical conductivities, and even the near incompressibility are all properties of the Fermi sea that forms around a metal. On that note the element Beryllium also breaks a bunch of rules namely that it really only behaves as a metal in a pure state otherwise it prefers to bond covalently and has a strong grip on its valence electrons second only to Helium which makes sense when you realize it has two full s orbital shells. It should be noted that Florine is only the most electronegative element in its electrically neutral valence state Helium and Neon are the two most electronegative elements if missing a valence electron able to basically steal an electron from anything else on the periodic table. This is one of the ways alpha particles cause so much damage as they more or less steal the first two electrons they come across. Nothing but Helium can steal an electron from helium if you want to ionize Helium you need to use high energy ionizing radiation. Helium also has a net spin state of zero meaning it tends to act like a boson particularly under low temperatures. So rule breaking is pretty much a thing for all the really light elements.

[@justinklenk]

Wow, thanks for that! Makes sense...

[@pixerhp]

Thanks for all of that info, that was interesting to read.

[@Dragrath1]

@@pixerhp Glad I could help it was one of the most memorable things we learned in my graduate Statistical mechanics class as it made so many things suddenly click for me. Physics wise this threshold is also the reason semiconductors exist and can be chemically doped by replacing an atom in the lattice by an adjacent element with one or or less valence electron since you are dealing with an element right at the threshold between exhibiting electron degeneracy and its absence by toggling the state on or off with an external source of electron current density. Mathematically we model this by treating these degenerate electrons as a fluid which flows around the associated elements which goes by the names electron sea or fermi gas(though its not really a liquid or a gas in a conventional sense)

[@OmnipotentNoodle]

Worth noting that metallic hydrogen, unlike other chemicals becoming chemically metallic under extreme conditions, is theorized to be metastable. Also just a fun little tidbit that Helium-3, while exceptionally rare in nature, is actually perfectly stable, and with an atomic spin of 1/2, instead acts as a fermion :)

[@calebkaminski6951]

I do want to ask Do the things that start acting like metal turn to plasma? My understanding is limited, from what I know in metal electrons flow somewhat freely and in a plasma electrons completely freely just wondering if I'm corrector what other distinctions their are@@Dragrath1

[@IsYitzach]

I've heard of sticking with both the alkali metals and the halogens, never with group 14. But when you say the outer shell is half full in both, then it makes sense.

[@scaper8]

Same. I first thought, "I have never heard that! That sounds insane." But as soon as he said, "Their outer shells are half full," I immediately thought, "Of course! They can all readily gain _or_ lose elections as needed!" Crazy interesting how that stuff works.

[@DraigBlackCat]

Except that the half full hydrogen shell is an S-shell, rather than a P-shell. That's why I've never seen a periodic table place Hydrogen anywhere but above the Alkaline Metals of the S block.

[@Two_Trick]

@@DraigBlackCat Sure but by that logic why not shove He in Group 2 above Mg. It's also in the S block.

[@zackkertzman7709]

Electronegativity is pretty important in organic chemistry, especially relative to hydrogen - it influences which reactions happen, and how/how much/when, and also some of the properties of different compounds. In that context placing hydrogen relative to its electronegativity makes sense...

[@DraigBlackCat]

@zackkertzman7709 Electronegativity is only one trait and the periodic table groups elements using a number of properties, the primary one being electron shell. The periodic table of the elements is a general ready reckoner so if you are just interested in a solitary trait, like electronegativity, then consult a separate table. Arguably the periodic table's greatest use is as an educational so it would be hard to justify positioning of Hydrogen in a group where you'd need a more advanced knowledge of chemistry to justify. Try explaining electron shells and valency to a pupil just starting out on their chemistry education at junior high with Hydrogen positioned above the halogens.

[@Goldenbear6]

Hydrogen walks into a bar and asked sodium hypobromite for a date. Sodium hypobromite said: NaBrO.

[@rheiagreenland4714]

congratulations sir you win

[@ZeroOneInfinity]

Sodium Hypobromite says that to everyone that walks into that bar. It's why I don't drink there any more 😜

[@Lowseeds]

@@ZeroOneInfinity He's Bro mine's brother

[@stocktonnash]

@@ZeroOneInfinity “but I’ll happily swap wives with Potash, KBro!”

[@garethdean6382]

But can anyone tell me the formula for nitrogen monoxide?

[@brandongaines1731]

3:22 my chemistry teacher went one better - he turned the lights off, dropped MAGNESIUM into a beaker of water, and warned us to not look directly at the beaker because the blindingly white flashing light could literally blind us - just not in that order X-D This guy also lit a hydrogen balloon on fire with a candle that he had glued onto the end of a meterstick - in the classroom, no less - and placed a certain chemical which reacts spectacularly with hydrochloric acid into a beaker of hydrochloric acid and some carcinogenic dish soap (leftover from before the government banned carcinogenic soaps and the school stopped using it for cleaning), placed a ceramic jack-o-lantern over it, and said, "this is why you don't eat the chemicals" (paraphrasing) as the jack-o-lantern vomited so hard it came out its nose and eyes! Loved this guy!

[@DawnDavidson]

HS Chem teachers are the best. My HS Chem teacher had us do a lab that involved polysaccharides and protein inclusions. We were making peanut brittle, 😂 YUM!

[@thunderacrossthereef3323]

magniesum does not react violently with water. what you are describing is impossible.

[@pandapip1]

​@@thunderacrossthereef3323 He problably meant burning magnesium, not dropping it in water.

[@brandongaines1731]

@@thunderacrossthereef3323 he must've set it on fire, instead, based on what I've found on my end. I guess that it's true that your memories get distorted over time, something which I wasn't quite ready to believe until now :-/

[@technophobian2962]

​@@brandongaines1731You're probably also getting the water part from the sodium metal in water experiment, which creates some nice sparks if you use a large enough piece (though not as bright as burning magnesium).

[@RaspK]

I always liked checking the different versions of the periodic table, and the one thing that always stood out to me is just how... nobody would (or could, even) agree where to place hydrogen. My favourite by far was the one version that just gave up and put it literally *_on the border_* (on the top left corner), a little away from all other rows and columns of the table.

[@duckrutt]

I pulled out my copy of Chemistry in Everyday Life (1928) to see what they did. According to the index the periodic classification of elements is on 538 ff. Which is not PAGE 538 but section 538 on page 390. Thanks index you're very helpful. Anywho they put Hydrogen in series 1 (out of 12 rows) group 1 (out of 9! columns). I won't hold missing elements against them but the whole thing is slightly inaccurate.

[@Engy_Wuck]

I've even once seen one which included a single neutron. *Technically* it sort-of belongs there: it's sort-of a nucleus with zero electrons in its (non-existing) shell 😛

[@emu071981]

The periodic tables back when I was doing high school chemistry just had hydrogen sitting above left of fluorine to show that it was kind of similar to the halogens but not the same. Something else to note is that the transition metals (the light pink in your periodic chart) and the lanthanide and actinide series don't really behave in a periodic fashion either. And one final thing, the electron shells are actually probability orbits and are usually shaded in a particular way with the darker areas being where the electrons are most likely to be if you were to look for them at any particular point in time.

[@DanielMWJ]

Mine had it like that above fluorine AND above the alkalines, then with a bracket bar attaching them.

[@jamesharmer9293]

"There are at least three credible places that you can stick it". Wasn't expecting that this time of night...! 🤣

[@cfltheman]

Sounds like something the chemistry teacher Walter White would say.

[@kidnamedfinguh]

​@@cfltheman*breaking bad intro theme plays*

[@cheesedaemon]

Giving up and letting graphic designers "do their thing" is also why we often end up with Lutetium and Lawrencium, which are transition metals, being stuck out there with the Lanthanides and Actinides. Although unlike Hydrogen, there isn't an accompanying debate concerning their chemical properties.

[@stephhugnis]

Lutetium and Lawrencium are most certainly not transition metals. Transition metals are characterized by valence numbers of generally 4-6 and multiple oxidation states. Lanthanides and actinides are characterized by +3 oxidation states and high valence numbers of 8-13. Lu fulfills both of these with exclusively +3 and a coordination number of generally 9. The chemistry of Lutetium and Lawrencium are most similar to the other lanthanides and post-americium actinides along with scandium, yttrium, indium, and gallium. In fact scandium and yttrium are often considered rare earth metals along with the lanthanides.

[@drenzine]

Ooh, hot take

[@Omgbbqhaxlolol]

I think we should treat hydrogen like an element of it's own class. No one element is exactly like it, and is the first element, the building block if you will. Slap it up in the middle above the rest, on it's own, in it's singular superiority.

[@karlvalteroja4675]

No element is exactly like any other

[@SoWhat1221]

@@karlvalteroja4675 That's a tautology. Otherwise it'd be the same element.

[@stefangadshijew1682]

@@SoWhat1221 The point made is that uniqueness doesn't warrant an own group designation. H and He are elements in period 1, having only the 1s shell for electrons to occupy, which perfectly explains the "uniqueness" of that period. The whole of period 2 also behaves kind of "quirky" compared to other elements in the same group. Maybe Li, Be, O and F less so, but Boron and Carbon are definitely very weird elements. But they all have the valency that you would expect, and fit neatly into their respective groups in that regard. I don't really see how Hydrogens uniqueness justifies removing it from Group 1.

[@andrewhammel8218]

hydrogen IS just one cut above being a subatomic particle. So...its kinda missing link between atoms and non atoms.

[@stefangadshijew1682]

@@andrewhammel8218 Hydrogen is an atom, an electron orbiting a proton and maybe some neutrons. It is absolutely a chemical element, there really is no question about that.

[@FloozieOne]

Great episode. I I've seen that chart many times and tried to figure out why things are where they are. You've given me whole year of chemistry in 8 minutes. This will also be one I'll come back to when I get confused about something. Thanks so much for stuffing my brain with more stuff.

[@jhonnyrock]

6:14 Awesome Video! I do want to mention however that on this periodic table you are missing the most recent additions that have been known for a few years now, like Oganesson being element 118, etc.

[@irri4662]

My wife says ,when I'm in my element . I don't belong either.

[@ExcitedLeptons]

Rather than moving Hydrogen, I'd suggest moving the noble gases to the left of all the alkali metals. It'd be like starting to count from zero instead of counting from 1 - when you consider the nobles as fully empty s orbital, not a full p orbital. Then H is all alone, which it really should be. This makes sense with thr many wrap-around depictions of the Table also.

[@omargoodman2999]

Another thing to take into consideration is the hidden 3-D aspect of the table. Most don't realize it because of how it's typically displayed, but the two rows along the bottom *actually* jut _straight forward_ from the table. You have rotate that entire row 90° out into the space in front/above (depending on its orientation); but since having a "popup book periodic table" is a bit inconvenient in most settings, they were content to just saw it off and display it along the bottom. Perhaps Hydrogen is in a similar sort of situation; it ought to be utilizing the extra dimensions of the table that aren't available due to it being projected in a measly two. In other words, it's distorted just like the map of a globe projected in 2D. Maybe Hydrogen is something like the "Pole" of the Periodic Globe (or paraboloid, hyperboloid, or whatever other such shape it might actually be). At the North Pole, *every* direction is South; and at Hydrogen, you could just as well go "down" to either Group I, Group IV, or Group VII. That's on the basis of its Valence shell being "up by 1", "half full" and "short by 1" all simultaneously.

[@red.aries1444]

Even if you move the noble gases to the left side, neutral Hydrogen would still keep it's place on top of the column with the alkaline metals. Only the H+ Proton could have a place on top of the noble gases, but ions are not elements. It wouldn't solve any problem.

[@SunlightonMoon]

Aren't the s orbitals filled first, so helium would have a full s orbital and every other noble gases have a full p orbital, so I don't get what you are infering with the statement "when you consider the nobles as fully empty s orbital, not a full p orbital. Doesn't make sense in the slightest tbh

[@jeezuhskriste5759]

You’re counting up to a full shell. The noble gasses aren’t 0s, they’re more like 10s.

[@SunlightonMoon]

@@omargoodman2999 Interesting, if hydrogen is the north pole of sorts ,now the goal is to find the south pole of the periodic globe XD.

[@WahrheitMachtFrei.]

I'm certain I was never taught the periodic table's meaning/purpose; I just learned more than I did in 5 years of secondary school.

[@StYxXx]

That's a sad school then :(

[@TessaBain]

Yeah, I took chemistry and earth science (which included some degree of chemistry as well as almost every other biology and geology related science) and I definitely did not hear that ever mentioned in any class either. That was something I read myself years prior.

[@Pyrolonn]

They probably skipped the entire table's gaps ties in with quantum numbers, as you add electron types s, p, d, f, you get gaps in the table itself. The 'f' gap is large enough that they put them at the bottom.

[@DanielSolis]

"There are at least three credible places you can stick it." is a great nerdy clap back.

[@AManWithAGODComplex]

The placement of Hydrogen in Group one is based on its electron configuration rather than its metallic characteristics. The term 'Alkali Metals' would seem to serve as a collective nickname for the elements within the group, as it highlights the obvious (their shared characteristic of forming alkaline solutions when reacting with water), but even if Hydrogen doesn’t exhibit such a trait, it doesn’t discount it from the group, as the actual name for the group is just 'group one'. I could, of course, be wrong, but that's my interpretation on this matter.

[@Rocketsong]

Agreed, it's in Group 1 because it has 1 electron in the s sub-shell.

[@AManWithAGODComplex]

​@@RocketsongAlso correct. I neglected to mention it.

[@CuppzGeo]

same with oganesson being not a noble gas

[@silviavalentine3812]

In astronomy, anything besides hydrogen and helium is considered a metal. Also the shells are Hamiltonian for the Schrodinger equation, which gets messier as you add more protons Edit: matthewhafner in the comments pointed out that the Hamiltonian gets messy beyond h-1 (1 proton and 1 electron) as adding anything else creates a n-body problem which has to be solved numerically

[@doktormcnasty]

I heard this about astronomy too but can't remember why it is the case.

[@juliagreen423]

Woah what a fact! Do you have any more information or a source i could look up to learn more?:)

[@silviavalentine3812]

@@doktormcnasty from what I can remember, there's two things. Hydrogen and helium are the only two that give a viable net energy output in fusion. That and a main sequence star with a higher proportion of these metals indicates that they're relatively young seeing as they were made from a prior generation of star's material (which have fused at the end of their life)

[@darkstar.357]

Jupiter is full of metallic hydrogen

[@ZeroOneInfinity]

In music, anything involving electric guitars and heavy drums is also known as metal

[@lightningbolt9155]

The real reason it’s in the very top-left corner is because it would look ugly anywhere else.

[@kevincronk7981]

That graphic of the periodic table at 1:00 confirmed that I'm not just gaslighting myself, within my 18 yearlife there did in fact use to be a bunch of elements without names

[@gracetriendl721]

As someone in chemistry teachers education, i was physically hurt by the graphic at 1:52, please fix that, it gives a very wring impression of how ionic compounds work and is a mental picture we actively want to prevent! Arguing for including it in the halogen group on the bounds that it "can form an H- Ion" is also bizarre. Hydrogen barely ever does that, and even Sodium *can* form a negative Ion. The chemical behaviour argument is way more solid imo

[@janAlekantuwa]

Hydride occurs more often than hydrogen cations. The former exists in multiple reactive salts, while the latter only exists in particle accelerators and hydrogen plasma. "H+" is just a shorthand for "protonated solvent molecule," as naked protons don't exist if there is any atom with a lone electron pair nearby. Meanwhile, hydride actually exists as an ion

[@gracetriendl721]

@@janAlekantuwa Thats a good point! Over all i still feel like the occurrence of hydride is way too low to make that a worthwhile argument.

[@janAlekantuwa]

@@gracetriendl721 Yeah, it's definitely more of a supporting point rather than the main point of why hydrogen shouldn't be grouped with the alkali metals. I personally believe that the best way to tackle the Hydrogen Problem is to have it completely detached from the table entirely, as it really is in a category of its own. If we want to insist on having hydrogen be attached to the table because of the table's usefulness in showing periodic trends, then I would have to say that it belongs above carbon in group 14. Hydrogen is marginally more electronegative than carbon, the average carbanion has a pKb similar to that of hydride, and the character of bonds involving hydrogen is very similar to bonds involving carbon (covalent bonds to nonmetals and metalloids, highly polar covalent bonds to halogens, ionic bonds with most metals, and bonds teetering on the covalent/ionic boundary with lithium, beryllium, magnesium, and all metals in group 13, 14, and 15) Hell, I could even argue for hydrogen and helium to both be detached from the table, as helium is the only noble gas without a full p orbital, but helium shares enough properties with the other noble gases to warrant its placement atop group 18.

[@Olympiadmaxx]

Could you please explain why that's a bad graphic, and perhaps even provide a better understanding?

[@gracetriendl721]

@@janAlekantuwa Personally i think that its best left as it is, to keep the electrons in outer shell = Row of table rule (Except He, but bc that is so irrelevant in chemistry it doesnt matter imo), and in my experience understanding that hydrogen is just not like the other alkali metals is pretty intuitive. My point of view is very heavily influenced by me going into chemistry teaching tho

[@abbyb6958]

3:12 yeah no my hs chemistry teacher ignored our complaints about the classroom smelling like gas and left us unattended when lighting Bunsen burners… surprised nothing ever went wrong in that class

[@marianzlotkiewicz1582]

Thanks!

[@Ilovepaneer]

How does this have no comments😂

[@Xnoob545]

Interesting

[@aobo_0]

Donowalled 🥶

[@GeneralPuppet]

Damn you're rich

[@Balt_Altee1]

cha ching

[@jensphiliphohmann1876]

About 01:45 _All chemical reactions are just electrons swapping places._ No. This only holds for the redox reactions where "ox" stands for oxidation i.e. one partner giving electrons partly or wholly away and "red" stands for reduction i.e. another partner taking them partly or wholly. There are still other reactions like protolysis where protons are exchanged.

[@hallstuart6604]

I love how humans keep trying to define the universe and it keeps defying definition.

[@stanpines9011]

that's usually what happens when you categorize stuff you don't fully understand yet though

[@RichardFraser-y9t]

Where has science failed?

[@NicholasHay1982]

"I love how humans keep trying to define the universe only to come up with even better definitions a little while later." There I fixed it for you.

[@saladparfait]

​​@@RichardFraser-y9t Well to be fair, it was believed that lobotomy was a legitimate solution to some mental conditions and even some standard human characteristics previously misjudged as such.

[@CleetusGlobin]

@stanpines9011 is it even possible to know everything about anything? Doesn't quantum mechanics literally forbid this?

[@PauxloE]

3:27 "All of them tend to lose that one outermost electron to form an ion with a positive charge: H+, Na+." - The H+ isn't really an ion, it's just a single proton, and doesn't really exist by itself (except in a plasma, or e.g. solar wind), only in compounds when it again borrows that missing electron back from some other atom (like H3O+).

[@rustix3]

0:12 Well first let's determine which periodic table we are using. If you really mean any, then let's look at periodic table that was in USSR/Russia, the place of the one who developed the periodic table: Mendeleev. To my surprise it looks different what it looks like in English speaking section of internet. Hydrogen is closely standing together with Helium both lonely on the same row.

[@hailthequeenFM]

As far as I remember, the only difference is that Global has H on top of the Alkaline Metals family while the USSR/Russia has H on top of the Fluorine family.

[@AWellesley]

I’d have loved it if a chemistry teacher had explained the purpose of the periodic table as a predictive tool like it was explained in this video. Instead we were told to learn it,” because you must“ I never managed to do it and always struggled in chemistry class.

[@paulbrickler]

We did a project in high school AP chemistry where we re-arranged the Periodic table into a more circular, spiral shape, with hydrogen at the center. Which allowed hydrogen to be connected to all three groups.

[@Turalcar]

My first was to make it a globe with H on the pole but a spiral works even better

[@CrowMagnum]

"There are at least three credible places you can stick it"

[@DrewLonmyPillow]

0:42 I've tried that argument before. Didn't work too well.

[@justinklenk]

My perspective, understanding and knowledge of these dynamics all really just took a big bump upwards, with this breakdown/elucidation - BIG thanks for this gem. 👍

[@ArchDudeify]

What about a big merged cell like a whole line of H Is this just a formatting problem? 🙆🏻‍♂️ Rules of the table mean that H has to go before everything else so a line maybe dashed border ☺️ Edit: this would be above He

[@peterdore2572]

Very good topic. Bravo. Its good to see Scishow still has unexplored topics 🎉

[@lostboy583]

“There are at least three credible places you can stick it.” That’s what she said.

[@yashaswini1208]

👀😂

[@archemax2724]

I prefer the idea of H being alone, set apart from the other groups. There’s no sense in trying to cram it in where it doesn’t belong. We can understand it being special because of its status as the simplest of elements.

[@WEPayne]

In 8th grade I objected to dissociation of water, complaining that H+ is a subatomic particle. Mr Rose studied me carefully for a moment then proceeded to explain about the Hydronium ion. Made an impression on him, he took me far beyond the regular lessons LOL.

[@Crodmog83]

"There are 3 credible places you can stick it" lol,that made me giggle

[@DotArve]

@SciShow - while I know a little humour should be allowed: What is going on with elements 110 to 115 @1:00 in this video?

[@FishOfTheSea]

That's actually their names lol

[@idjles]

@@FishOfTheSeaold stock photo.

[@FishOfTheSea]

@@idjles they've been updated?

[@CerberusTenshi]

​​​@@FishOfTheSea Yes, they have been. Darmstadtium. Ds 110. Roentgenium. Rg 111. Copernicium. Cn 112. Nihonium. Nh 113. Flerovium. Fl 114. Moscovium. Mc 115. Livermorium. Lv 116. Tennessine. Ts 117. Oganesson. Of 118. These are elements that have only been ever created in labs, often with a lifetime of milliseconds. And like a few atoms at a time. 110 used to Ununnillium, 111 Unununium, etc. Basically justLatin for "element 110" etc.

[@Okapi8]

Those were placeholder names for undiscovered/ unamed elements. The last 4 elements were only named in 2016!

[@gordonweir5474]

Nice video, but a couple of comments (from a chemist): (1) There is really no such thing in chemistry as a H+ ion floating around, as that would be simply a proton. What we call "hydrogen ions" are usually solvated species. e.g. a "hydrogen ion" attaches itself covalently to a water molecule to form a hydronium ion, H3O+. (2)The periodic table is organized into blocks, according to where the outermost electron is found. The alkali and alkali earth metals are in the "s" block, the transition elements are in the "d" block, the lanthanides and actinides are in the "f" block, and the (mostly) non-metals to the right of the table are in the "p" block. The misfit is not so much hydrogen as it is helium. Helium is usually lumped with the other "inert gases" because it is, well, inert. But Ne, Ar, Kr, etc are p-block elements, whereas helium has no p-electrons: its electron configuration is 1s2. One could then argue that if H (1s1) is to be placed above lithium (2s1) based on electron configuration, then helium (1s2) should be placed above beryllium (2s2) beside hydrogen in the s block.

[@benjaminmargulies1853]

leave hydrogen and helium as "islands" since they don't belong with the rest of the s block and hydrogen is the apex of the periodic table cone (though helium is decidedly a noble gas rather than an alkaline earth metal, hydrogen is just a loner)

[@pacotaco1246]

You guys should do a video on neutronium. The former(?) Element Zero

[@nickjc1999]

while neutrons absolutely detest forming bonds with other neutrons only (this is what neutronium is), we actually DO have something that serves as element 0! its when you get an electron to orbit a positively charged antimuon (muons are the heavier cousins of the electron) It doesnt exist for very long because muons are unstable, but it has 0 protons and would be able to do chemistry!

[@nightwishlover8913]

They already have: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gaPEk5qrobNkgpo&

[@CuppzGeo]

muonium is either μ+ e- or μ- e+

[@steverempel8584]

Astronomers have an extremely simple periodic table. There's just 3 groups: 1) Hydrogen 2) Helium 3) Metals Metals, according to this astronomical group, is any atom with at least 3 protons. So it seems to me that Hydrogen and Helium are both quite unique elements on the periodic table, with Hydrogen being even more unique than Helium.

[@Monody512]

Only now does it finally occur to me why it's called a _periodic_ table. The repeating pattern of of the orbitals.

[@tschadschi1010]

Public education has to be really shitty in your country...

[@rickseiden1]

"Alright, people, look. You all used to be Hydrogen once, until the star you were born in crushed you into what you are today. So please, just get along with Hydrogen."

[@KatsuNoJutsu]

I wonder if the periodic table will have to change shape to more of a circular design around the hydrogen? Or some other arrangement.

[@porcorosso4330]

0:51 I mean there is probably no reason why it couldn't be at all three of those places... Might be a "problem" of a 2d only periodic table... If we have a 3d or 4d periodic table by add a dimensions depending on the chemical properties we care about, this might be a none problem...

[@wasd____]

"There are at least three credible places you can stick it." - Hydrogen, the rudest crudest element

[@prjndigo]

Hydrogen is just what we call protons when they stick to things. Its that simple. If we define an atom and an element as a nucleus containing two or more protons the problem solves itself. Maybe its a buffered pure acid? Hydrogen is technically just excessively low pH anyway?

[@culwin]

Hydrogen like that 40 year old guy at the club

[@ehsnils]

Changing how it's done just complicates things even more. Most of us knowing a bit of science knows that hydrogen is a bit odd and chemically volatile but at the same time when you go down the table you'll see that you have the lanthanides and actinides that's represented separately but are actually breaking apart the periodic table even more. The end consequence is that it's better to stick with the situation we have than to try to cook up something new.

[@PsychoMuffinSDM]

Hey SciShow, can you do a video about the alternate types of graphics for organizing the elements?

[@scaper8]

I'd have to look it up, but I'm pretty sure they have done a video on alternate periodic table forms.

[@scaper8]

So, I was slightly right. They did do a video on some alternate tables and one on Mendeleev's table. Sadly, it was a pretty short list and a short run-down of each. If you want, though, I'll tey to link them (here's to hoping KZbin's auto filters down cut me down): kzbin.info/www/bejne/pJyQXoVjfqyqrNEsi=_3GCIY-OBaMn8icM kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y6jYYX-frbh1ps0si=wuCo85vejIz1JNji

[@Koljadin]

This is something I remembered from elementary school, but completely forgot the details. It was great to be reminded of, so thank you! Great video!

[@lafamillecarrington]

I have always thought that helium was the element in the wrong position.

[@sib315]

Yea but healium acts like the rest of the group that it doesnt want to make compounds with other elements becouse its last plane with electrons is full

[@lafamillecarrington]

I know that, but I was considering the electron configuration. Elements at the right of the periodic table have full p subshells, helium doesn't. @@sib315

[@Omega-D-Nightingale]

Thank you for this informative Video. The first thing that comes into my mind when I hear Hydrogen is: Explosion. The second thing that comes to mind are stars. They fuse Hydrogen into Helium to create light and warmth. It's an oversimplified explanation, I'm aware of that. As you said Hydrogen is hard to predict, it reminded me of very big stars. (O, B and A class stars)They are also hard to predict, because when they run out of fuel, some turn into black holes others into neutron stars. Again a very oversimplified explanation. I've heard that Astrophysicists use their own elements. I believe they were, Hydrogen, Helium, Oxygen and dust. If an astrophysicist reads this, they can comment, the correct elements they use.

[@hah.365]

This video reminds me of why I struggled with chemistry so much.

[@brentlanyon4654]

This has piqued my curiosity! H1 (the theoretical pure form) can't be dropped into water like the other alkali metals because H1 always goes to H2. Even the Na that Mr. Loyd dropped in the water had to be stored in oil to keep it from reacting with the air.

[@pierremainstone-mitchell8290]

Well, not to mention humorously, done!

[@OcaRebecca]

Years ago, when I was in seventh grade, the classroom periodic table was one that had hydrogen on it twice (alkali metals and halogens). When I asked why, I was simply told that if I thought about it, I would know. The snarky side of me wanted to say, "I AM thinking about it and can't come up with a good reason. That's why I'm asking!" Alas, I was too meek and mild-mannered.

[@deleted-something]

Hydrogen moment

[@etienneporras7252]

5:37 I have seen a periodic table which put hyrdogen "above" the rest of the table, but no indication as to why.

[@1BadElky]

I have a doctorate and even though I knew what he was going to say, I came just to close my eyes and listen to white Neil DeGrasse Tyson

[@phoenixarian8513]

Hydrogen. Its electron setup is so small that it fits into multiple categories and therefore shows characteristics from different cats. Lose one electron and you got H+ like alkali metal and gain one you got H- like Halogens. After all the innermost orbit has only 2 vacants. Comparing it with carbon group is something I don't understand. However due to the double characteristics of hydrogen the link between C and H come in covalent bond instead of ionic bond. You can't really tell C or H actually got that electron but thanks to this specialty this bond is a lot harder to break than other element bonds. You can get rid of the Cl on CH3CH2Cl to make ethylene but you can't do that with ethane. (You can make ethane with ethylene and hydrogen but not in reverse)

[@rezadaneshi]

Fits perfectly. The beautiful symmetry of one proton and one electron is a very belonging element at the beginning that we see how it's symmetry is broken with all its isotopes and all other elements following it. Hydrogen is the mother of Periodic table

[@Eriorguez]

Ah, my high school textbook, 20 years ago, had a really crafty solution: H was in the upper period, of course... but it was in the middle, as it was being used as the example of what the different numbers and symbols around each element meant, and so it needed the extra space. And it wasn't centered, so hydrogen didn't quite fall within any group.

[@kordellcurl7559]

Solution: Put hydrogen in the middle and colour it in 3 different colours to show that it can be in the alkaline halogens and carbon groups.

[@kalkuttadrop6371]

While I know using the common physical properties isn’t very scientific or wise for sorting these, I will say common sense points me to the Halogens. Hydrogen doesn’t explode in water and isn’t usually a metal, the two main things the Akali metals are known for. The Halogens are known for being reactive(which hydrogen is). Also, something I noticed while looking at the elements is every Halogen has a steadily higher melting and boiling point, and these never overlap. By the time one Halogen has boiled into a gas, the next one hasn’t even reached its melting point and is still solid. Fluorine boils before Chlorine melts, Chlorine boils before Bromine melts. Bromine boils before Iodine melts. Hydrogen fits this pattern perfectly, it turns into a gas at a temperature where Fluorine is still solid.

[@capnstewy55]

Hydrogen is the single duplo block. You can pit it anywhere.

[@ice9ify]

I think when you dig into orbital theory, it kind of explains why Hydrogen is an outlier. That shell is all it kind of has available. The first shell only has an S orbital, P,D etc are in higher shells. The outer shell of hydrogen also has no shells underneath it. So yes its an outer shell, but there are no electrons in lower energy states "beneath" it. All those things are hard to calculate exactly. My opinion as a chemist is that Hydrogen is group 0. To me that makes the most sense of all. It is an opinion of course, and many at my job disagree and I respect that, but I do have some arguments. Cant be group 1, because H doesnt have electrons below the outer shell. Cant be group 14, because it has no P shells in its outer shell to hybridize with(which carbon love to do) Cant be group 17 because a captured electron wouldnt be filling a P orbital, as with Fluorine, chlorine etc. Fight me :).

[@SotraEngine4]

Also carbon. What even is carbon?

[@patfre]

Carbon is life

[@AquibMohammedAyman]

Carbon is us. We are Carbon. It's a way of life. It is the life

[@B.D.F.]

It’s element #6 because it has 6 protons and 6 electrons (and typically 6 neutrons, although sometimes more).

[@Flesh_Wizard]

Carbon is my cooking

[@samstarlight160]

Why? Who's asking? Who sent you!?

[@kalkuttadrop6371]

Is it possible Hydrogen is just kind of the 'Original Element'? It's it's own thing as the simplest and most basic element that (via fusion in stars) forms pretty much everything else(ok Helium also formed initially, but you can also get that from fusion and the bulk of it was, Hydrogen was almost everything initially like 99% of matter). So it doesn't fit cleanly on the table. It has some aspects in common (Looks like the Alkali metals the closest molecule wise, acts the most like the halogens as it's a reactive gas), but doesn't line up as it's not really in the same line of thinking. It's the element you can make every other element from, the Element of Elements, more of a midpoint between Subatomic Particles and Heavier Elements.

[@kalkuttadrop6371]

(Also, while Helium is far closer and clearly fits the noble gasses the best, it also has a few minor issues that don't cleanly line up. So to some degree these super light elements that formed when the universe started act their own way, and it's only when the atoms get bigger and bigger the clean patterns show up)

[@eliljeho]

Hydrogen is under no obligation to make sense to us.

[@jakoblarok]

I feel like I grew up with a periodic table where H was lifted above the alkaline series by a half-notch - but I'm starting to think that my high school science department head (or whoever got that poster up in the shared science rooms) was a little ahead of the game, as I can't find that exact chart (with the raised H) anywhere...

[@frogz]

I AM SO SORRY TO TELL YOU, THIS VIDEO HAS 56 VIEWS AND I AM NOT FIRST!!

[@matthewwriter9539]

0:40 "There are at least three credible places you can stick it." That's what she said.

[@argentpuck]

I'm not convinced hydrogen is an element. It's a lone, wandering proton that picked up an electron buddy (which is very easy to do in our universe). "Hydrogen" is how protons act left to their own devices.

[@rheiagreenland4714]

Ah, but what about deuterium or protium? By the way both can be true

[@PelenTan]

"Giving up and hucking it the middle." I had to pause so I could stop chuckling.

[@gravestone4840]

Hydrogen is strange for a bunch of reasons but what gets me is that it was the first element. Which forces are responsible that allowed Hydrogen to exist in the first place? Was it just a bunch of subatomic particles that happened to stick in that arrangement? We can easily explain where every element came from, how to change it to another element by slamming more protons and neutrons into it or what it will decay into, but Hydrogen we really aren't sure how that first element came about. I feel we're missing something about its nature.

[@ianbelletti6241]

This is probably the result of only having one electron shell and only being able to have a maximum of 2 electrons in that shell. That means the bonding properties should share similarities to multiple columns on the chart.

[@johnsavard7583]

That's because there's room for two electrons in the s shell, and six electrons in the p shell... and ten in d, and fourteen in f. So Hydrogen, with one out of two electrons, has one extra from zero (like lithium), is missing one from two (like fluorine) and has as many extra as it is missing, since one is half of two (like carbon, because four is half of eight, two plus six, because the s and p shells are both going in its row). The d shell makes the transition metals, and the f shell makes the rare earths, so it's not like the shape of the periodic table only changes for Hydrogen.

[@yogeshroy9913]

"Chemists gave up arguing... with the graphic designers" Makes it like illustrators determined the positions of elements, not chemists. And Hydrogen do behave like alkali metals under extreme conditions. Most chemists agree about it's positioning in Group 1.

[@NerdOracle]

In my opinion it would make more sense to regard hydrogen as protium. Since the term as it stands is somewhat redundant, with the insistence of regarding loose protons as protium, when we also choose to equate them to H+ ions. They’re all the same thing. If we instead considered everything prior to Helium to be Protium, we’d eliminate the confusion regarding tritium, deuterium, Hydrogen, protium, and Hydrogen ion states. Just denote distinct stages of protium. Protium+, protium-, protium° Rewrite the text books, teach children from the ground up, make them understand the math involved in chemistry. Erasing hydrogen from the record in favor of protium puts deuterium and tritium in the table with ease, and both can adopt the same +,-,° denotation as well. It makes all ionic science that little bit more intuitive as well

[@kryts27]

Hydride ions are fairly rare, as chemists do experiments where water is a solvent or reagent, in which case we're talking about H+ (the hydrogen ion or Brønsted-Lowry acid ion). However, it is correct that hydrogen is the odd man out as it only has one orbital to fill electrons; the 1S orbital. However, hydrogen alone can act as an acid or base, and often is found with period 2 non-metal atoms with covalent bonds; beryllium hydride (BeH2), methane; CH4, ammonia NH3, water H2O and the extremely potent mineral acid, hydrofluoric acid HF. The weird thing is that the extremely common water is quite stable and relatively unreactive next to highly caustic ammonia and the even more powerfully reactive (and dangerous to handle) hydrofluoric acid. Hydrogen is by far the most abundant atom in your body and the most abundant element in the universe.

[@ruanholtzhausen4000]

Well, it's about what kind of outermost shell it has. So helium is the odd one. The 2 left most rows and helium have s orbitals.

[@rhebucks_zh]

6:16 > Says stuff about Dubnium > Shows a table with Dubnium with a provisional name

[@siamsiamguite2909]

"Like it's embarrassed to be there" wow

[@mykolapliashechnykov8701]

I lol'd at "electrons fill the shells in specific patterns". Back in the school my chemistry teacher, a retired researcher, taught me a "bus seating rule" which perfectly described these specific patterns. Later at the university, during the quantum mechanics crash course, I got very ill and spent almost a month recovering. So our prof decided to get me up to speed during the lab, she called me to the chalkboard and tasked me with finding out the electronic formula of Thorium. I had no idea in the slightest how to, but after a quick look at the periodic table in the lab I remembered my chemistry classes and, with a little bit of math just wrote the damned formula down. The prof was shocked, then she complained about "those blasted chemists who just can't learn" and we spent till the end of the class solving equations to come to the same formula. She also demanded me to teach her this "bus seating rule". I came out of that class feeling enlightened. Good times.

[@Gorilla_Chaos]

Something I’ve learned through my limited years of science is the fact humans greatest weakness is the need to put everything in neat categories. Hydrogen is the best example. None of us can accept that hydrogen definition without fighting that it’s not mentioning something important. Science just boils down to “this is the easiest way for us to do something. So that’s how we do it” which is why hydrogen ions (and basic electrons) just show up in every type of science. Hydrogen deserves its own cataglory. Not because it can’t fit into a single definition, but because we are so obsessed with defining things that hydrogen is limited by our ability to define it. We need to accept things are multifaceted. And if we need a defintion, we need to describe “this is the practical (insert science) definition” and elaborate on it.

[@mithrillis]

"You have a whole row! might as well fill all of it yourself!"

[@ryanmaris1917]

One of the first things we had to do for AP chemistry was memorize most of the periodic table (think anything after like uranium or lead forget which was basically extra credit) and as the year went on I realized how important it was and yeah, hydrogen is definitely a weird element.

[@janmelantu7490]

I knew that Hydrogen was both listed sometimes above the Halogens instead of Alkali metals, but I didn’t know people were also suggesting trying to put it above Carbon. It’s definitely a bit weird, but totally makes sense

[@cliffh.3279]

It’s just organized by energy level and orbitals. Hydrogen is the least filled 1s valence element, so it’s on the left. Helium is the most filled 1s valence element, so it’s on the right. The trends on the table are helpful but the placements are not due to extrinsic properties of the elements

[@cyberjack1406]

Imagine being the first atom in existence and responsible for all the elements that were created next and people call you a misfit 😂

[@TojosWizzyWorld]

Hydrogen is group 14 for sure. All the physics fits. Also, though it has 1 electron in its outer shell compared to 4, that is not a real argument. Though weird, it is not weirder then the fact that we can’t measure a particles properties exactly, no matter how hard we try, and THAT became the most accurate theory ever.

[@Ifyoucanreadthisgooglebroke]

Funny how in so many contexts 1 manages to behave in asterisk-laden manners almost like the more on-their-face oddities 0 and infinity do.