Editing Periodic table (section)

== Variations ==
===Period 1===
{{Main|Period 1 element}}
Although the modern periodic table is standard today, the placement of the period 1 elements hydrogen and helium remains an open issue under discussion, and some variation can be found.<ref name=KW/><ref name="Lemonick">{{cite web |url=https://cen.acs.org/physical-chemistry/periodic-table/periodic-table-icon-chemists-still/97/i1 |title=The periodic table is an icon. But chemists still can't agree on how to arrange it |last=Lemonick |first=Sam |date=2019 |website=C&EN News |access-date=16 December 2020 |archive-date=28 January 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210128031450/https://cen.acs.org/physical-chemistry/periodic-table/periodic-table-icon-chemists-still/97/i1 |url-status=live }}</ref> Following their respective s<sup>1</sup> and s<sup>2</sup> electron configurations, hydrogen would be placed in group 1, and helium would be placed in group 2.<ref name="KW" /> The group 1 placement of hydrogen is common, but helium is almost always placed in group 18 with the other noble gases.<ref name="IUPAC-redbook" /> The debate has to do with conflicting understandings of the extent to which chemical or electronic properties should decide periodic table placement.<ref name=Lemonick/>

Like the group 1 metals, hydrogen has one electron in its outermost shell<ref name="Gray12">Gray, p. 12</ref> and typically loses its only electron in chemical reactions.<ref name="Vlasov" /> Hydrogen has some metal-like chemical properties, being able to displace some metals from their [[salt (chemistry)|salts]].<ref name="Vlasov">{{cite book |last1=Vlasov |first1=L. |last2=Trifonov |first2=D. |translator-last1=Sobolev |translator-first1=D. |date=1970 |title=107 Stories About Chemistry |publisher=Mir Publishers |pages=23–27 |isbn=978-0-8285-5067-3}}</ref> But it forms a diatomic nonmetallic gas at standard conditions, unlike the alkali metals which are reactive solid metals. This and hydrogen's formation of [[hydride]]s, in which it gains an electron, brings it close to the properties of the [[halogen]]s which do the same<ref name=Vlasov/> (though it is rarer for hydrogen to form H<sup>−</sup> than H<sup>+</sup>).<ref name="raynercanham">{{cite book |last=Rayner-Canham |first=Geoffrey |date=2020 |title=The Periodic Table: Past, Present, Future |publisher=World Scientific |pages=53–70, 85–102 |isbn=978-981-12-1850-7}}</ref> Moreover, the lightest two halogens ([[fluorine]] and [[chlorine]]) are gaseous like hydrogen at standard conditions.<ref name="Vlasov" /> Some properties of hydrogen are not a good fit for either group: hydrogen is neither highly oxidizing nor highly reducing and is not reactive with water.<ref name=raynercanham/> Hydrogen thus has properties corresponding to both those of the alkali metals and the halogens, but matches neither group perfectly, and is thus difficult to place by its chemistry.<ref name="Vlasov" /> Therefore, while the electronic placement of hydrogen in group 1 predominates, some rarer arrangements show either hydrogen in group 17,<ref>{{Clayden}}</ref> duplicate hydrogen in both groups 1 and 17,<ref>{{cite journal |last=Seaborg |first= G.|title=The chemical and radioactive properties of the heavy elements |journal= Chemical & Engineering News|year=1945 |volume=23 |issue=23 |pages=2190–93|doi= 10.1021/cen-v023n023.p2190}}</ref><ref name="Kaesz" /> or float it separately from all groups.<ref name="Kaesz">{{cite journal |last1=Kaesz |first1=Herb |last2=Atkins |first2=Peter |date=2009 |title=A Central Position for Hydrogen in the Periodic Table |journal=Chemistry International |volume=25 |issue=6 |page=14 |doi=10.1515/ci.2003.25.6.14 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="GE">Greenwood & Earnshaw, throughout the book</ref><ref name="KW" /> This last option has nonetheless been criticized by the chemist and philosopher of science [[Eric Scerri]] on the grounds that it appears to imply that hydrogen is above the periodic law altogether, unlike all the other elements.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Scerri |first1=Eric |date=2004 |title=The Placement of Hydrogen in the Periodic Table |url=http://publications.iupac.org/ci/2004/2603/ud2_scerri.html |journal=Chemistry International |volume=26 |issue=3 |pages=21–22 |doi=10.1515/ci.2004.26.3.21 |access-date=1 January 2023|doi-access=free |url-access=subscription }}</ref>	

Helium is the only element that routinely occupies a position in the periodic table that is not consistent with its electronic structure. It has two electrons in its outermost shell, whereas the other noble gases have eight; and it is an s-block element, whereas all other noble gases are p-block elements. However it is unreactive at standard conditions, and has a full outer shell: these properties are like the noble gases in group 18, but not at all like the reactive alkaline earth metals of group 2. For these reasons helium is nearly universally placed in group 18<ref name="IUPAC-redbook" /> which its properties best match;<ref name="KW" /> a proposal to move helium to group 2 was rejected by IUPAC in 1988 for these reasons.<ref name=Fluck/> Nonetheless, helium is still occasionally placed in group 2 today,<ref name=shattered>{{cite book |last1=Thyssen |first1=Pieter |last2=Ceulemans |first2=Arnout |date=2017 |title=Shattered Symmetry: Group Theory from the Eightfold Way to the Periodic Table |url= |location= |publisher=Oxford University Press |pages=336, 360–381 |isbn=978-0-19-061139-2}}</ref> and some of its physical and chemical properties are closer to the group 2 elements and support the electronic placement.<ref name="Gray12" /><ref name="KW">{{cite book |last1=Keeler |first1=James |last2=Wothers |first2=Peter |date=2014 |title=Chemical Structure and Reactivity |url= |edition=2nd |location= |publisher=Oxford University Press |pages=257–260 |isbn=978-0-19-9604135}}</ref> Solid helium crystallises in a [[hexagonal close-packed]] structure, which matches beryllium and magnesium in group 2, but not the other noble gases in group 18.<ref name=Kurushkin>{{cite journal |last1=Kurushkin |first1=Mikhail |date=2020 |title=Helium's placement in the Periodic Table from a crystal structure viewpoint |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342152661 |journal=IUCrJ |volume=7 |issue=4 |pages=577–578 |doi=10.1107/S2052252520007769 |pmid=32695406 |pmc=7340260 |access-date=19 June 2020 |doi-access=free |bibcode=2020IUCrJ...7..577K |archive-date=19 October 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211019202250/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342152661_Helium's_placement_in_the_Periodic_Table_from_a_crystal_structure_viewpoint |url-status=live }}</ref> Recent theoretical developments in noble gas chemistry, in which helium is expected to show slightly less inertness than neon and to form (HeO)(LiF)<sub>2</sub> with a structure similar to the analogous beryllium compound (but with no expected neon analogue), have resulted in more chemists advocating a placement of helium in group 2. This relates to the electronic argument, as the reason for neon's greater inertness is repulsion from its filled p-shell that helium lacks, though realistically it is unlikely that helium-containing molecules will be stable outside extreme low-temperature conditions (around 10&nbsp;[[kelvin|K]]).<ref name="PTSS" /><ref name=grochala>{{cite journal |last1=Grochala |first1=Wojciech |date=1 November 2017 |title=On the position of helium and neon in the Periodic Table of Elements |journal=Foundations of Chemistry |volume=20 |pages=191–207 |issue=2018 |doi=10.1007/s10698-017-9302-7 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bent Weberg |first1=Libby |date=18 January 2019 |title="The" periodic table |url=https://cen.acs.org/articles/97/i3/Reactions.html |journal=Chemical & Engineering News |volume=97 |issue=3 |access-date=27 March 2020 |archive-date=1 February 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200201200009/https://cen.acs.org/articles/97/i3/Reactions.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Grandinetti |first1=Felice |date=23 April 2013 |title=Neon behind the signs |journal=Nature Chemistry |volume=5 |issue=2013 |page=438 |doi=10.1038/nchem.1631 |pmid=23609097 |bibcode=2013NatCh...5..438G |doi-access=free }}</ref>

The [[Nonmetal (chemistry)#First row anomaly|first-row anomaly]] in the periodic table has additionally been cited to support moving helium to group 2. It arises because the first orbital of any type is unusually small, since unlike its higher analogues, it does not experience interelectronic repulsion from a smaller orbital of the same type. This makes the first row of elements in each block unusually small, and such elements tend to exhibit characteristic kinds of anomalies for their group. Some chemists arguing for the repositioning of helium have pointed out that helium exhibits these anomalies if it is placed in group 2, but not if it is placed in group 18: on the other hand, neon, which would be the first group 18 element if helium was removed from that spot, does exhibit those anomalies.<ref name="PTSS" /> The relationship between helium and beryllium is then argued to resemble that between hydrogen and lithium, a placement which is much more commonly accepted.<ref name=grochala/> For example, because of this trend in the sizes of orbitals, a large difference in atomic radii between the first and second members of each main group is seen in groups 1 and 13–17: it exists between neon and argon, and between helium and beryllium, but not between helium and neon. This similarly affects the noble gases' boiling points and solubilities in water, where helium is too close to neon, and the large difference characteristic between the first two elements of a group appears only between neon and argon. Moving helium to group 2 makes this trend consistent in groups 2 and 18 as well, by making helium the first group 2 element and neon the first group 18 element: both exhibit the characteristic properties of a [[kainosymmetric]] first element of a group.<ref name=SB23/><ref>Siekierski and Burgess, p. 128</ref> The group 18 placement of helium nonetheless remains near-universal due to its extreme inertness.<ref>{{Cite book|title = Modeling Marvels: Computational Anticipation of Novel Molecules|url = https://books.google.com/books?id=IoFzgBSSCwEC|publisher = Springer Science & Business Media|date = 5 December 2008|isbn = 978-1-4020-6973-4|first = Errol G.|last = Lewars|pages = 69–71|url-status=live|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20160519021952/https://books.google.com/books?id=IoFzgBSSCwEC|archive-date = 19 May 2016|df = dmy-all}}</ref> Additionally, tables that float both hydrogen and helium outside all groups may rarely be encountered.<ref name=GE/><ref name=KW/><ref name=jensenlaw/>

===Group 3===
{{main|Group 3 element#Composition}}
{{Periodic table (micro)|mark=Sc,Y,Lu,Lr|title=Group&nbsp;3: Sc, Y, Lu, Lr [[Image:Yes check.svg|15px|Correct]]|caption=Correct depiction of Group 3}}
{{Periodic table (micro)|form=Sc, Y, La, Ac|mark=Sc,Y,La,Ac|title=Group&nbsp;3: Sc, Y, La, Ac [[Image:X mark.svg|15px|Incorrect]]|caption=Incorrect depiction of Group 3}}
In many periodic tables, the f-block is shifted one element to the right, so that lanthanum and actinium become d-block elements in group 3, and Ce–Lu and Th–Lr form the f-block. Thus the d-block is split into two very uneven portions. This is a holdover from early mistaken measurements of electron configurations; modern measurements are more consistent with the form with lutetium and lawrencium in group 3, and with La–Yb and Ac–No as the f-block.<ref name="Jensen1982"/><ref name=wulfsberg53/>

The 4f shell is completely filled at ytterbium, and for that reason [[Lev Landau]] and [[Evgeny Lifshitz]] in 1948 considered it incorrect to group lutetium as an f-block element.<ref name=Landau/> They did not yet take the step of removing lanthanum from the d-block as well, but [[Jun Kondō]] realized in 1963 that lanthanum's low-temperature [[superconductivity]] implied the activity of its 4f shell.<ref name=Kondo/> In 1965, David C. Hamilton linked this observation to its position in the periodic table, and argued that the f-block should be composed of the elements La–Yb and Ac–No.<ref name=Hamilton/> Since then, physical, chemical, and electronic evidence has supported this assignment.<ref name=Jensen1982/><ref name=Fluck/><ref name=wulfsberg53>Wulfsberg, p. 53: "As pointed out by W. B. Jensen, the metallurgical resemblance [to yttrium] is much stronger for lutetium than for lanthanum, so we have adopted the metallurgist's convention of listing Lu (and by extension Lr) below Sc and Y. An important additional advantage of this is that the periodic table becomes more symmetrical, and it becomes easier to predict electron configurations. E. R. Scerri points out that recent determinations of the electron configurations of most of the ''f''-block elements now are more compatible with this placement of Lu and Lr."</ref> The issue was brought to wide attention by [[William B. Jensen]] in 1982,<ref name=Jensen1982/> and the reassignment of lutetium and lawrencium to group 3 was supported by IUPAC reports dating from 1988 (when the 1–18 group numbers were recommended)<ref name="Fluck"/> and 2021.<ref name=2021IUPAC/> The variation nonetheless still exists because most textbook writers are not aware of the issue.<ref name=Jensen1982/>

A third form can sometimes be encountered in which the spaces below yttrium in group 3 are left empty, such as the table appearing on the IUPAC web site,<ref name="IUPAC-redbook" /> but this creates an inconsistency with quantum mechanics by making the f-block 15 elements wide (La–Lu and Ac–Lr) even though only 14 electrons can fit in an f-subshell.<ref name=2021IUPAC/> There is moreover some confusion in the literature on which elements are then implied to be in group 3.<ref name=2021IUPAC/><ref name=Thyssen/><ref name="JWP">{{cite journal |author=Barber, Robert C. |author2=Karol, Paul J |author3=Nakahara, Hiromichi |author4=Vardaci, Emanuele |author5=Vogt, Erich W. |title=Discovery of the elements with atomic numbers greater than or equal to 113 (IUPAC Technical Report) |doi=10.1351/PAC-REP-10-05-01 |journal=Pure Appl. Chem. |date=2011 |volume=83 |issue=7 |page=1485|doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="Karol">{{cite journal |last1=Karol |first1=Paul J. |last2=Barber |first2=Robert C. |last3=Sherrill |first3=Bradley M. |last4=Vardaci |first4=Emanuele |last5=Yamazaki |first5=Toshimitsu |date=22 December 2015 |title=Discovery of the elements with atomic numbers Z = 113, 115 and 117 (IUPAC Technical Report) |journal=Pure Appl. Chem. |volume=88 |issue=1–2 |pages=139–153 |doi=10.1515/pac-2015-0502|doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Pyykkö |first1=Pekka |date=2019 |title=An essay on periodic tables |url=http://www.chem.helsinki.fi/~pyykko/pekka/No330b.pdf |journal=Pure and Applied Chemistry |volume=91 |issue=12 |pages=1959–1967 |doi=10.1515/pac-2019-0801 |s2cid=203944816 |access-date=27 November 2022}}</ref> While the 2021 IUPAC report noted that 15-element-wide f-blocks are supported by some practitioners of a specialized branch of [[relativistic quantum mechanics]] focusing on the properties of [[superheavy element]]s, the project's opinion was that such interest-dependent concerns should not have any bearing on how the periodic table is presented to "the general chemical and scientific community".<ref name=2021IUPAC/> Other authors focusing on superheavy elements since clarified that the "15th entry of the f-block represents the first slot of the d-block which is left vacant to indicate the place of the f-block inserts", which would imply that this form still has lutetium and lawrencium (the 15th entries in question) as d-block elements in group 3.<ref name=smits/> Indeed, when IUPAC publications expand the table to 32 columns, they make this clear and place lutetium and lawrencium under yttrium in group 3.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Leigh |first1=G. Jeffrey |date=2009 |title=Periodic Tables and IUPAC |url=https://publications.iupac.org/ci/2009/3101/1_leigh.html |journal=Chemistry International |volume=31 |issue=1 |pages=4–6 |doi=10.1515/ci.2009.31.1.4 |access-date=8 January 2024}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |editor-last=Leigh |editor-first=G. Jeffrey |date=1990 |title=Nomenclature of inorganic chemistry : recommendations 1990 |url=https://archive.org/details/nomenclatureofin0000unse/page/282/mode/2up |location= |publisher=Blackwell Scientific Publications |page=283 |isbn=0-632-02319-8}}</ref>

Several arguments in favour of Sc-Y-La-Ac can be encountered in the literature,<ref>{{cite journal |last1= Vernon|first1= R|date= 2021|title=The location and composition of Group 3 of the periodic table|journal=Foundations of Chemistry |volume= 23|issue= 2|pages= 155–197|doi=10.1007/s10698-020-09384-2|s2cid= 254501533|doi-access= free}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Cotton |first1=SA |last2=Raithby |first2=BR |last3=Shield |first3=A|date= 2022|title= A comparison of the structural chemistry of scandium, yttrium, lanthanum and lutetium: A contribution to the group 3 debate |journal= Coordination Chemistry Reviews |volume=455 |issue= |page= 214366 |doi= 10.1016/j.ccr.2021.214366|s2cid=245712597 |url=https://purehost.bath.ac.uk/ws/files/227604162/CCR_SC_Y_Ln_Manuscript_accepted_131221.pdf }}</ref> but they have been challenged as being logically inconsistent.<ref name="Jensen-2015" /><ref name=Scerri2009/><ref name=Chemey/> For example, it has been argued that lanthanum and actinium cannot be f-block elements because as individual gas-phase atoms, they have not begun to fill the f-subshells.<ref name=Lavelle>{{cite journal |last1=Lavelle |first1=Laurence |date=2008 |title=Lanthanum (La) and Actinium (Ac) Should Remain in the d-block |journal=Journal of Chemical Education |volume=85 |issue=11 |pages=1482–1483 |doi=10.1021/ed085p1482|bibcode=2008JChEd..85.1482L |doi-access=free }}</ref> But the same is true of thorium which is never disputed as an f-block element,<ref name=2021IUPAC/><ref name=Jensen1982/> and this argument overlooks the problem on the other end: that the f-shells complete filling at ytterbium and nobelium, matching the Sc-Y-Lu-Lr form, and not at lutetium and lawrencium as the Sc-Y-La-Ac form would have it.<ref name=johnson>{{cite book |last=Johnson |first=David |date=1984 |title=The Periodic Law |url=https://www.rsc.org/images/23_The_Periodic_Law_tcm18-30005.pdf |location= |publisher=The Royal Society of Chemistry |page= |isbn=0-85186-428-7}}</ref> Not only are such exceptional configurations in the minority,<ref name=johnson/> but they have also in any case never been considered as relevant for positioning any other elements on the periodic table: in gaseous atoms, the d-shells complete their filling at copper, palladium, and gold, but it is universally accepted by chemists that these configurations are exceptional and that the d-block really ends in accordance with the Madelung rule at zinc, cadmium, and mercury.<ref name="Thyssen"/> The relevant fact for placement<ref name=Jensen2009/><ref name=JensenLr/> is that lanthanum and actinium (like thorium) have valence f&nbsp;orbitals that can become occupied in chemical environments, whereas lutetium and lawrencium do not:<ref name=jensenlaw/><ref name="Wittig">{{cite book |last=Wittig |first=Jörg |editor=H. J. Queisser |date=1973 |title=Festkörper Probleme: Plenary Lectures of the Divisions Semiconductor Physics, Surface Physics, Low Temperature Physics, High Polymers, Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics, of the German Physical Society, Münster, March 19–24, 1973 |chapter=The pressure variable in solid state physics: What about 4f-band superconductors? |series=Advances in Solid State Physics |volume=13 |location=Berlin, Heidelberg |publisher=Springer |pages=375–396 |isbn=978-3-528-08019-8 |doi=10.1007/BFb0108579}}</ref><ref name=XuPyykko/> their f-shells are in the core, and cannot be used for chemical reactions.<ref name=Cp3Ln/><ref name=wulfsberg26/> Thus the relationship between yttrium and lanthanum is only a secondary relationship between elements with the same number of valence electrons but different kinds of valence orbitals, such as that between chromium and uranium; whereas the relationship between yttrium and lutetium is primary, sharing both valence electron count and valence orbital type.<ref name=jensenlaw/>