Confused by notation of atomic number Z and mass number A on periodic table of elementsSuperscript and subscript together after the same atomWhat is the group number or name for elements between group 3 and 4 (F-block) on the periodic table?What do the numerals on the top right corner of the cells in the periodic table represent?Memorizing polyatomic ions? Using Periodic TableDo non-English speaking countries use the same element symbols?Why are group 1 elements called alkali metals and group 2 elements are called alkaline earth metals?Can isotopes of a given element be represented by different symbols?What proof is there that the “Island of Stability” exists?Are halogens a further classification of non-metals, or are they another group themselves?Why is the probability for the signal at 160 in the bromine mass spectrum twice as high as for the signals at 158 and 162?Why doesn't the Atomic mass number(u) represent the exact mass of 1 mole of a given element?
Fizzy, soft, pop and still drinks
Can not tell colimits from limits
Has any spacecraft ever had the ability to directly communicate with civilian air traffic control?
"The cow" OR "a cow" OR "cows" in this context
Reverse the word in a string with the same order in javascript
Do I have to worry about players making “bad” choices on level up?
Confusion about capacitors
How can I place the product on a social media post better?
Is thermodynamics only applicable to systems in equilibrium?
Single Colour Mastermind Problem
Will this character get back his Infinity Stone?
Can fracking help reduce CO2?
What is the point of Germany's 299 "party seats" in the Bundestag?
What does KSP mean?
Stateful vs non-stateful app
Alternatives to Overleaf
Is this a realistic set of world maps?
Are Boeing 737-800’s grounded?
Phrase for the opposite of "foolproof"
Why was Germany not as successful as other Europeans in establishing overseas colonies?
Who is the Umpire in this picture?
Do I have an "anti-research" personality?
Rivers without rain
Minimum value of 4 digit number divided by sum of its digits
Confused by notation of atomic number Z and mass number A on periodic table of elements
Superscript and subscript together after the same atomWhat is the group number or name for elements between group 3 and 4 (F-block) on the periodic table?What do the numerals on the top right corner of the cells in the periodic table represent?Memorizing polyatomic ions? Using Periodic TableDo non-English speaking countries use the same element symbols?Why are group 1 elements called alkali metals and group 2 elements are called alkaline earth metals?Can isotopes of a given element be represented by different symbols?What proof is there that the “Island of Stability” exists?Are halogens a further classification of non-metals, or are they another group themselves?Why is the probability for the signal at 160 in the bromine mass spectrum twice as high as for the signals at 158 and 162?Why doesn't the Atomic mass number(u) represent the exact mass of 1 mole of a given element?
$begingroup$
I'm totally confused by the different conventions and when to use what. In the Periodic Table I see
$$ce^6_12C$$
However, in books when talking about isotopes I see
$$ce^12_6C$$
I don't understand the difference between the two. I know what the numbers mean but I don't understand when to use which convention. Are there names for these two conventions?
notation periodic-table isotope
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm totally confused by the different conventions and when to use what. In the Periodic Table I see
$$ce^6_12C$$
However, in books when talking about isotopes I see
$$ce^12_6C$$
I don't understand the difference between the two. I know what the numbers mean but I don't understand when to use which convention. Are there names for these two conventions?
notation periodic-table isotope
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm totally confused by the different conventions and when to use what. In the Periodic Table I see
$$ce^6_12C$$
However, in books when talking about isotopes I see
$$ce^12_6C$$
I don't understand the difference between the two. I know what the numbers mean but I don't understand when to use which convention. Are there names for these two conventions?
notation periodic-table isotope
New contributor
$endgroup$
I'm totally confused by the different conventions and when to use what. In the Periodic Table I see
$$ce^6_12C$$
However, in books when talking about isotopes I see
$$ce^12_6C$$
I don't understand the difference between the two. I know what the numbers mean but I don't understand when to use which convention. Are there names for these two conventions?
notation periodic-table isotope
notation periodic-table isotope
New contributor
New contributor
edited 11 mins ago
Karsten Theis
5,242644
5,242644
New contributor
asked 8 hours ago
DanDan
1411
1411
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Periodic tables of elements (PTEs) are often abused by designers. Books are more trustworthy as long as they are written by chemists. Long story short, the second notation $(ce^12_6C)$ is the correct one.
There is an easy to remember AZE notation: $^A_ZceE$.
I suspect the PTE you were looking at lists standard (averaged) atomic weights of the elements $A_mathrmr$ rounded to the nearest whole number so it may appear as if those were the mass numbers $A$, probably something like this:
Note that a good periodic table usually includes a legend which deciphers and justifies designer's choice.
Even better example is the Periodic Table of the Elements by NIST.
Despite atomic number $Z$ also located in the upper left corner of the cell, its location is typographically literate as both $Z$ and $A_mathrmr$ have distinct place, different typeface and the legend unambiguously denotes which is which:
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
@NightWriter Thank you for the edit, I copypasted part of the sentence and forgot to change the word: it should be vice versa;)
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NightWriter If you want mass numbers, then it's the Nuklidkarte in Karsten's answer. Here it's the average atomic weight, which I assumed was rounded to the whole part in OP's PTE, so that it appeared as if it were the mass number, so I went along with this (maybe it wasn't a good idea though).
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
Ok but I think that generally speaking one should not assume that for a particular nuclide rounding off the average over the natural abundances will give you that particular nuclides mass number. There's a loss of generality there. I think you may want to look for a better figure or explain that in your answer.
$endgroup$
– Night Writer
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NightWriter Yep, that's a good point, thank you for noticing this flaw. I'm going to fix this in a while.
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
According to the international standard ISO 80000 Quantities and units – Part 9: Physical chemistry and molecular physics (corrected in Amendment 1, 2011-06-01), the attached subscripts and superscripts have the following meanings.
(…)
The nucleon number (mass number) of a nuclide is shown in the left superscript position, as in the following
example: $$mathrm^14N$$
(…)
The atomic number (proton number) is shown in the left subscript position, as in the following example. $$mathrm_64Gd$$
(…)
The same meanings are described in the German standard DIN 1338 (2011).
$$^A_Zmathrm E_nu^z$$
This notation is also used in Nomenclature of Inorganic Chemistry – IUPAC Recommendations 2005 (Red Book). Note, however, that this document unfortunately introduced the terrible typographic disaster of the staggered notation for ions (see this question).
The mass, charge and atomic number of a nuclide are indicated by means of three indexes (subscripts and superscripts) placed around the symbol. The positions are occupied as follows:
left upper index mass number
left lower index atomic number
right upper index charge
The same notation can also be found in the IUPAC Green Book Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry (2007).
It is also recommended in the ACS Style Guide:
Use the left superscript for mass number
Use the left subscript for atomic number
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Different periodic tables show the atomic number above, below, or next to the element. They don’t show the mass number, usually, but the atomic weight (not an integer). There is a type of table, for example the Karlsruher Nuklidkarte, that shows all observed isotopes, and this type of chart does show mass numbers as well.
In the picture, the isotope chart is on the right (https://www.nucleonica.com/wiki/index.php?title=Historical)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "431"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Dan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f114478%2fconfused-by-notation-of-atomic-number-z-and-mass-number-a-on-periodic-table-of-e%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Periodic tables of elements (PTEs) are often abused by designers. Books are more trustworthy as long as they are written by chemists. Long story short, the second notation $(ce^12_6C)$ is the correct one.
There is an easy to remember AZE notation: $^A_ZceE$.
I suspect the PTE you were looking at lists standard (averaged) atomic weights of the elements $A_mathrmr$ rounded to the nearest whole number so it may appear as if those were the mass numbers $A$, probably something like this:
Note that a good periodic table usually includes a legend which deciphers and justifies designer's choice.
Even better example is the Periodic Table of the Elements by NIST.
Despite atomic number $Z$ also located in the upper left corner of the cell, its location is typographically literate as both $Z$ and $A_mathrmr$ have distinct place, different typeface and the legend unambiguously denotes which is which:
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
@NightWriter Thank you for the edit, I copypasted part of the sentence and forgot to change the word: it should be vice versa;)
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NightWriter If you want mass numbers, then it's the Nuklidkarte in Karsten's answer. Here it's the average atomic weight, which I assumed was rounded to the whole part in OP's PTE, so that it appeared as if it were the mass number, so I went along with this (maybe it wasn't a good idea though).
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
Ok but I think that generally speaking one should not assume that for a particular nuclide rounding off the average over the natural abundances will give you that particular nuclides mass number. There's a loss of generality there. I think you may want to look for a better figure or explain that in your answer.
$endgroup$
– Night Writer
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NightWriter Yep, that's a good point, thank you for noticing this flaw. I'm going to fix this in a while.
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Periodic tables of elements (PTEs) are often abused by designers. Books are more trustworthy as long as they are written by chemists. Long story short, the second notation $(ce^12_6C)$ is the correct one.
There is an easy to remember AZE notation: $^A_ZceE$.
I suspect the PTE you were looking at lists standard (averaged) atomic weights of the elements $A_mathrmr$ rounded to the nearest whole number so it may appear as if those were the mass numbers $A$, probably something like this:
Note that a good periodic table usually includes a legend which deciphers and justifies designer's choice.
Even better example is the Periodic Table of the Elements by NIST.
Despite atomic number $Z$ also located in the upper left corner of the cell, its location is typographically literate as both $Z$ and $A_mathrmr$ have distinct place, different typeface and the legend unambiguously denotes which is which:
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
@NightWriter Thank you for the edit, I copypasted part of the sentence and forgot to change the word: it should be vice versa;)
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NightWriter If you want mass numbers, then it's the Nuklidkarte in Karsten's answer. Here it's the average atomic weight, which I assumed was rounded to the whole part in OP's PTE, so that it appeared as if it were the mass number, so I went along with this (maybe it wasn't a good idea though).
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
Ok but I think that generally speaking one should not assume that for a particular nuclide rounding off the average over the natural abundances will give you that particular nuclides mass number. There's a loss of generality there. I think you may want to look for a better figure or explain that in your answer.
$endgroup$
– Night Writer
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NightWriter Yep, that's a good point, thank you for noticing this flaw. I'm going to fix this in a while.
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Periodic tables of elements (PTEs) are often abused by designers. Books are more trustworthy as long as they are written by chemists. Long story short, the second notation $(ce^12_6C)$ is the correct one.
There is an easy to remember AZE notation: $^A_ZceE$.
I suspect the PTE you were looking at lists standard (averaged) atomic weights of the elements $A_mathrmr$ rounded to the nearest whole number so it may appear as if those were the mass numbers $A$, probably something like this:
Note that a good periodic table usually includes a legend which deciphers and justifies designer's choice.
Even better example is the Periodic Table of the Elements by NIST.
Despite atomic number $Z$ also located in the upper left corner of the cell, its location is typographically literate as both $Z$ and $A_mathrmr$ have distinct place, different typeface and the legend unambiguously denotes which is which:
$endgroup$
Periodic tables of elements (PTEs) are often abused by designers. Books are more trustworthy as long as they are written by chemists. Long story short, the second notation $(ce^12_6C)$ is the correct one.
There is an easy to remember AZE notation: $^A_ZceE$.
I suspect the PTE you were looking at lists standard (averaged) atomic weights of the elements $A_mathrmr$ rounded to the nearest whole number so it may appear as if those were the mass numbers $A$, probably something like this:
Note that a good periodic table usually includes a legend which deciphers and justifies designer's choice.
Even better example is the Periodic Table of the Elements by NIST.
Despite atomic number $Z$ also located in the upper left corner of the cell, its location is typographically literate as both $Z$ and $A_mathrmr$ have distinct place, different typeface and the legend unambiguously denotes which is which:
edited 2 hours ago
answered 7 hours ago
andseliskandselisk
20.1k667130
20.1k667130
1
$begingroup$
@NightWriter Thank you for the edit, I copypasted part of the sentence and forgot to change the word: it should be vice versa;)
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NightWriter If you want mass numbers, then it's the Nuklidkarte in Karsten's answer. Here it's the average atomic weight, which I assumed was rounded to the whole part in OP's PTE, so that it appeared as if it were the mass number, so I went along with this (maybe it wasn't a good idea though).
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
Ok but I think that generally speaking one should not assume that for a particular nuclide rounding off the average over the natural abundances will give you that particular nuclides mass number. There's a loss of generality there. I think you may want to look for a better figure or explain that in your answer.
$endgroup$
– Night Writer
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NightWriter Yep, that's a good point, thank you for noticing this flaw. I'm going to fix this in a while.
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
@NightWriter Thank you for the edit, I copypasted part of the sentence and forgot to change the word: it should be vice versa;)
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NightWriter If you want mass numbers, then it's the Nuklidkarte in Karsten's answer. Here it's the average atomic weight, which I assumed was rounded to the whole part in OP's PTE, so that it appeared as if it were the mass number, so I went along with this (maybe it wasn't a good idea though).
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
Ok but I think that generally speaking one should not assume that for a particular nuclide rounding off the average over the natural abundances will give you that particular nuclides mass number. There's a loss of generality there. I think you may want to look for a better figure or explain that in your answer.
$endgroup$
– Night Writer
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NightWriter Yep, that's a good point, thank you for noticing this flaw. I'm going to fix this in a while.
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@NightWriter Thank you for the edit, I copypasted part of the sentence and forgot to change the word: it should be vice versa;)
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NightWriter Thank you for the edit, I copypasted part of the sentence and forgot to change the word: it should be vice versa;)
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NightWriter If you want mass numbers, then it's the Nuklidkarte in Karsten's answer. Here it's the average atomic weight, which I assumed was rounded to the whole part in OP's PTE, so that it appeared as if it were the mass number, so I went along with this (maybe it wasn't a good idea though).
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NightWriter If you want mass numbers, then it's the Nuklidkarte in Karsten's answer. Here it's the average atomic weight, which I assumed was rounded to the whole part in OP's PTE, so that it appeared as if it were the mass number, so I went along with this (maybe it wasn't a good idea though).
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
Ok but I think that generally speaking one should not assume that for a particular nuclide rounding off the average over the natural abundances will give you that particular nuclides mass number. There's a loss of generality there. I think you may want to look for a better figure or explain that in your answer.
$endgroup$
– Night Writer
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Ok but I think that generally speaking one should not assume that for a particular nuclide rounding off the average over the natural abundances will give you that particular nuclides mass number. There's a loss of generality there. I think you may want to look for a better figure or explain that in your answer.
$endgroup$
– Night Writer
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NightWriter Yep, that's a good point, thank you for noticing this flaw. I'm going to fix this in a while.
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NightWriter Yep, that's a good point, thank you for noticing this flaw. I'm going to fix this in a while.
$endgroup$
– andselisk
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
According to the international standard ISO 80000 Quantities and units – Part 9: Physical chemistry and molecular physics (corrected in Amendment 1, 2011-06-01), the attached subscripts and superscripts have the following meanings.
(…)
The nucleon number (mass number) of a nuclide is shown in the left superscript position, as in the following
example: $$mathrm^14N$$
(…)
The atomic number (proton number) is shown in the left subscript position, as in the following example. $$mathrm_64Gd$$
(…)
The same meanings are described in the German standard DIN 1338 (2011).
$$^A_Zmathrm E_nu^z$$
This notation is also used in Nomenclature of Inorganic Chemistry – IUPAC Recommendations 2005 (Red Book). Note, however, that this document unfortunately introduced the terrible typographic disaster of the staggered notation for ions (see this question).
The mass, charge and atomic number of a nuclide are indicated by means of three indexes (subscripts and superscripts) placed around the symbol. The positions are occupied as follows:
left upper index mass number
left lower index atomic number
right upper index charge
The same notation can also be found in the IUPAC Green Book Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry (2007).
It is also recommended in the ACS Style Guide:
Use the left superscript for mass number
Use the left subscript for atomic number
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
According to the international standard ISO 80000 Quantities and units – Part 9: Physical chemistry and molecular physics (corrected in Amendment 1, 2011-06-01), the attached subscripts and superscripts have the following meanings.
(…)
The nucleon number (mass number) of a nuclide is shown in the left superscript position, as in the following
example: $$mathrm^14N$$
(…)
The atomic number (proton number) is shown in the left subscript position, as in the following example. $$mathrm_64Gd$$
(…)
The same meanings are described in the German standard DIN 1338 (2011).
$$^A_Zmathrm E_nu^z$$
This notation is also used in Nomenclature of Inorganic Chemistry – IUPAC Recommendations 2005 (Red Book). Note, however, that this document unfortunately introduced the terrible typographic disaster of the staggered notation for ions (see this question).
The mass, charge and atomic number of a nuclide are indicated by means of three indexes (subscripts and superscripts) placed around the symbol. The positions are occupied as follows:
left upper index mass number
left lower index atomic number
right upper index charge
The same notation can also be found in the IUPAC Green Book Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry (2007).
It is also recommended in the ACS Style Guide:
Use the left superscript for mass number
Use the left subscript for atomic number
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
According to the international standard ISO 80000 Quantities and units – Part 9: Physical chemistry and molecular physics (corrected in Amendment 1, 2011-06-01), the attached subscripts and superscripts have the following meanings.
(…)
The nucleon number (mass number) of a nuclide is shown in the left superscript position, as in the following
example: $$mathrm^14N$$
(…)
The atomic number (proton number) is shown in the left subscript position, as in the following example. $$mathrm_64Gd$$
(…)
The same meanings are described in the German standard DIN 1338 (2011).
$$^A_Zmathrm E_nu^z$$
This notation is also used in Nomenclature of Inorganic Chemistry – IUPAC Recommendations 2005 (Red Book). Note, however, that this document unfortunately introduced the terrible typographic disaster of the staggered notation for ions (see this question).
The mass, charge and atomic number of a nuclide are indicated by means of three indexes (subscripts and superscripts) placed around the symbol. The positions are occupied as follows:
left upper index mass number
left lower index atomic number
right upper index charge
The same notation can also be found in the IUPAC Green Book Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry (2007).
It is also recommended in the ACS Style Guide:
Use the left superscript for mass number
Use the left subscript for atomic number
$endgroup$
According to the international standard ISO 80000 Quantities and units – Part 9: Physical chemistry and molecular physics (corrected in Amendment 1, 2011-06-01), the attached subscripts and superscripts have the following meanings.
(…)
The nucleon number (mass number) of a nuclide is shown in the left superscript position, as in the following
example: $$mathrm^14N$$
(…)
The atomic number (proton number) is shown in the left subscript position, as in the following example. $$mathrm_64Gd$$
(…)
The same meanings are described in the German standard DIN 1338 (2011).
$$^A_Zmathrm E_nu^z$$
This notation is also used in Nomenclature of Inorganic Chemistry – IUPAC Recommendations 2005 (Red Book). Note, however, that this document unfortunately introduced the terrible typographic disaster of the staggered notation for ions (see this question).
The mass, charge and atomic number of a nuclide are indicated by means of three indexes (subscripts and superscripts) placed around the symbol. The positions are occupied as follows:
left upper index mass number
left lower index atomic number
right upper index charge
The same notation can also be found in the IUPAC Green Book Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry (2007).
It is also recommended in the ACS Style Guide:
Use the left superscript for mass number
Use the left subscript for atomic number
edited 6 hours ago
answered 6 hours ago
Loong♦Loong
34.5k886181
34.5k886181
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Different periodic tables show the atomic number above, below, or next to the element. They don’t show the mass number, usually, but the atomic weight (not an integer). There is a type of table, for example the Karlsruher Nuklidkarte, that shows all observed isotopes, and this type of chart does show mass numbers as well.
In the picture, the isotope chart is on the right (https://www.nucleonica.com/wiki/index.php?title=Historical)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Different periodic tables show the atomic number above, below, or next to the element. They don’t show the mass number, usually, but the atomic weight (not an integer). There is a type of table, for example the Karlsruher Nuklidkarte, that shows all observed isotopes, and this type of chart does show mass numbers as well.
In the picture, the isotope chart is on the right (https://www.nucleonica.com/wiki/index.php?title=Historical)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Different periodic tables show the atomic number above, below, or next to the element. They don’t show the mass number, usually, but the atomic weight (not an integer). There is a type of table, for example the Karlsruher Nuklidkarte, that shows all observed isotopes, and this type of chart does show mass numbers as well.
In the picture, the isotope chart is on the right (https://www.nucleonica.com/wiki/index.php?title=Historical)
$endgroup$
Different periodic tables show the atomic number above, below, or next to the element. They don’t show the mass number, usually, but the atomic weight (not an integer). There is a type of table, for example the Karlsruher Nuklidkarte, that shows all observed isotopes, and this type of chart does show mass numbers as well.
In the picture, the isotope chart is on the right (https://www.nucleonica.com/wiki/index.php?title=Historical)
answered 5 hours ago
Karsten TheisKarsten Theis
5,242644
5,242644
add a comment |
add a comment |
Dan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Dan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Dan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Dan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Chemistry Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f114478%2fconfused-by-notation-of-atomic-number-z-and-mass-number-a-on-periodic-table-of-e%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown