Enter a player name to begin or load your saved progress.
Lawrencium is a naturally occurring radioactive metal with an atomic number of 103.
Answer: False
Explanation: Lawrencium is a synthetic element and does not occur naturally, although it is a radioactive metal with atomic number 103.
Ernest Lawrence, the namesake of Lawrencium, is renowned for inventing the cyclotron, a device instrumental in creating artificial radioactive elements.
Answer: True
Explanation: Ernest Lawrence, for whom Lawrencium is named, invented the cyclotron, a particle accelerator used to synthesize artificial radioactive elements.
Lawrencium is the first transuranium element and the last member of the actinide series.
Answer: False
Explanation: Lawrencium is the eleventh transuranium element and the last member of the actinide series, not the first transuranium element.
What is the atomic number and symbol for Lawrencium?
Answer: Atomic number 103, symbol Lr
Explanation: Lawrencium is a synthetic chemical element with the symbol Lr and an atomic number of 103.
Who is Lawrencium named after, and what was his significant invention?
Answer: Ernest Lawrence, inventor of the cyclotron
Explanation: Lawrencium is named after Ernest Lawrence, the inventor of the cyclotron, a particle accelerator used to create artificial radioactive elements.
Which of the following accurately describes Lawrencium's position in the periodic table?
Answer: The eleventh transuranium element and the last member of the actinide series
Explanation: Lawrencium is the eleventh transuranium element and the last member of the actinide series.
Elements with an atomic number exceeding 100, including lawrencium, are exclusively produced in nuclear reactors.
Answer: False
Explanation: Elements with an atomic number over 100, such as lawrencium, are exclusively produced in particle accelerators, not nuclear reactors.
In nuclear fusion for superheavy elements, electrostatic repulsion helps bind nuclei together, while the strong interaction tears them apart.
Answer: False
Explanation: In nuclear fusion, electrostatic repulsion causes nuclei to repel each other, while the strong interaction binds them together once repulsion is overcome.
A 'cross section' in nuclear fusion quantifies the probability that fusion will occur between a target and a beam.
Answer: True
Explanation: A cross section characterizes each pair of a target and a beam in nuclear fusion, representing the probability that fusion will occur if two nuclei approach one another.
A compound nucleus formed after fusion is highly stable and immediately ejects gamma rays to reach its ground state.
Answer: False
Explanation: A compound nucleus formed after fusion is highly unstable and may fission, eject neutrons, or produce gamma rays to reach a more stable state, typically within 10<sup>-16</sup> seconds.
The IUPAC/IUPAP Joint Working Party requires a nucleus to not decay within 10<sup>-10</sup> seconds to be recognized as a new element.
Answer: False
Explanation: The IUPAC/IUPAP Joint Working Party requires a nucleus to not decay within 10<sup>-14</sup> seconds to be recognized as a new element.
How is Lawrencium typically produced?
Answer: By bombarding lighter elements with charged particles in particle accelerators
Explanation: Lawrencium, like all elements with an atomic number over 100, is produced in particle accelerators by bombarding lighter elements with charged particles.
What is the primary role of the strong interaction in the creation of superheavy atomic nuclei?
Answer: To bind nuclei together after overcoming electrostatic repulsion.
Explanation: The strong interaction acts over very short distances to bind nuclei together after they overcome electrostatic repulsion during nuclear fusion.
According to the IUPAC/IUPAP Joint Working Party, what is the criterion for recognizing the discovery of a new chemical element?
Answer: A nucleus must not decay within 10<sup>-14</sup> seconds.
Explanation: The IUPAC/IUPAP Joint Working Party states that a chemical element can only be recognized as discovered if a nucleus of it has not decayed within 10<sup>-14</sup> seconds.
How is <sup>260</sup>Lr specifically produced?
Answer: By bombarding berkelium-249 with oxygen-18.
Explanation: <sup>260</sup>Lr is produced by bombarding berkelium-249 with oxygen-18, yielding lawrencium-260, an alpha particle, and three neutrons.
The most stable isotope of lawrencium is <sup>260</sup>Lr, which is also the one most commonly used in chemistry experiments.
Answer: False
Explanation: The most stable isotope of lawrencium is <sup>266</sup>Lr, with a half-life of 11 hours. While <sup>260</sup>Lr is commonly used in chemistry, it is not the most stable.
Superheavy nuclei predominantly decay via alpha decay and spontaneous fission because the strong interaction weakens for larger nuclei, while electrostatic repulsion increases.
Answer: True
Explanation: The strong interaction weakens for larger nuclei, while electrostatic repulsion between protons increases, leading superheavy nuclei to predominantly decay through alpha decay and spontaneous fission.
The liquid drop model predicted an 'island of stability' for nuclei with about 300 nucleons, where they would be more resistant to spontaneous fission.
Answer: False
Explanation: The nuclear shell model, not the liquid drop model, predicted an 'island of stability' for nuclei with about 300 nucleons, where they would be more resistant to spontaneous fission.
Alpha decays are more useful than spontaneous fission for identifying new elements because their decay chains can be linked to known nuclei by specific decay energies.
Answer: True
Explanation: Alpha decays are useful for identifying new elements because their decay chains can be linked to known nuclei by specific decay energies, allowing the original product to be determined. Spontaneous fission is less useful due to the variety of daughter nuclei produced.
The longest-lived Lawrencium isotope, <sup>266</sup>Lr, has a half-life of about 11 hours and was discovered as a decay product of <sup>294</sup>Tennessine.
Answer: True
Explanation: The longest-lived isotope, <sup>266</sup>Lr, has a half-life of about ten hours and was discovered in 2014 as a final decay product in the decay chain of <sup>294</sup>Tennessine.
The shortest-lived known lawrencium isotope is <sup>251</sup>Lr, with a half-life of 24.4 milliseconds.
Answer: True
Explanation: The shortest-lived known lawrencium isotope is <sup>251</sup>Lr, which has a half-life of 24.4 milliseconds.
The heaviest Lawrencium isotopes, <sup>264</sup>Lr and <sup>266</sup>Lr, are easily produced by bombarding actinide targets with light ions.
Answer: False
Explanation: The heaviest Lawrencium isotopes, <sup>264</sup>Lr and <sup>266</sup>Lr, are difficult to produce directly and are only produced at much lower yields as decay products of even heavier, harder-to-make isotopes.
Which isotope of lawrencium is most commonly used in chemistry experiments, despite not being the most stable?
Answer: <sup>260</sup>Lr
Explanation: The shorter-lived <sup>260</sup>Lr, with a half-life of 2.7 minutes, is more commonly used in chemistry experiments because it can be produced on a larger scale, even though <sup>266</sup>Lr is the most stable.
Why do superheavy nuclei predominantly decay via alpha decay and spontaneous fission?
Answer: The strong interaction weakens for larger nuclei, while electrostatic repulsion increases, tearing the nucleus apart.
Explanation: Superheavy nuclei predominantly decay via alpha decay and spontaneous fission because the strong interaction weakens for larger nuclei, while electrostatic repulsion between protons increases, leading to nuclear instability.
How do alpha decays assist in identifying new elements, unlike spontaneous fission?
Answer: Alpha decays produce known nuclei in a chain, allowing the original product to be determined by linking decays and analyzing energies.
Explanation: Alpha decays produce known nuclei in a chain, allowing the original reaction product to be determined by linking the decays to the same location and analyzing their specific decay energies. Spontaneous fission is less useful as it produces various nuclei.
How many isotopes of Lawrencium are currently known?
Answer: Fourteen
Explanation: Fourteen isotopes of lawrencium are currently known, with mass numbers ranging from 251 to 262, 264, and 266.
What is the half-life of the longest-lived Lawrencium isotope, <sup>266</sup>Lr?
Answer: About ten hours
Explanation: The longest-lived isotope, <sup>266</sup>Lr, has a half-life of about ten hours.
Which Lawrencium isotopes are typically used in chemical experiments?
Answer: Shorter-lived isotopes like <sup>256</sup>Lr and <sup>260</sup>Lr.
Explanation: Shorter-lived isotopes like <sup>256</sup>Lr and <sup>260</sup>Lr are typically used in chemical experiments because <sup>266</sup>Lr is difficult to produce directly.
What is the half-life of the shortest-lived known Lawrencium isotope?
Answer: 24.4 milliseconds
Explanation: The shortest-lived known lawrencium isotope is <sup>251</sup>Lr, which has a half-life of 24.4 milliseconds.
Why are the heaviest Lawrencium isotopes, <sup>264</sup>Lr and <sup>266</sup>Lr, difficult to produce?
Answer: They are produced at much lower yields as decay products of even heavier, harder-to-make isotopes.
Explanation: The heaviest Lawrencium isotopes, <sup>264</sup>Lr and <sup>266</sup>Lr, are difficult to produce because they are only produced at much lower yields as decay products of even heavier, harder-to-make isotopes.
The dispute over Lawrencium's discovery and naming was resolved by IUPAC crediting only the American team due to their earlier claims.
Answer: False
Explanation: IUPAC resolved the dispute by giving shared credit to both the Soviet and American teams, though the name 'lawrencium' was retained.
The Berkeley team's initial identification of the Lawrencium isotope in 1961 as <sup>257</sup>103 was later confirmed to be correct.
Answer: False
Explanation: The Berkeley team's initial identification of the isotope as <sup>257</sup>103 in 1961 was later corrected to <sup>258</sup>103.
The Dubna team criticized Berkeley's 1961 claim, arguing that producing <sup>258</sup>Lr from <sup>10</sup>B would require emitting four neutrons, which was less likely than emitting three or five, leading to an expected narrow yield curve.
Answer: True
Explanation: The Dubna team criticized Berkeley's 1961 claim, noting that producing <sup>258</sup>Lr from <sup>10</sup>B would require emitting four neutrons, which was less likely than emitting three or five, and should have resulted in a narrow yield curve, not the broad one reported.
The discoveries of Lawrencium by both Berkeley and Dubna teams were definitively confirmed in the 1970s through X-ray measurements of <sup>258</sup>103.
Answer: True
Explanation: All previous results from Berkeley and Dubna were confirmed in 1971, and final doubts were dispelled in 1976 and 1977 when the energies of X-rays emitted from <sup>258</sup>103 were measured, providing definitive evidence.
How did IUPAC resolve the historical dispute over the discovery and naming of Lawrencium?
Answer: They gave shared credit to both Soviet and American teams but retained the name 'lawrencium'.
Explanation: IUPAC resolved the dispute by giving shared credit to both the Soviet and American teams for the discovery, but retained the name 'lawrencium' due to its long-standing use.
What was the initial identification of the Lawrencium isotope produced by the Berkeley team in 1961, and what was the later correction?
Answer: Initially <sup>257</sup>103, later corrected to <sup>258</sup>103.
Explanation: The Berkeley team initially identified the isotope as <sup>257</sup>103 in 1961, but this was later corrected to <sup>258</sup>103.
When did the Dubna team first report the synthesis of element 103, and what isotope did they claim to produce?
Answer: 1965, claiming <sup>256</sup>103
Explanation: The Dubna team first reported work on element 103 in 1965, claiming to have made <sup>256</sup>103.
Lawrencium behaves as a heavier homolog to lutetium and is a trivalent element, sharing similar chemical properties.
Answer: True
Explanation: Chemistry experiments confirm that lawrencium behaves as a heavier homolog to lutetium and is a trivalent element, sharing similar chemical properties and reactivity.
Lawrencium's electron configuration is anomalous, having an s<sup>2</sup>d configuration instead of the expected s<sup>2</sup>p configuration for its position.
Answer: False
Explanation: Lawrencium's electron configuration is anomalous, having an s<sup>2</sup>p configuration instead of the s<sup>2</sup>d configuration typically expected for its homolog, lutetium.
Lawrencium is predicted to be a light metal with a density similar to aluminum.
Answer: False
Explanation: Lawrencium is predicted to be a rather heavy metal with a density of around 14.4 g/cm<sup>3</sup>, not a light metal similar to aluminum.
Lawrencium is expected to be easily oxidized by air, steam, and acids, indicating its reactive metallic nature.
Answer: True
Explanation: Lawrencium is expected to be easily oxidized by air, steam, and acids, which is characteristic of a reactive metallic nature.
Glenn T. Seaborg predicted in 1949 that element 103 would be the first actinide, a prediction later disproven.
Answer: False
Explanation: Glenn T. Seaborg predicted in 1949 that element 103 (lawrencium) would be the *last* actinide, and this prediction was later experimentally confirmed, not disproven.
Early chemical studies in 1970 showed lawrencium coextracted with divalent ions, distinguishing it from trivalent elements.
Answer: False
Explanation: Early chemical studies in 1970 showed lawrencium coextracted with trivalent ions, distinguishing it from divalent and tetravalent elements.
Due to the actinide contraction, the ionic radius of Lr<sup>3+</sup> is expected to be larger than that of Md<sup>3+</sup>.
Answer: False
Explanation: Due to the actinide contraction, the ionic radius of Lr<sup>3+</sup> is expected to be smaller than that of Md<sup>3+</sup>.
Experiments successfully reduced Lr<sup>3+</sup> to Lr<sup>2+</sup> or Lr<sup>+</sup> in aqueous solution, confirming its variable oxidation states.
Answer: False
Explanation: All experiments to reduce Lr<sup>3+</sup> to Lr<sup>2+</sup> or Lr<sup>+</sup> in aqueous solution were unsuccessful, indicating that these lower oxidation states are unlikely to exist in aqueous solution.
Lawrencium's ground-state electron configuration is [Rn]5f<sup>14</sup>6d<sup>1</sup>7s<sup>2</sup>, following the Aufbau principle.
Answer: False
Explanation: While initially predicted to be [Rn]5f<sup>14</sup>6d<sup>1</sup>7s<sup>2</sup>, Lawrencium's ground-state electron configuration is now known to be the anomalous [Rn]5f<sup>14</sup>7s<sup>2</sup>7p<sup>1</sup>.
The s<sup>2</sup>p configuration in Lawrencium is energetically favored because the s and p<sub>1/2</sub> orbitals are relativistically stabilized.
Answer: True
Explanation: The s<sup>2</sup>p configuration is energetically favored in Lawrencium because the spherical s and p<sub>1/2</sub> orbitals are relativistically stabilized due to their proximity to the nucleus and high velocity.
Adsorption experiments in 1988 confirmed lawrencium's volatility, consistent with an s<sup>2</sup>p electron configuration.
Answer: False
Explanation: Adsorption experiments in 1988 found no evidence of lawrencium being volatile, and its adsorption enthalpy was significantly higher than estimated for the s<sup>2</sup>p configuration, suggesting a different behavior.
The first ionization energy of lawrencium, measured at 4.96 eV, is the highest among all lanthanides and actinides.
Answer: False
Explanation: The first ionization energy of lawrencium, measured at 4.96 eV, is the lowest among all lanthanides and actinides.
Lawrencium can still be considered a d-block element despite its anomalous s<sup>2</sup>p ground-state configuration because its chemical behavior aligns with lutetium.
Answer: True
Explanation: Even with the s<sup>2</sup>p ground-state configuration, lawrencium can still be considered a d-block element because its chemical behavior aligns with expectations for a heavier analog of lutetium, and the ds<sup>2</sup> configuration is a low-lying excited state.
Early experiments with <sup>256</sup>Lr used rapid solvent extraction with TTA, which could separate trivalent actinides from each other.
Answer: False
Explanation: Early experiments with <sup>256</sup>Lr used rapid solvent extraction with TTA, which could separate ions of different charges but could not separate trivalent actinides from each other.
More recent purification methods for Lawrencium have enabled rapid selective elution using α-HIB, improving separation.
Answer: True
Explanation: More recent purification methods have enabled rapid selective elution using α-HIB, allowing for the separation of the longer-lived isotope <sup>260</sup>Lr and improving separation capabilities.
What is notable about Lawrencium's electron configuration for its position in the periodic table?
Answer: It has an s<sup>2</sup>p configuration, which is anomalous for its position.
Explanation: Lawrencium's electron configuration is anomalous for its position in the periodic table, having an s<sup>2</sup>p configuration instead of the s<sup>2</sup>d configuration typically expected for its homolog lutetium.
What physical state and appearance is Lawrencium predicted to have under normal conditions?
Answer: A solid, silvery metal
Explanation: Lawrencium is predicted to be a silvery metal and is expected to be a solid under normal conditions.
What is the estimated enthalpy of sublimation for Lawrencium, and what does it suggest about its metallic nature?
Answer: 352 kJ/mol, suggesting it is a trivalent metal
Explanation: The enthalpy of sublimation for lawrencium is estimated at 352 kJ/mol, a value that strongly suggests metallic lawrencium is trivalent.
How does Lawrencium's expected metallic behavior differ from the immediately preceding late actinides (fermium and mendelevium)?
Answer: Lawrencium is expected to be trivalent, while they are known or expected to be divalent.
Explanation: Lawrencium is expected to be trivalent, unlike the immediately preceding late actinides (fermium and mendelevium), which are known or expected to be divalent.
What did Glenn T. Seaborg predict about Lawrencium in 1949?
Answer: It would be the last actinide and the Lr<sup>3+</sup> ion would be as stable as Lu<sup>3+</sup>.
Explanation: Glenn T. Seaborg predicted in 1949 that element 103 (lawrencium) would be the last actinide and that the Lr<sup>3+</sup> ion would be as stable as Lu<sup>3+</sup> in aqueous solution.
What compound was most likely formed when Lawrencium reacted with chlorine in 1969 studies?
Answer: LrCl<sub>3</sub>
Explanation: Studies in 1969 showed that lawrencium reacts with chlorine to form a product that was most likely the trichloride, LrCl<sub>3</sub>.
What are the expected properties of Lawrencium compounds in aqueous solution?
Answer: Lawrencium is expected to exist as the trivalent Lr<sup>3+</sup> ion, and its compounds should be insoluble.
Explanation: Lawrencium is expected to exist as the trivalent Lr<sup>3+</sup> ion in aqueous solution, meaning its compounds, such as lawrencium(III) fluoride (LrF<sub>3</sub>) and hydroxide (Lr(OH)<sub>3</sub>), should be insoluble in water.
What was the experimentally determined ionic radius for Lawrencium in later experiments?
Answer: 88.1 ± 0.1 pm, which was larger than expected.
Explanation: Later experiments in 1987 and 1988 refined lawrencium's ionic radius to 88.1 ± 0.1 pm, which was found to be larger than expected from simple periodic trends.
What was the initial prediction for Lawrencium's ground-state electron configuration in 1970?
Answer: [Rn]5f<sup>14</sup>6d<sup>1</sup>7s<sup>2</sup>
Explanation: In 1970, the ground-state electron configuration of lawrencium was initially predicted to be [Rn]5f<sup>14</sup>6d<sup>1</sup>7s<sup>2</sup>, following the Aufbau principle.
What was the measured first ionization energy of Lawrencium in 2015?
Answer: 4.96 eV
Explanation: In 2015, the first ionization energy of lawrencium was measured at 4.96 eV.
What was a limitation of the rapid solvent extraction method used for early experiments with <sup>256</sup>Lr?
Answer: It could not separate trivalent actinides from each other.
Explanation: The rapid solvent extraction method used for early experiments with <sup>256</sup>Lr could separate ions of different charges but could not separate trivalent actinides from each other.