If It Made Chemistry News, You’ll Find It in… QUESTION: Why was the naming of elements 104, 105, and 106 so controversial? Search Citation DOI Advanced Search elements 104 OR 105 OR 106 Anywhere Search FinDinG THE ANSweR IS QUICK AND EASY Using the Quick Search box at the C&EN Archives homepage (pubs.acs.org/cen-archives), you can perform a Boolean search for elements 104 OR 105 OR 106. This produces a lengthy list of hits; however, the first hit on the list begins to answer your question and quickly guides you to the other articles that you need. Researching element 104, you’ll discover that… “…the element, which has the atomic number 104, was first reported by Georgii Flerov and colleagues at the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research in Dubna, Russia, in 1964. The Russian scientists named the element ‘kurchatovium’ in honor of nuclear physicist Igor Kurchatov…”1 IT'S ELEMENTAL! The article goes on to note… RUTHERFORDIUM AT A GLANCE “Glenn T. Seaborg, Albert Ghiorso, and coworkers at RUTHERFORDIUM Name: Named after New Zealand MICHAEL FREEMANTLE, C&EN LONDON physicist Ernest Rutherford. Atomic mass: (261). Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory considered the UTHERFORDIUM IS AN ELEMENT is the Latin word code for 104 (un = 1, nil = History: Production first reported by a more famed for its names than 0, and quad = 4). Its symbol was "Unq." team at the Joint Institute for Nuclear its properties or uses. It was al- Seaborg thought these IUPAC names Research in Dubna, Russia, in 1964 Al- so my baptism of fire into the in- were "unnecessarily cumbersome" and bert Ghiorso and his team at the Univer- Dubna discovery in 1964 to be invalid, saying it was based ternational politics and sensi- served "no useful purpose" (C&EN, May 13, sity of California, Berkeley, produced a tivities of naming new elements. 1985, page 2). I quoted the letter in the item different isotope in 1969. IUPAC recom- RIn 1985,1 innocently wrote a piece on I wrote for Chemical International m 1985. mended that the discovery be shared. the element titled "What's in a Name?" for Three weeks after my piece was published, Occurrence: Artificially produced. on the misinterpretation of experimental data. In 1969, Chemistry International, the newsmagazine I attended the 33rd IUPAC general assem- Appearance: Metal of unknown color. of the International Union of Pure & Ap- bly in Lyon, France. One evening, while re- Behavior: Intensely radioactive. plied Chemistry (IUPAC). laxing with some secretari- Uses: No commercial uses. At that time, I had only just at colleagues in the bar of joined the IUPAC secretari- the hotel where we were mended names for elements 101-109. El- the Berkeley group produced two isotopes of the element, at staff in Oxford as informa- staying, several members of ement 104 was named "dubnium" after the tion officer. My duties in- IUPAC's Commission on Dubna group and element 106, "ruther- cluded editing the magazine. Nomenclature of Inorgan- fordium." Seaborg and colleagues at Berke- The piece was short and, ic Chemistry joined us. ley were astonished, calling the names "ab- Rf-258 and Rf-260, and laid claim to its discovery. They in my view, innocuous and After some initial plea- surd," "ridiculous," "outrageous," and factual. It alluded to the fact santries, they tackled me "almost unbelievable" (C&EN, Oct. 10, that the element, which has about the piece, and it soon 1994, page 4). They wanted element 106, the atomic number 104, was became obvious that they which was undisputedly discovered by the named the element ‘rutherfordium’ after…physicist Ernest first reported by Georgii were unhappy with it. They Berkeley group, to be named "seaborgium." Flerov and colleagues at the did not question that it was Controversy and confusion now pre- Joint Institute for Nuclear accurate. What they dis- vailed. An element that had had an occa- 1 Research in Dubna, Russia, liked was that it had been sional, fleeting, and useless existence now Rutherford…” Rutherford in 1964. The Russian scien- published in IUPAC's appeared in various English-language pub- tists named the element "kurchatovium" in house magazine. They suggested that the lications around the word under five differ- honor of nuclear physicist Igor Kurchatov magazine was not a suitable forum for rais- ent names: rutherfordium, kurchatovium, (1903-60), who was a driving force behind ing and debating such highly contentious dubnium, unnilquadium, and element 104. the Soviet Union's race to develop the atom- issues as the discovery and naming of the In June 1995, the American Chemical ic bomb. For the next 10 years or so, the transfermium elements. I drank another Society decided to adopt the names Dubna group published numerous papers beer while they informed me that IUPAC rutherfordium and seaborgium for ele- on the element, including papers in 1969 had formal channels and procedures for ments 104 and 106, respectively, for its A May 1970 article, Element 105 is Long Lived, tells a and 1970 that provided evidence of the pro- dealing with such controversies. journals and magazines. duction of the isotope rutherfordium-259. I soon learned that the pro- At its 38th general assembly, Glenn T. Seaborg, Albert Ghiorso, and cedures were, perhaps necessar- held in 1995 at the University of coworkers at Lawrence Berkeley Nation- ily for democratic reasons, slow Surrey in Guildford, England, similar story… al Laboratory considered the Dubna dis- and cumbersome. In 1985, IUPAC decided to reconsider covery in 1964 to be invalid, saying it was IUPAC and the International its recommended names. Fol- based on the misinterpretation of experi- Union of Pure & Applied Phys- lowing a further two years of mental data. In 1969, the Berkeley group ics decided to set up an ad hoc consultation, the union ratified “Albert Ghiorso reported the discovery of element 105…. produced two isotopes of the element, Rf- working group to consider the a slate of names for elements 258 and Rf-260, and laid claim to its dis- competing claims for priority of CELEBRATING 101-109 at its 39th general as- covery They named the element "ruther- discovery of elements 101-112. C&EN'S sembly in Geneva in 1997. The fordium" after New Zealand-born physicist The group first met in Bayeux, 80TH names met with widespread ap- The Berkeley team proposes that element 105 be named Ernest Rutherford (1871-1937), who won France, in February 1988. It pub- ANNIVERSARY proval. Elements 105 and 106 the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1908 "for lished its final report five years were named dubnium (symbol his investigations into the disintegration later in August 1993. Db) and seaborgium (Sg), respectively, and of the elements and the chemistry of ra- For rutherfordium, it concluded: "The element 104, 28 years after its discovery, hahnium…to honor Otto Hahn….it will probably be several dioactive substances." chemical experiments in Dubna [published was finally named rutherfordium (Rf). In view of the wrangle over the discovery in 1969 and 1970] and the Berkeley ex- and names of element 104 and other trans- periments [published in 1969] were es- London-based C&EN Senior Correspondent fermium elements, IUPAC adopted a pro- sentially contemporaneous and each show Michael Freemantle reports primarily on years before these elements are named officially by the visional naming system for these elements that element 104 had been produced. developments in European chemistry and sci- based on their atomic numbers. Ruther- Credit should be shared." ence policy. He was IUPAC information officer fordium was named "unnilquadium," which In 1994, IUPAC revealed its recom- from 1985to 1994. International Union for Pure and Applied Chemistry HTTP://WWW.CEN-ONLINE.ORG C&EN / SEPTEMBER 8, 2003 181 [IUPAC]….This delay is caused by claims by Soviet scientists that they discovered elements 104 and 105 in 1968.”2 In June 1974, C&EN reported the discovery of the then newest element 106… “The creation of element 106 is ‘without any scientific doubt.’ Thus did Albert Ghiorso of Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory formally certify the laboratory’s production of the new element.”3 This announcement was also not without controversy… “The Berkeley announcement may raise new debate between LBL and the Soviet Union’s Joint Institute for Nuclear Research….As with elements 104 and 105 earlier…a group of Dubna scientists…has claimed to have made element 106.”3 Discover It All from the ACS Web Editions Platform! ReaD THE Although elements 104, 105, and 106 were first discovered in the 60s and 70s, the controversy over who deserved credit and how the elements would be ARTICLES! named continued for decades. A 1994 C&EN article reported… “…IUPAC has revealed…its 1. RUTHERFORDIUM recommendations for naming elements 101 to 109….Most Chem. Eng. News, 2003, contentious are the names chosen 81 (36), p 181 for elements 104, 105, and 106. DOI: 10.1021/cen- Groups at Lawrence Berkeley v081n036.p181 Laboratory…and at the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research…have competing claims….An international 2. ELEMENT 105 IS committee…decided in 1992 that LONG-LIVED the groups should share credit. But Chem. Eng. News, 1970, IUPAC chose two Russian-proposed 48 (19), p 9 names—dubnium and joliotium— DOI: 10.1021/cen- for 104 and 105…”4 v048n019.p009 Researchers at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory were particular upset over IUPAC’s 3. U.S. ScienTISTS naming of element 106… “The U.S. team that discovered element 106 proposed that it be named PRODUCE elemenT 106 ‘seaborgium’ after Nobel Laureate Glenn T. Seaborg….but IUPAC rejected Chem. Eng. News, 1974, ‘seaborgium’ because it’s based on the name of a living person….Seaborg 52 (37), pp 4–5 and colleagues at Berkeley expressed astonishment to C&EN, calling IUPAC’s DOI: 10.1021/cen- recommended names…‘almost unbelievable.’”4 v052n037.p004a The naming of elements 104, 105, and 106 was not resolved until 1997, when IUPAC finalized their names along with several other controversial elements… 4.