Skip to main content

The positions of lanthanum (actinium) and lutetium (lawrencium) in the periodic table: an update

Abstract

This article updates the author’s 1982 argument that lutetium and lawrencium, rather than lanthanum and actinium, should be assigned to the d-block as the heavier analogs of scandium and yttrium, whereas lanthanum and actinium should be considered as the first members of the f-block with irregular configurations. This update is embedded within a detailed analysis of Lavelle’s abortive 2008 attempt to discredit this suggestion.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. Brewer, L.: Energies of the electron configurations of the lanthanides and actinides. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 61, 1101–1111 (1971)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Cronyn, M.W.: The proper place of hydrogen in the periodic table. J. Chem. Educ. 80, 947–951 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fang, L., Chen, C., Lombard, J.R.: Raman and absorption spectrum of mass-selected lutetium dimers in argon matrices. J. Chem. Phys. 113, 10202–10206 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Fritzsche, S., Dong, C.Z., Koike, F., Uvarov, A.: The low-lying level structure of atomic lawrencium (Z = 103): energies and absorption rates. Eur. Phys. J. D 45, 107–113 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Haire, R.G.: Insights into the bonding and electronic nature of heavy element materials. J. Alloy Compds. 444–445, 63–71 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Jensen, W.B.: The positions of lanthanum (actinium) and lutetium (lawrencium) in the periodic table. J. Chem. Educ. 59, 634–636 (1982)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Jensen, W.B.: The periodic table: facts or committees? J. Chem. Educ. 85, 1491–1493 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Jensen, W.B.: Misapplying the periodic table. J. Chem. Educ. 86, 1186 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Jørgensen, C.K.: The loose connection between electron configuration and the chemical behavior of the heavy elements (transuranics). Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 12, 12–19 (1973)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lavelle, L.: Lanthanum (La) and actinium (Ac) should remain in the d-block. J. Chem. Educ. 85, 1482–1483 (2008a)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lavelle, L.: Response to the flyleaf periodic table. J. Chem. Educ. 85, 1491 (2008b)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lavelle, L.: Response to misapplying the periodic law. J. Chem. Educ. 86, 1187 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ouyang, Y., Wang, J., Hou, Y., Zhong, X., Du, Y., Feng, Y.: First principle study of AlX (X = 3d, 4d, 5d elements and Lu) dimers. J. Chem. Phys. 128, 074305-1–074305-6 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Silva, R.J.: Fermium, mendelevium, nobelium, and lawrencium. In: Morss, L.R., Edelstein, N.M., Fuger, J. (eds.) The Chemistry of the Actinides and Transactinide Elements, Chapt 13, vol. 3, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin (2006)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William B. Jensen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jensen, W.B. The positions of lanthanum (actinium) and lutetium (lawrencium) in the periodic table: an update. Found Chem 17, 23–31 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10698-015-9216-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Periodic table
  • Group 3
  • Lanthanum
  • Lutetium
  • Actinium
  • Lawrencium