general article seeking order in chaos

GENERAL ARTICLE

Seeking Order in Chaos

Mendeleev and the Emergence of the Periodic Table

Abhinav Godavarthi and S Sivaram

Abhinav, 16, is currently a

12th grader at Plano West

Senior High School, Texas. A

quiz bowl national champion

(USA), he is interested in both

science and history and

particularly the intersection

of the two. He is a cellist,

pianist, and a Carnatic singer.

He plans to study chemistry,

molecular biology, and

history, and eventually

pursue a PhD.

S Sivaram is currently a

Honorary Professor and

INSA Senior Scientist at

IISER-Pune. He was a

CSIR-Bhatnagar Fellow

(2011–16) and Director of

CSIR-NCL (2002–10). Apart

from research in polymer

chemistry, he is interested in

the history of science and the

origin and evolution of

thoughts that drive the

scientific enterprise.

The International Year of the Periodic Table, proclaimed by

the United Nations to begin January 2019, coincides with the

one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of Mendeleev’s pub-

lished Periodic Table. The Periodic Table marked the coming

of age of Chemistry. Mendeleev’s genius lay not in the dis-

covery of the fact of periodicity, but in his interpretation of it

as a fundamental principle, allowing for concrete hypotheses

to be tested. His predictions of the properties of elements-to-

be, as well as presentation in a simple and easy to understand

chart were contributing factors to make it his lasting legacy.

The success of the Periodic Table was a triumph of the value

of understanding chemistry based on theory over merely de-

pending on empirical observations and an ability to relate

such theory to experiments. Mendeleev’s discovery emerged

out of the difficulties he encountered in teaching chemistry

and, interestingly enough, it continues to serve that purpose

today. The Periodic Table is taught worldwide early on in

science education. Regardless of scientific technicalities, the

Periodic Table will always stand as a symbol of the beauty in

the simplicity of nature, an order that permeates a seemingly

chaotic world of elements with deep scientific and philosoph-

ical underpinnings. In this article, we trace the origins of this

epoch-making discovery, his life as well as the times in which

Mendeleev lived and worked and the present and future im-

pact of his discovery.

1. Introduction

The United Nations General Assembly has proclaimed 2019 asthe International Year of the Periodic Table of Chemical Ele-

RESONANCE | January 2019 11https://doi.org/10.1007/s12045-019-0756-x

GENERAL ARTICLE

ments (IYPT 2019) [1]. The goal: “in proclaiming an Interna-Keywords

Periodic Table, atomic taxonomy,

atomic weights, atomic number,

valency, periodicity.

tional Year focusing on the Periodic Table of Chemical Elementsand its applications, the United Nations has recognized the impor-tance of raising global awareness of how chemistry promotes sus-tainable development and provides solutions to global challengesin energy, education, agriculture and health and other critical sec-tors.” This year coincides with the 150th anniversary of DmitriMendeleev’s Periodic Table published in 1869. The objective ofIYPT 2019 is to promote and celebrate the significance of the Pe-riodic Table of Elements and its applications to both science andsociety.

TheThe Periodic Table is theundisputed central piece

of chemistry. If ourworld consists of

elements, the buildingblocks from which allliving and non-living

matter are derived, thenthe Periodic Table is theconstruct which reveals

the deepest relationshipsand patterns amongst

these elements.

Periodic Table is the undisputed central piece of chemistry. Ifour world consists of elements, the building blocks from which allliving and non-living matter are derived, then the Periodic Tableis the construct which reveals the deepest relationships and pat-terns amongst these elements. The Periodic Table was a startlingrevelation, simple to comprehend, yet profound in its impact. Itreflected a deep order in nature, which always existed, but waswaiting to be discovered. The Table had deep philosophical un-derpinnings. Why was this relationship so? Who created it andfor what purpose? Was it a cryptogram without a key? [2]. Doesthis ‘invisible key’ hold the secrets to decipher the darkest secretsof nature and this universe? Why is the Periodic Table so impor-tant to not only chemistry but to other branches of science? Whatwere the historical events that led to the revelation of periodicityof elements? Even after a century and a half, many questions begfor answers. It is not, therefore, surprising that the Periodic Ta-ble has attracted attention not only from scientists but from artistsand writers of all hues and colours. In the words of Oliver Sacks,the Periodic Table appears “to read the mind of Gods” [2], or asstated by C P Snow, “a jungle that suddenly transformed itselfinto a Dutch garden” [3]. Does the Periodic Table belong to therealm of chemistry or sociology (since it explores families andrelationships), or geography (since we can understand the prop-erties of elements from the directional spaces they occupy in theTable. For example, strongly electropositive elements are found

12 RESONANCE | January 2019

GENERAL ARTICLE

on the west side, whereas strongly electronegative elements arefound on the east)? Perhaps it belongs to both history and philos-ophy, as Primo Levi beautifully stated: “micro-history, the historyof a trade and its defeats, victories, and miseries, such as every-one wants to tell when he feels close to concluding the arc of hiscareer, and art ceases to be long. Having reached this point inlife, what chemist, facing the Periodic Table, does not perceivescattered among them the sad tatters, or trophies, of his own pro-fessional past? He only has to leaf through any treatise and mem-ories rise up in bunches: there is among us he who has tied hisdestiny, indelibly, to bromine or to propylene, or the –NCOgroup, or glutamic acid; and every chemistry student, faced byalmost any treatise, should be aware that on one of those pages,perhaps in a single line, formula, or word, his future is writtenin indecipherable characters, which, however, will become clear‘afterward’: after success, error, or guilt, victory or defeat. Ev-ery So, it happens, therefore,

that every element sayssomething to someone(something different toeach) like the mountainvalleys or beachesvisited in youth.

– Primo Levi

no longer young chemist, turning again to the page in thatsame treatise, is struck by love or disgust, delights or despairs.So, it happens, therefore, that every element says something tosomeone (something different to each) like the mountain valleysor beaches visited in youth.”

The Periodic Table as we perceive today is indelibly associatedwith Dmitri Ivanovich Mendeleev [5] as his most lasting contri-bution to chemistry. Therefore, to understand the significance ofthe Table, we need to delve into the life and times of Mendeleevand ask what led him to this epochal discovery. This article willchronicle Mendeleev’s journey leading to the discovery of the Ta-ble, his influences in every stage of his scientific career, his undy-ing curiosity, and his lost Nobel Prize. Finally, we will brieflyallude to the future of the Periodic Table as an instrument of sci-ence in the modern world.

2. Early Life and the Path to the Discovery [6]

Dmitri Ivanovich Mendeleev was born on 27 January 1834 in avillage near present-day Tobolsk, Siberia, as the last of 17 chil-

RESONANCE | January 2019 13

GENERAL ARTICLE

Figure 1. (Left) : DmitriMendeleev in 1897 (Picturecourtesy: public domain).(Right) A statue of DmitriMendeleev at the Universityof St. Petersburg (Picturecourtesy: S Sivaram, 2013).

dren to Maria Dmitrievna Mendeleeva and Ivan Pavlovich Mendeleev.A young Mendeleev saw his father, a teacher, becoming blind.This led his mother to work in a glass factory. However, in 1848the factory burned down, and the family faced penury. Mendeleev’smother, recognizing his precocious mind, travelled thousands ofmiles with him to Moscow (where he was denied admission atthe University, being a Siberian) and then to St. Petersburg wherehe began to train as a teacher. After a brief stay at the renownedHeidelberg University, home to such dominant figures as RobertBunsen and Gustav Kirchhoff, Mendeleev returned to St. Peters-burg to teach at the Technical Institute in St. Petersburg in 1861.He had a flowing beard and long, wild hair that he was knownto trim only once a year (Figure 1), and he is believed to haveintentionally cultivated the personality of an eccentric.

Mendeleev initially wrote a textbook titled Organic Chemistry(1861) (Figure 2) which was considered the most authoritativebook of his times. However, he was acutely conscious that his stu-dents were finding it difficult to understand chemistry. Mendeleev


GENERAL ARTICLE

also realized that the difficulties The edifice of sciencenot only requiresmaterial, but also a plan,and necessitates thework of preparing thematerials, putting themtogether, working out theplans and symmetricalproportions of thevarious parts.

–D I Mendeleev

were due to the lack of a clearsystem for classifying the known elements. Without such a clas-sification, he could only state known facts about elements, but noframework that would explain the relationships amongst them.Therefore, Mendeleev began to write a textbook for inorganicchemistry and the result, Principles of Chemistry (two volumes,1868–70) became the standard text until early in the 20th century.As Mendeleev wrote in the preface to this book, “The edifice ofscience not only requires material, but also a plan, and necessi-tates the work of preparing the materials, putting them together,working out the plans and symmetrical proportions of the variousparts. To conceive, understand and grasp the whole symmetry ofthe scientific edifice, including its unfinished portions, is equiva-lent to tasting that enjoyment only conveyed by the highest formsof beauty and truth. Without the material, the plan alone is buta castle in the air, whilst material without a plan is but uselessmatter” [7]. Mendeleev while writing Principles of Chemistry be-gan to organize the elements beginning with hydrogen, oxygen,nitrogen, and carbon. He found in them a natural order. Next,he included the halogens which had low atomic weights. He at-tempted to use known atomic weights of elements as a principleof organization. However, he encountered difficulties in doing so.

Mendeleev’s achievements as a thinker were not limited to thediscovery of the Periodic Table. He was a scientist concernedwith service, an avid technologist, and an industrialist. He con-ducted his science with great influence and his pressing desire toenable his country to compete with the rapidly growing Westernnations which he witnessed growing at an incredible pace in viewof the burgeoning industrial revolution.

3. Atomic Taxonomy (Circa 1860)

To properly understand Mendeleev’s contribution to creating thecategorized matrix of the elements as we know it today, we mustfirst observe all those who had attempted the challenge beforehim. In his ‘Seven Postulates of Periodicity’, Mendeleev made


GENERAL ARTICLE

Figure 2. The front pageof Mendeleev’s book Or-ganic Chemistry from theMendeleev Museum, TheUniversity of St. Peters-burg (Picture courtesy: SSivaram, 2013).

a few claims which truly set him apart as the prophet of the ele-ments, but many underlying trends were brought into light by hiscontemporaries.

AsAs early as the thirdcentury BCE, Plato and

his disciples had formedthe concept of the

element, a unit of matterthat formed, either by

itself or with otherelements, everything.

Like most ideas inchemistry, it was not

until Antoine deLavoisier (1743–94)

touched the subject thata rigorous definition was

provided.

early as the third century BCE, Plato and his disciples hadformed the concept of the element, a unit of matter that formed,either by itself or with other elements, everything. Like mostideas in chemistry, it was not until Antoine de Lavoisier (1743–94) touched the subject that a rigorous definition was provided.In his Elementary Treatise of Chemistry, widely considered asthe first chemistry textbook, Lavoisier writes [8]: “...by the termelements, we mean to express those simple and indivisible atomsof which matter is composed...”

Lavoisier went on to report the existence of several elements butwas unable to identify any underlying principle regarding theirnatural order. Nearly fifty years later, Johann Dobereiner (1780–1849) put forth his empirical ‘Law of Triads’, which described therelated properties of triads of elements, with increasing atomicmass. In his paper, titled ‘An Attempt to Group Elementary Sub-stances According to Their Analogies’ (1829), Dobereiner stated:


GENERAL ARTICLE

Figure 3. A recreationof Mendeleev’s office at theMendeleev Museum, TheUniversity of St. Peters-burg (Picture courtesy: SSivaram, 2013).

“In the alkali group, according to this view, soda stands in themiddle, since if we take the value for the atomic weight of lithia,determined by Gmelin, = 195.310, and the value for potash =589.916, then the arithmetic mean of these numbers...[equals]392.613, which comes very close to the atomic value for soda,which Jacob Berzelius (1779–1848) determined as 390.897” [9].Dobereiner was troubled by the fact that the gap in atomic weightbetween chlorine and iodine was large, and that there must bea third element with an atomic weight midway between the twohalogens. This element, bromine, was discovered in 1926. Therewere mixed reactions to Dobereiner’s hypothesis. Berzelius andHumphry Davy (1778–1829) were skeptical whether such ‘nu-merology’ had any real meaning in science.

While Dobereiner’s work identified simple patterns in small gro-ups, it showed no principle that could be extended across all theknown elements. That would only arrive some thirty years later,when an English chemist by the name John Newlands (1837–98)


GENERAL ARTICLE

proposed the ‘Law of Octaves’, noting that “the eighth element,starting from a given one, is a kind of repetition of the first, likethe eighth note in an octave of music” [10]. Newlands arrangedall the known elements, starting with hydrogen into seven groupsof eight. In fact, it was Newlands who contributed the term ‘Peri-odic’ to the lexicon, not Mendeleev [11].

At the turn of the nineteenth century, another profound thoughtappeared in chemistry. Building on the hypothesis of JosephProust (1754–1826) that elements combine in discrete propor-tions (The Law of Definite Proportions), Dalton (1766–1844) pos-tulated that elements were composed of atoms with unique weightswhich combine in simple whole number ratios to form compounds.In spite of Dalton’s flawed postulate for the structure of water andammonia, his theory survived.

AnotherAnother raging debatetook place amongst

chemists in the latter halfof the nineteenth

century. There weresome who believed in

the physical reality of anatom (atomism) and

others who doubted theexistence of the atom

(anti-atomism).However, many chemists

were willing to acceptatomic theory

epistemologically (atomas a chemically

indivisible unit) but notontologically (as a

physical reality).

raging debate took place amongst chemists in the lat-ter half of the nineteenth century. There were some who be-lieved in the physical reality of an atom (atomism) and otherswho doubted the existence of the atom (anti-atomism). However,many chemists were willing to accept atomic theory epistemolog-ically (atom as a chemically indivisible unit) but not ontologically(as a physical reality). Mendeleev too grappled with this dualityof thought and struggled to reconcile the concept of periodicitybased on atomic weights with the chemical nature of elements.He viewed elements as ‘chemical individuals’ and believed thatthe ‘immense diversities of elemental individualities’ cannot bereduced to a primary matter, such as an atom [12].

In spite of all the intellectual fervour of this period, there wasconsiderable confusion about the atomic weights of many ele-ments. The book titled Lehrbuch der Organischen Chemie (1861)by August Kekule (1829–96) gave nineteen different formulaefor acetic acid! This confusion was put to rest finally only in1860 at the Karlsruhe Chemical Congress [13]. The KarlsruheCongress was called by a group of European chemists to discussmatters of chemical nomenclature, notation and atomic weights.The key organizers were August Kekule, Adolphe Wurtz and KarlWeltzien. On the last day of the meeting, reprints of Stanislao


GENERAL ARTICLE

Element Atomic Element Atomic Element Atomic

Weight Weight Weight

Cl 35.5 K 39 Ca 40

Br 80 Rb 85 Sr 88

I 127 Cs 133 Ba 137

Table 1. Mendeleev’s earlyrepresentation of order in el-ements, circa 1860.

Cannizzaro’s (1826–1910) paper published in 1858 on atomicweights, in which he utilized earlier work by Amedeo Avogadro(1776–1856), were distributed. Cannizzaro’s paper caused a flut-ter and influenced the thinking of the participants. Julias LotharMeyer (1830–95) wrote that on reading Cannizzaro’s paper, “thescales seemed to fall from my eyes” [14]. An important long-termresult of the Karlsruhe Congress was the adoption of the mod-ern day atomic weights. Prior to this, several systems of atomicweights were Following the Karlsruhe

Chemical Congress in1860, values of 1 forhydrogen, 12 for carbon,16 for oxygen, and soforth were adopted basedon the recognition thatcertain elements werecomposed of diatomicmolecules and notindividual atoms.

in use, such as a value of 1 for hydrogen (the baseunit), 6 for carbon and 8 for oxygen. This led to uncertainties inthe composition of many compounds. Following the KarlsruheCongress, values of 1 for hydrogen, 12 for carbon, 16 for oxygen,and so forth were adopted based on the recognition that certain el-ements were composed of diatomic molecules and not individualatoms.

Mendeleev was present at the Karlsruhe Congress. He heard Can-nizzaro show the correct atomic weights of calcium, strontiumand barium, and it became clear how close these were to those ofthe alkali metals – potassium, rubidium and caesium. As soon ashe returned to St. Petersburg, Mendeleev made a small jotting,juxtaposing these three groups (Table 1). 1This date is according to the

older Julian calendar that wasused in Russia at this time. Itdiffers from the Gregorian cal-endar that was introduced in theWestern countries in 1582. In1869 the difference between thetwo calendars amounted to 12days.

It occurred to him immediately that this must be a fragment ofa larger pattern which ultimately led him to the idea of periodic-ity governing all the elements – a Periodic Law. Using a com-bination of careful analysis and deep intuition, Mendeleev ar-rived at a tabulation of thirty odd elements. It is widely held thatthe final revelation of the periodicity of the elements occurred toMendeleev on the morning of 17 February 18691, after working


GENERAL ARTICLE

Figure 4. The first Peri-odic Table of Mendeleev inhis hand writing, from theMendeleev Museum, TheUniversity of St. Peters-burg (Picture courtesy S.Sivaram, 2013)

non-stop for three days and nights (Figure 4). On 6 March 1869,Dmitri Mendeleev delivered a presentation to the Russian Chem-ical Society titled, ‘The Dependence Between the Properties ofthe Atomic Weights of the Elements’. The content of the presen-tation was published later under the title, ’On the Relationshipof the Properties to the Atomic Weights of the Elements’22D Mendelejeff, Zeitschrift fur

Chemie, Vol.12, pp.405–406,1869, (now Angewandte

Chemie).

, thusputting in writing a discovery that would revolutionize and re-invigorate chemistry forever. His first exposition of the PeriodicTable in the West was the Faraday Lecture he delivered on 4 June1889 [15].

As a testimony to his supreme confidence that his Table repre-sented the truth, he suggested new positions for half a dozen ele-ments in defiance of their accepted valency and atomic weights.Mendeleev went a step farther and made note of the underly-ing principle of his discovery: periodicity. With this principle inmind, he noted the inconsistencies in mass data on the existing el-ements, hypothesized the determining factors of an atom’s prop-


GENERAL ARTICLE

erties, and, most importantly, predicted the properties of elements-to-be. He reserved several empty spaces in his Table for elements‘as yet unknown’. He Mendeleev predicted the

existence of an element‘eka-aluminium’ belowaluminium in Group IIIwith an atomic weight of68 and specific gravityof 5.9. Four years later,Lecoq de Boisbaudran(1838–1912) woulddiscover this element,which he namedGallium, after his homecountry and had anatomic weight of 69.9and specific gravity of5.94!

predicted the existence of an element ‘eka-aluminium’ below aluminium in Group III with an atomic weightof 68 and specific gravity of 5.9. Four years later, Lecoq deBoisbaudran (1838–1912) would discover this element, which henamed Gallium, after his home country and had an atomic weightof 69.9 and specific gravity of 5.94! The accepted atomic massof gallium today is 69.723 and the value of density is 5.91 g/cm3.The pattern of periodicity could only not be clearly seen at thebeginning partly because of inaccurate values of atomic weights.This resulted in an entire group of missing elements that no onehad predicted, namely, the noble gases. Furthermore, The Ta-ble did not provide the optimal ordering principle based only onatomic weights and as many as four pairs of elements occurred inreversed positions. This issue had to wait until the discovery ofatomic number in 1913–14 for a full clarification. The contem-porary Periodic Table that we see today is arranged according tothe increasing atomic numbers that correspond to the increasingnumber of protons in the nucleus and can be attributed to Anto-nius van den Broek (1870–1926) and H G J Mosley (1887–1915).

Mendeleev was the first to recognize valency as rationale for nat-ural families of elements, with Group I having a valency of one,Group II with a valency of two and Group VIII with a valency ofeight. When he arranged the elements in the order of their atomicweights, in horizontal ‘periods’ as he called them, one could seethe recurrences of the same properties and valencies at regularintervals.

Ironically, originating from someone who doubted the existenceof an atom, the Periodic Table provided the strongest argumentfor the physical atom which opened the door for a deeper under-standing of the atomic structure, and led to revolutionary discov-eries in the early years of the twentieth century!

Mendeleev’s genius lay not in the discovery of the fact of peri-odicity, but in his interpretation of it as a fundamental principleallowing for concrete hypotheses to be tested. His predictions


GENERAL ARTICLE

of the properties of elements-to-be, as well as the creation ofan elegant figure, wereMendeleev’s genius lay

not in the discovery ofthe fact of periodicity,

but in his interpretationof it as a fundamentalprinciple allowing for

concrete hypotheses tobe tested.

instrumental in making it his most last-ing legacy. It was Mendeleev who changed the whole challengefrom one of simple classification to that of an understanding offirst principles, consistent with fellow thinkers from the periodsof enlightenment and romanticism who preceded him. For in-stance, Linnaeus (1707–1778), who had not only classified ani-mals and plants but also designed a system for classification afterhis time; Alexander Humboldt (1769–1859), who shaped our un-derstanding of the biosphere as a truly interconnected system ofecosystems and environments through the observation of broadnatural principles; Darwin (1809–1882) , who strove to uncoverunderlying principles of visible diversity in the natural world byproposing the theory of natural selection; J D Dana, (1813–1895),a renowned geologist, who provided a chemical classification ofminerals; even mathematicians such as Gauss and Abel, who un-covered the fundamental laws and a reduced set of principles thatexplained the applied phenomena that scientists of previous gen-erations had described.

4. Mendeleev, Ethics, and the Elusive Nobel

If Mendeleev was not the first one to come up with the idea ofperiodicity, why is any credit attributed to him for the PeriodicTable? In questions of Mendeleev’s ethical integrity, we mustprobe his intents in attempting to classify the elements: were theyfor the sole purpose of getting recognition? Did he feel a com-petitive spirit with his contemporaries? Did he have access to thewide body of literature emerging from Western Europe?

E Scerri, an acknowledged scholar on Mendeleev, believes that“Mendeleev wasn’t isolated in Siberia, which is the way he issometimes portrayed. He spoke all the major European languages,was familiar with the literature and had travelled in Europe. Hementioned the precursors of the Periodic Table, but not the oneswho actually devised systems. He surely must have known aboutthem.” He continues further to ask, “Why wouldn’t he acknowl-


GENERAL ARTICLE

edge the efforts of other scientists here? It beats me. I don’t knowwhether the project of systematizing was viewed differently byMendeleev and his colleagues than, say, discovery of a new sub-stance or a new reaction. Or maybe it was standard issue of hu-man frailty. Indeed, my sense is that Mendeleev probably hadvery little to lose by acknowledging earlier versions of the Peri-odic Table, simply because his was a more useful way to system-atize the elements. Mendeleev’s Table captured the organizingprinciples that made the most sense. Mendeleev should have ac-knowledged any earlier versions of the Periodic Table of whichhe was aware – even if he didn’t feel that they had influenced hisown thinking in formulating his famous version of the PeriodicTable.” [16]. While speculations abound, there is no definitiveview whether Mendeleev deliberately ignored the work before histimes in an attempt to claim total credit for himself.

It Apart from the PeriodicTable, Mendeleev addedgreatly to the knowledgeof phase transitions,anticipating the presenceof the critical point.Later on, he beganapplying his theoreticalknowledge to thedevelopment oftechnologies for theRussian military.

is perplexing that Mendeleev lost the Nobel each year from itsintroduction (1901) to his death (1907) [17]. In his homeland,too, he was never elected a full member of the Russian Academyof Sciences. Nevertheless, by the end of his life, Mendeleev hadbeen honoured by several scientific institutions all over Europe,including the Royal Society in London, which gave him the DavyMedal in 1882 and the Copley Medal in 1905.

5. Mendeleev’s Other Contributions

In light of his discovery of The Periodic Law at such an earlystage in his career, many of Mendeleev’s further contributionshave been forgotten. Mendeleev abandoned the pursuit of his in-terest in the Periodic Table in 1871, a mere two years after hisepochal discovery. At Heidelberg, his theoretical interests ex-tended into physical chemistry. He added greatly to the knowl-edge of phase transitions, anticipating the presence of the criticalpoint (terming it the ‘temperature of absolute ebullition’). Lateron, he began applying his theoretical knowledge to the develop-ment of technologies for the Russian military. His work on theexpansion of gases, funded by the Russian government, found


GENERAL ARTICLE

great use in ballistics.

BeyondMendeleev was deeplyinvolved in the

discovery,manufacturing, and

distribution of petroleumin Russia, and a large

chunk of existing plansfor petroleum

infrastructure today inRussia can thank

Mendeleev for theirefficiencies.

fundamental work, Mendeleev was deeply involved in thediscovery, manufacturing, and distribution of petroleum in Rus-sia; in fact, a large chunk of existing plans for petroleum infras-tructure today in Russia can thank Mendeleev for their efficien-cies. After a visit to the United States in the 1870s, Mendeleevintroduced private entrepreneurs to American oil drilling tech-niques. The shift in Russian oil refineries to the centre of Russia,allowing for easy transport and distribution of the product, canalso be attributed to Mendeleev. Mendeleev devoted a significantportion of his remaining years to advocating further innovationsto Russian oil production, from improvements to oil quality tothe creation of a pipeline stretching through the Caucasus to theBlack Sea [18].

Mendeleev understood that science alone was not enough to cre-ate sustainable change in his country, and that policy and indus-trial management played equally important roles. This aspect ofMendeleev’s mindset as an agent of change in the world is mostseen in the last stage of his career. He spent fourteen years as thehead of the Main Chamber of Weights and Measurements, duringwhich period, he was instrumental in shifting the Russian Empireto the use of metric system and the development of more preciseweighing systems. His commitment to the field continued untilhis death in 1907. He also made important advances in the fieldsof meteorology and economics, writing polemical texts in the lat-ter encouraging increased industrialization of Russia.

6. Conclusions and the Future of the Periodic Table

It is clear that Mendeleev’s contributions to chemistry range farand beyond the Periodic Law. Yet, the Periodic Table is his mostenduring legacy, the simplest formulation of the natural world’smost essential building blocks. It is through this formulation thathe successfully managed to communicate the inherent patternsin nature and the beauty with which it is constructed. Since theinitial conception of the Table, it has been structurally modified


GENERAL ARTICLE

by many to emphasize certain patterns that lie within it. There arehundreds of versions of Periodic Table that can be accessed on theweb [19, 20]. Several of them use quantum number as a basis ofcategorization. For example, Charles Jenet’s ‘Left Step PeriodicTable’ makes clear the exact pattern of orbital filling in the ele-ments [19]. Valery Tsimmerman’s ‘ADOMAH’ Table systemati-cally describes the element by each of its four quantum numbers,making it incredibly useful from a physicist’s perspective as well[20]. Many continue to question the position of elements in thePeriodic Table. The position of the two f-blocks has been the sub-ject of extensive discussion. IUPAC has kept two vacant spacesbelow Sc and Y with separate 15-element rows of lanthanides andactinides [21].

The The creation of‘next-gen’ PeriodicTables gives rise to animportant question: isthere a limit on how farthe Table may reach?

creation of such ‘next-gen’ Periodic Tables gives rise to animportant question: is there a limit on how far the Table mayreach? It is said that Feynman once proposed that unitriseptium(atomic number 137) would be the last element capable of exist-ing in a neutral form [22]. At such nuclear charge, the speed of anelectron in the 1s orbital in the atom is predicted by the classicalBohr model to exceed the speed of light. Even after taking intoaccount relativistic effects, approximations of nuclear size, andfield effects, a limit emerges. Current theoretical studies basedon quantum theory places a limit on atomic size at Z < 173. Atsuch atomic numbers, elements would be fundamentally unstableand spontaneously disintegrate into charged atomic sub-particles.Even today, as chemists attempt to synthesize larger and largerelements (many comprising the trans-Uranium family), the fun-damental instabilities in the products are clear.

As the human need for novel energy sources arises, and with it,the synthesis of several new elements such as those of the trans-Uranium family, one question that arises is whether or not suchelements should be considered as elements in the truest sense ofthe word. After all, to date, several of these elements have notbeen found to be naturally-occurring, but all elements are said tobe components of the natural world.

We posit that the Periodic Table today is most powerful as an


GENERAL ARTICLE

educational tool – not simply a record of those substances wemay find in nature, but rather a means to categorize and analyseany element which may be found to have use in any way. Thus,any element that emerges as a consequence of explicitly syntheticefforts still has a very important place in the Periodic Table of thefuture. The Periodic Table, in one plane, is a manifestation ofproperties of natural elements; in another plane, it points out tothe properties of the atoms which define man-made elements.

MoreRegardless of scientifictechnicalities, the

Periodic Table willalways stand as a symbol

of the beauty in thesimplicity of nature, anorder that permeates a

seemingly chaotic worldof elements with deep

scientific andphilosophical

underpinnings.

broadly, regardless of scientific technicalities, the PeriodicTable will always stand as a symbol of beauty and simplicity ofnature. Although Mendeleev was a true genius for discoveringthe Periodic Table, the periodic system was pre-existing and pro-vided by nature itself. The truth was just waiting to be discoveredby someone. There were never two ways of arranging the ele-ment similar to a deck of playing cards in the game of patience orsolitaire. When the game is completed, the result is obvious. It isthe same with the Periodic Table.

The ultimate quest of science is to seek order in chaos and tofind meaning in the patterns of creation of this universe. To quoteMendeleev, the quintessential philosopher-chemist, “it is the func-tion of science to find a general reign of order in nature and to findthe causes that govern this order; and this refers in equal measureto the relations of man – social and political – and the entire uni-verse” [23]. Mendeleev assured his position in posterity becausehe accomplished this goal.

Suggested Reading

[1] https://iupac.org/united-nations-proclaims-international-year-

periodic-table-chemical-elements/; accessed 25 December 2018;

https://www.iypt2019.org/

[2] Oliver Sacks, Uncle Tungsten: Memories of a Chemical Boyhood, Alfred A.

Knopf Inc., New York, 2011.

[3] C P Snow, The Search, Stratus Books, UK, 1958.

[4] Primo Levi, The Periodic Table, Schocken Books New York, 1984, reprinted as

Penguin Classics, 2000.

[5] The name of Mendeleev has been spelt on various ways in the literature, such

as, Mendeleeff, Mendelejeff, Mendeleyev, Mendeleeiff, etc. The difficulty in ex-


GENERAL ARTICLE

actly translating his Russian name to English is probably the cause of this con-

fusion.

[6] Several articles on Mendeleev have appeared in previous issues of Resonance:Journal of Science Education. A Chakravorty, Dmitrii Ivanovich Mendeleev,

Resonance,Vol.5, No.5, pp.2–5, 2000; A G Samuelson, Fulfilling Mendeleev’s

Dream, Resonance, Vol.5, No.5, pp.64–66, 2000; Gregory J Butera, Glenn

Seaborg 1912–1999, Resonance, Vol.5, No.5, pp.67–73, 2000. In addition, there

are several scholarly publications on the life and work of Mendeleev. P Strath-

ern, Mendeleyev’s Dream: The Quest for the Elements, St. Martin’s Press, New

York, 2000; E V Babaev, Dmitri I Mendeleev, Mendeleev Communications,

Moscow, 2009.

[7] H M Leicester, Chymia, Vol.1, No.67, 1948; D I Mendeleev, The Principles ofChemistry, London, , p.9, 1891.

[8] Lavoisier and R Kerr, Elements of Chemistry, trans. Edinburgh, Scotland:

William Creech, from p.24, 1790.

[9] L A Horvitz, Eureka! Scientific Breakthroughs That Changed the World, John

Wiley, New York, 2002.

[10] J R Partington, A Short History of Chemistry, Harper Torchbooks, New York,

p.345, 1960.

[11] B Bryson, A Short History of Nearly Everything, Broadway Books, New York,

2003.

[12] P Thyssen in Positivism and Chemistry, Eds. M Eisvogel and K Ruthenberg,

Konigshausen and Neumann, Wurzburg, Germany, 2015.

[13] Historically, Karlsruhe Chemical Congress was the first international meeting

of chemists and it led to the eventual founding of the International Union of

Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC).

[14] Eric R Scerri, A Tale of Seven Elements, Oxford University Press UK, p.21,

2013.

[15] The text of the Faraday Lecture has been reproduced in Resonance as

Mendeleev’s Faraday Lecture: The Periodic Classification of the Chemical El-

ements, Vol.5, No.5, p.104, 2000.

[16] Eric R Scerri, The Periodic Table: Its Story and Significance, Oxford University

Press, UK, 2006; Eric R Scerri, The Periodic Table: A Very Short Introduction,

Oxford University Press, UK, 2011.

[17] C J Giunta, Dmitri Mendeleev’s Nobel-Prize-Losing Research, ACS Sympo-sium Series, Vol,1262, Chapter 3, pp.31–49, 2017; U Lagerkvist, The Peri-odic Table and the Missed Nobel Prize, World Scientific, Singapore, 2012; R M

Friedman, The Politics of Excellence: Behind the Nobel Prize in Science, Times

Books, New York, 2001; Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.,42, 1194, 2003.

[18] B Bensaude-Vincent, Dmitri Mendeleev, Encyclopaedia Britan-nica, 2018; Z Pelta-Heller, Distillations, January 19, 2018.

https://www.sciencehistory.org/distillations/blog/braving-the-

elements-why-mendeleev-left-russian-soil-for-american-oil, accessed, Decem-

ber 16, 2018.

[19] P J Stewart, Charles Janet: Unrecognized Genius of the Peri-

odic System, Foundations of Chemistry, 2009; https://www.meta-


GENERAL ARTICLE

synthesis.com/webbook/35 pt/pt database.php?PT id=152, Accessed De-

cember 17, 2018.

Address for Correspondence

Abhinav Godavarthi

5853 Pebblestone Ln

Plano, TX 75093 , USA.

Email:

[email protected]

S Sivaram

Indian Institute of Science

Education and Research

Dr Homi Bhabha Road

Pune 411 008, India.

Email:

s.sivaram@iiserpune .ac.in

[20] Valery Tsimmerman, Periodic Law can be understood in terms of tetrahedral

sphere packing, 2008; http://www.perfectperiodictable.com, Accessed Decem-

ber 18, 2018.

[21] E D Jemmis, Controversy continues on the position of elements in the Periodic

Table, Current Science, Vol.114, No.12, p.2428, 2018; M C Rath, Periodic ta-

ble of elements revisited for accommodating elements of future years, CurrentScience, Vol.115, No.9, p.1644, 2018.

[22] P Ball, Would Element 137 Really Spell the End of the Periodic Table, Chem-istry World, 28 October 2010; T Kuntzleman, The Search for the Final Element,

https://www.chemedx.org/blog/search-final

-element, accessed on 26 December 2018; D Powell, When Will We Reach

the End of the Periodic Table? https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-

nature/when-will-we-

reach-end-periodic-table-180957851/, accessed 26 December 2018.

[23] Mendeleev on the Periodic Law: Selected Writings, 1869–1905, W B Jensen Ed.,

Dover Publications, New York, 2005.


general article seeking order in chaos

Documents