Blank Periodic Table Form

It’s odd, isn’t it?I like to think that I’m smart. I’m always winning Kahoots in class. I watch The Chase fairly regularly and often do better than the contestants. If we’re doing a family trivia quiz, and we’re not sure of the answer, everyone goes with what I’m thinking.You wanna know the capital of Honduras? Or the square root of 784? Or the 69th element in the Periodic Table? I’ve gotcha. This is my turf.And fine, it’s great having a lot of knowledge about these matters. I like to learn, and my memory makes that a lot easier.But does that really help me? Am I gonna be helped out in four years’ time if I’m trying to fill out a tax form or if I’m applying for a loan? Great, mitochondria’s the powerhouse of the cell, but that does fuck all for me. Never in my life is knowing how to analyse every part of a centuries-old book gonna benefit me. It doesn’t help that school is, to quote CGP Grey, “a babysitting service obsessed with an endless game of Trivial Pursuit”.And that’s not all.If someone tells me a joke, I often can’t tell if they’re serious. I struggle to detect sarcasm. My own feelings and emotions don’t make sense to me, and neither do anyone else’s. I often make situations worse by trying to help and I can’t really read body language at all. Double meanings, puns, jokes all go over my head.I don’t understand a thing about socializing.I don’t get people. And I never will.How smart am I really? Not at all.

As per the tentative schedule published on the official website, Indian Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS) will conduct the preliminary exam for recruitment of probationary officers (PO) in the month of October.This leaves roughly six months for banking job aspirants to prepare for the exam. While it's not necessary that you begin preparation for IBPS PO exactly six months prior to the exam but it will definitely give you ample to go over all the topics and revise. In this article we will discuss the strategy aspirants should adopt right now in order to ensure a good score in the IBPS PO preliminary and main exam.IBPS PO Preliminary and Main combined, there are total five sections in the IBPS PO exam - English Comprehension, Quantitative Aptitude, Reasoning, Banking Awareness and General Knowledge, and Computer Awareness. Six months are fairly enough to be completely prepared for both Preliminary and Main exam.1st and 2nd monthMake a section-wise list of all the topics from which questions may be asked. Start with the ones you find the toughest or have never heard of before. Devote one hour on each section. In case of Banking Awareness and GK, and Computer Awareness, half an hour a day is enough. Refer only school textbooks and normal exercise books to learn the fundamental concepts.3rd and 4th monthBy now you would have gone through every topic on your list. Now you need to begin focused preparation. Buy a preparation book for bank exams and start solving questions topic-wise. Again an hour a day should be enough. You should follow preparation books because the questions asked in the exam are a tad bit different than the ones which are mentioned in school textbooks. Also focus on learning shortcut tricks for solving lengthy problems.5th and 6th monthIn the last two months, I suggest you sign up for online speed test and solve at least one paper in a day. Don't just solve preliminary speed test but also speed tests designed for Main exam. Solving speed tests would help you identify your problem areas and you can work on them. Speed tests would also get in the gear for online exam and benefit you on the exam day.This schedule (even with a little variation) would allow you to cover every topic including revision and give you an edge over other candidates appearing in the exam.Books for Banking ExamFor IBPS PO i am giving you a small sum of books that will help you for upcoming exams.QUANT:Paramount By Neetu singh (both vol 1 and vol 2).DI: Arhihant + BSC magazine problem.Reasoning:Buy arhihant publication book for general practice.BSC Publication Magazine problems for practice.For Puzzle- Magical Book on PUZZLES by K Kundan.ENGLISH:Reading Reading and Reading, no book will help you unless you start reading and make summary that will help in descriptiveVocab building and revise them regularly.Hindu paper/Indian express/TOINote: No need of book for english. News paper enough.General Awareness:Bankers Adda/Gk today daily affairs don’t read them write them in your daily notes.For quick reading leadthecompetition.comFor quiz App: Daily GKIf you are done with these above three areas, you are done with GA. No need to go for GK tornedo, Capsule, Injection, Golden points etc. ☺BANKING:RBI FAQ ( Frequently Asked Questions)Dhankar publication book for general banking.Make notes from History of banking, years of establishment, Acts, Nationalization, recent developments, committees.Previous exam questions of banking.COMPUTER:Lucent + Arhihant book read them twice will take 15 days to read both twice.Mock Tests:Start with Bankersadda and then after getting proper level join Practice mock and Oliveboard.TIPS:Join Facebook groups to understand pattern and competitionPractice as much as mock u can don’t wait for syllabus to complete.Keep cut off,Types of questions in mind.Don’t Mug up things understanding things well that will help you in life.Don’t compare ever, stay positive, confident, happy.Dont go for bulk materials, books follow the above things these are quite enough to crack u dont need to do phd in quanta/reso. We are here to crack exam. Thats all

The most common element in the universe is hydrogen, making up ~70% of the visible universe, by mass.The second most common element in the universe is helium, making up ~20% of the universe, by mass.Hydrogen atoms are composed of one proton and one electron (sometimes with up to two neutrons to make deuterium or tritium). It is the first element on the periodic table.Helium atoms are composed of two protons, two electrons and 1 or 2 neutrons. It is the second element on the periodic table.Spotting a pattern here?Well, unfortunately it's not quite that simple — the naïve prediction would be that lithium (the third element) would be the next most abundant element — but it's actually Oxygen ([math]Z=8[/math], approx 1%) followed by carbon ([math]Z=6[/math], 0.4%), and then neon [math](Z=10[/math], 0.1% abundance).There is a definite trend of “heavier elements = rarer”, but there is definitely something more going on.To answer why it is that way round, we need to look at how elements are formed in the first place.The first elements were formed after the Big Bang: in the immediate aftermath, the universe was so hot and energetic that nothing could exist in a bound state (like a nucleus), as it would just immediately get ripped apart by the insane levels of heat — at the earliest stages of the universe, even protons would get torn apart in this fashion!However, as the universe cooled (due to its expansion), more and more structures could form in a stable fashion. First protons were able to form — but remember, a single proton is just a hydrogen nucleus. So hydrogen was the first element created, and because it is so simple, it was created in incredible abundance.Then (a smaller number of) neutrons appeared— and almost immediately the protons and neutrons were forced together by the still immense pressure and temperature of the universe, to undergo nuclear fusion.The universe acted as a nuclear furnace, converting pure hydrogen into heavier elements. The first element that you get if you fuse hydrogen is helium — which is why helium is the next most common element.Strangely, at this era of the universe, lithium was the next most common element — after the Big Bang, approx 1% of the universe was lithium, by weight — as opposed to the [math]\lesssim 0.04\%[/math] it's at today.Outside of these three elements, virtually nothing else was created at this primordial stage — only the three lightest elements were formed.After this time (20 minutes after the Big Bang), the universe continued to cool — after 380,000 years, the universe was cool enough for neutral atoms to form, and the “primordial soup” dissipated into neutral atoms.Over the next 300 million years or so, large-scale structures began to form. The matter that made up the universe began to “clump” together, and to contract under gravity.This structure formation is what gives us our clusters, galaxies and — eventually — the stars that we observe today.When stars formed, they acted as a gateway to heavier elements. Stars are nuclear furnaces, like the conditions of the universe after 20 minutes — but on a much smaller scale. However, stars are long-lived structures. This means that some “slow-burn” processes could occur, which were not possible in the rapid evolution of the whole universe that formed the first three elements.These primordial stars, therefore, began to fuse more hydrogen into helium, and then helium into heavier elements.This pattern of fusing isn't as simple as stepping up the periodic table — it's not like “hydrogen -> helium -> lithium”, as you might initially expect, because the processes which go into making the fusion occur are remarkably complex, as evidenced by this chain which shows the simplest fusion reaction: hydrogen to helium, the so-called “proton-proton chain”.When you get to have slightly heavier elements around, they can act as catalysts, so you can make this reaction more complex, like the CNO (carbon-nitrogen-oxygen) cycle:(N.B. this process is called “burning”, even though it's nuclear, not combustion.)To cut a long story (relatively) short, each stage doesn't simply produce the element which is one heavier than it — there are multiple addition stages, as well as complex nuclear decay chains.Helium burning phases mostly result in cores which are primarily carbon or oxygen (which explains why they're the next most common element after helium).Subsequent burning of heavier elements with helium often produces products with even numbers of protons.There are of course other reactions going on as well — the lithium is often rapidly broken down by collisions with hydrogen to form two heliums, which subsequently fuse — which is why the ratio of lithium in the universe has drastically decreased, because it is used up, but not produced in large quantities.The final burning stage in stars is the Silicon burning phase, which produces the heaviest elements that can be produced in stars: iron ([math]Z=26[/math]), nickel [math](Z=28)[/math] and zinc ([math]Z=30[/math]). These last two fusion reactions in fact absorb energy — which serves to rapidly destabilise the star, leading to its death.It is the death stages of these stars that produce the remainder of the elements that we observe today. Iron is the heaviest element that can be stably produced in stellar nucleosynthesis — but we observe many heavier elements out there, so where did they come from?It turns out that not only do the death-throes of stars serve to disseminate the fusion products into space, by shedding their envelope, and seeding the interstellar medium with heavier elements — the final moments of a heavy star — the supernova — serve as a final, enormous nuclear furnace, which produces much heavier elements than is normally possible in the usual stellar cycles.This is where all of the heavier elements we observe come from — from the gold, silver and platinum in your jewellery, to the mercury in old thermometers, and the lead piping used to beat old men to death in murder mystery games.Everything heavier than iron (and a good deal of the stuff lighter than iron as well) is formed in these supernovae, and then these elements are exploded out into space by the force of the supernova.Eventually, this dust and debris begins to contract under gravity — where it forms secondary stars, solar systems and planets.Unlike the original, primordial stars which were composed only of the Big-Bang material, these secondary (and even tertiary and quaterniary) systems have been seeded with heavy elements by the previous generations of stellar cycles.And that, is why we exist.Our entire planet, every single atom in our bodies (except the hydrogen) was formed in the previous generations of stars — and then hurled into space, only to form anew.This process of stellar nucleosynthesis helps explain, with exquisite detail, why the abundance of elements that we observe in the universe is the way it is.There are of course still some links to be worked out — the neutron star collision observed last year helped us to fill in some missing pieces with regards to the production of gold (of which there was too much compared to our predictions), but in general, this model works incredibly well.So why are the most abundant elements the most abundant?Well, the two most abundant elements were created mere minutes after the Big Bang, in incredible quantities.The remaining abundant elements are those that form stable structures, and are produced in large quantities in the stellar nucleosynthesis cycles: oxygen, carbon and neon.The less abundant elements are those that are either unstable (and hence decay), are readily destroyed in stars in favour of other elements (lithium), or are simply not produced at all in stellar processes, and instead rely on supernova or neutron star processes to form them (i.e. heavy elements, [math]Z> 26[/math]).

There are plenty of different ways of laying out the same data in the periodic table. See for example Alternative periodic tables. Whether you display it in a block, a triangle or a spiral form and quite how you deal with the transition elements, the lanthanides and the actinides all allow some degree of flexibility. Perhaps the most radical is the Charles Janet's Left step periodic table which is based shell filling patterns.The tables can also display different information some give weighting according to abundance.

First of all, they didn’t see any gold or heavy elements directly here, there are no gold emission lines observed. The amount of gold produced is inferred from models, which fit the time dependence and color of the light curve that was observed in the optical telescopes.Second, neutrons decay in free space and in nuclei into electrons, protons and electron anti-neutrinos. So that’s in the normal way of things.But the mechanism that would theoretically be acting during a neutron star merger to build up heavy elements is undoubtedly some version of the r-process (r just stands for rapid).Neutron stars contain in their outer surface a crust of ordinary nuclei, many in the range of the iron group, having a mass number near [math]A=60.[/math]So in the collision of two orbiting neutron stars, the crust would be disrupted in the final stages of the inspiral due to tidal forces as well as the actual collision, ejecting many of these ordinary nuclei into the space surrounding the two revolving stars. In addition the subsurface matter is very neutron rich so one can expect huge fluxes of neutrons to also be liberated and to be present in this space, all forming a kind of very fast rotating disk, or cloud.The neutrons can live in free space for ten minutes before they would decay to protons. So there is plenty of time in the final stages of the neutron star collision, or rather merger, because the neutron stars will certainly merge into a black hole, but there is plenty of time for these free neutrons to collide repeatedly with the iron group nuclei that are in the circulating cloud. When they do, they stick temporarily and they build up still bigger nuclei, and if the neutron flux is truly enormous, then there is no time for those neutrons to beta decay to protons inside these neutron rich nuclei or resonant states, since another neutron hits the nucleus first in general. Some beta decays will happen of course and you may have to take account of reactions that may remove neutrons too, or break up the nuclei, or reactions with neutrinos that can have the same effect as a beta decay. The neutron numbers are driven up along a path that runs either closer or further from the neutron drip line, depending on the neutron flux and the temperatures and reactions that are open given the circumstances that exist, until eventually it becomes more likely that another neutron absorption produces fission of the nucleus than that it produces a capture.It is not actually necessary to start with iron nuclei: the r-process can in fact perfectly well operate directly starting on hydrogen and helium given only that high enough neutron fluxes exist. But to signNow the heavy r-process nuclei starting from iron you already need to have about 150 neutron captures per nucleus, so it is common to imagine iron as a starting point. The r-process has in fact been seen in fallout from thermonuclear weapons on Earth.However, certain neutron numbers are very greatly preferred, due to the nature of the nuclear forces. For neutrons, the magic numbers go 2,8, 20, 28, 50, 82, 126, 184, 196 when you account for nuclear deformation.So you might think of the r-process this way to first order: you build up huge and very neutron rich nuclei, near these magic numbers in atomic mass [math]A[/math] starting with neutrons on iron - they have only relatively few protons, and they can exist only as long as the neutron flux stays enormously high. This might be only for a few times 100 ms or so, it need not be for very long to drive the r-process. It is a highly non-equilibrium process. When the neutron flux finally drops, then beta decay takes over, and the neutrons rapidly decay to the nearest relatively stable nucleus of about the same atomic number they started with.So the lowest order picture you might have is that you build up a huge number of these close to magic neutron rich nuclei, and then the extra neutrons beta decay producing electrons, antineutrinos, and protons instead, and this results in a whole distribution of heavy elements. They beta decay until they signNow a reasonably long lived isotope up near to the valley of stability in the [math](Z,N)[/math]-plane.In some versions of this picture for neutron star mergers, it is even said that nuclear clusters with [math]A=280[/math] are formed, and that these then actually fission to produce the nuclei near neutron numbers 120-140.The weak point in all of this, this whole theoretical picture, is that we have very little idea of the reactions and properties, especially the neutrino and anti-neutrino interactions and the other properties - the masses, the beta decay lifetimes the neutron absorption cross-sections, the neutron separation energies, and the other reactions that are possible, on these very exotic neutron rich nuclei. We can barely make things that are somewhat like them in accelerators, and then they are so short lived that there is no time to do experiments.However, there never used to be any problem with heavy element production in nucleosynthesis in supernovae, none that I remember at least, and the oldest known stars in the Milky Way, judging by their very low metal content and nearly zero iron content, show the presence of these heavy nuclei that must be produced by the r-process already, and when you correct for the much greater abundance of metals that are found in the Sun, you also see these elements in about the same proportions. So it is known that the r-process happened very early in the history of our galaxy already, and that it was not working very much differently back then than it is now. These very old halo stars are probably no more than a few million years younger than the age of the Milky Way, so by far the most likely way for them to have gotten their heavy r-process elements is by the explosions of the supernovae from the very first stars to form. These would have had no metals at all in them, and it is thought that they are all now gone. These supernovae would have been all core collapse supernovae for the first few billion years, since it takes a relatively long time to make white dwarfs, and one would expect the first of these supernovae a few million years after the birth of the very first generation of stars.The reaction networks that people who do such r-process calculations use are very large and they are guessed at in the best way possible, but in the end there are still many uncertainties involved in the theory. More than this, it is almost impossible to believe that a realistic calculation of a neutron star merger is possible - it is a fully 3-D and general relativistic problem possibly with large magnetic fields as well. So the theory of the distributions that drive the r-process in such a merger is likely very highly speculative.To translate, I think that this particular part of the theory is probably a lot of hand waving at this stage.However it is very clear that some such mechanism as the r-process is needed to produce all of the heavy nuclei. It appears that it simply can’t be done otherwise in ordinary stars. The s-process (s stands for slow) is a much better understood neutron capture process, since it proceeds near to the valley of stability through a path of relatively ordinary nuclei that can be studied in very great detail in the laboratory, but it doesn’t seem to be sufficient on its own to produce the observed abundance peaks. On the whole the s-process peaks are shifted higher in atomic number relative to the r-process peaks, but the basis of them is, again the magic numbers for neutron closed shells. The limiting factor here is the neutron capture cross-section, which drops at a closed shell.This theory is of course, all based upon and guided by looking at the rough element abundances in the solar system (which really means the Sun) and in the galaxy, in general, in the various classes of stellar populations, and by then trying to get somewhere near to those abundance curves.Now the real focus here in these neutron star mergers is supposed to be the production of the nuclei that have neutron numbers approaching 120, which we should all remember are very rare. Since they are rare we can also expect it to be very hard to get their abundances exactly right.The total mass of such elements being produced in such a merger by the r-process, if I am absolutely fair to the advocates of this mechanism for making the elements near europium/platinum/osmium, may be something like [math]10^{-6}\text{M}_\odot.[/math]This would all be heated up and go out with the small mass of the ejecta.But this is by far not the only way that exists by which the r-process can be driven. There are also core collapse supernovae, and while of late the theoretical simulations have some problems producing enough of the very heavy elements, I suspect that there are simply still problems in the understanding of the mechanisms both of the supernova and of the r-process, because historically this has not been a problem.Certainly Burbidge, Burbidge, Fowler and Hoyle envisaged that the r-process could be driven in supernovae, and many of the early calculations from supernovae that I saw were in the right ballpark range.Core collapse supernovae are very common, neutron star mergers seem to be rare, both are quite complicated and so I tend to think that the theoretical understandings of the mechanisms of element production in both are not completely correct.But supernovae seem to me like a more plausible mechanism to generate the rare heavy elements, the lanthanides and the actinides, since they are common events and have a very efficient dispersal mechanism for these heavy elements. It’s better to have one mechanism to produce all the heavy elements, I would say.If instead very heavy elements come from neutron star mergers and these are rare then we should really see small areas in the galaxy which have stars that are full of europium/platinum/osmium. They will need to find a lot more such mergers in order to account for all of the actinides and lanthanides, I suspect, unless this particular one is an anemic producer for some reason, or unless somehow the lanthanide fraction is greater than what they estimate.

Dmitri Mendeleev published the first periodic table in 1869. He showed that when the elements were ordered according to atomic weight, a pattern resulted where similar properties for elements recurred periodically. Based on the work of physicist Henry Moseley, the periodic table was reorganized on the basis of increasing atomic number rather than on atomic weight.The periodic table lists elements by atomic number, which is the number of protons in every atom of that element. Atoms of an atomic number may have varying numbers of neutrons (isotopes) and electrons (ions), yet remain the same chemical element.Elements in the periodic table are arranged in periods (rows) and groups(columns). Each of the seven periods is filled sequentially by atomic number. Groups include elements having the same electron configuration in their outer shell, which results in group elements sharing similar chemical properties.The electrons in the outer shell are termed valence electrons. Valence electrons determine the properties and chemical reactivity of the element and participate in chemical bonding. The Roman numerals found above each group specify the usual number of valence electrons.There are two sets of groups. The group A elements are the representative elements, which have s or p sublevels as their outer orbitals. The group B elements are the nonrepresentative elements, which have partly filled d sublevels (the transition elements) or partly filled f sublevels (the lanthanide series and the actinide series). The Roman numeral and letter designations give the electron configuration for the valence electrons.Another way to categorize elements is according to whether they behave as metals or nonmetals. Most elements are metals. They are found on the lefthand side of the table. The far right side contains the nonmetals, plus hydrogen displays nonmetal characteristics under ordinary conditions. Elements that have some properties of metals and some of nonmetals are called metalloids or semimetals. These elements are found along a zig-zag line that runs from the upper left of group 13 to the bottom right of group 16.Metals are generally good conductors of heat and electricity, are malleable and ductile, and have a lustrous metallic appearance. In contrast, most nonmetals are poor conductors of heat and electricity, tend to be brittle solids, and can assume any of a number of physical forms. While all of the metals except mercury are solid under ordinary conditions, nonmetals may be solids, liquids, or gases at room temperature and pressure. Elements may be further subdivided into groups. Groups of metals include the alkali metals, alkaline earth metals, transition metals, basic metals, lanthanides, and actinides.Groups of nonmetals include the nonmetals, halogens, and noble gases.Periodic Table TrendsThe organization of the periodic table leads to recurring properties or periodic table trends. These properties and their trends are:Ionization Energy - energy needed to remove an electron from a gaseous atom or ion. Ionization energy increases moving left to right and decreases moving down an element group (column).Electronegativity - how likely an atom is to form a chemical bond. Electronegativity increases moving left to right and decreases moving down a group. The noble gases are an exception, with an electronegativity approaching zero.Atomic Radius (and Ionic Radius) - a measure of the size of an atom. Atomic and ionic radius decreases moving left to right across a row (period) and increases moving down a group.Electron Affinity - how readily an atom accepts an electron. Electron affinity increases moving across a period and decreases moving down a group. Electron affinity is nearly zero for noble gases.Source:- Periodic Table Introduction-http://bit.ly/2KPmBiU

The answers given are all very interesting. Thank you! I asked this question because I am surprised by the seemingly big difference in the approach in chemistry and the approach in quantum physics in “handling” the atoms in molecules, arranging the electrons, sharing electrons with adjoining atoms.Atoms and MoleculesI always was impressed by the very systematic overview in the periodic table, the shells, the consistency of building chemicals. I was surprised by the way our DNA is built. The genetic code, our DNA, is made up of four different chemicals: the bases adenine, guanine, thymine and cytosine, denoted by the abbreviations A, G, T and C. All the electrons that are involved seem to have a very demarcated place and if there are a few strayed atoms, you will get a big problem in your life.In my point of view the world of chemistry is ruling the world and our lives in a nice organised way: List of Elements - Element Names, Symbols, and Atomic NumbersIn the given answers I recognize the different path of the science in quantum physics. I tend to think, that for a real progress in knowledge we need the cooperation of the two approaches. We need quantum-chemists.

This is what my son and I did when he wanted to live independently, but couldn't really afford to live out on his own.I live on the west coast of Canada. Rents are very high, so it is difficult for young people to work at the minimum wage jobs available to them, and live independently.We have a strong Provincial Landlord Tenant Act which governs both landlords and tenants. Everything is very clear, and life is easier for all concerned if landlords use the government forms, and follow the act.My son called me one day, after living away from home for maybe 3 years, saying he wasn't going to be able to pay the rent due in 3 or 4 days. Could he please move back home into his room?I rented a truck, about 3 hours was all I could get at that late date, and we moved him home.It turned out he was having trouble with having a consistent income with the minimum wage jobs he was qualified for at the time.He moved into his childhood room, which is tiny, and my living room became a storage room for the rest of his things. (I have a tenant paying market rent in a one bedroom suite in my basement. It pays the mortgage.)Not long after, we moved him into the master bedroom, which has an ensuite (master bath), and all his things moved from the living room into his room, which is very large.Next, he filled out a provincial government landlord tenant form, and began paying $200 each month.I put a full size fridge and microwave in his room. He did his own grocery shopping, and cooking. He did his own cleaning and laundry. We didn't share a bathroom, so that removed a source of friction.I certainly did not worry about the cleanliness of his room. That's what doors are for, although it turned out he cleaned more regularly than I did.I did not enter his room without permission or proper notice, as per the Landlord Tenant Act.I had already taken him grocery shopping a few times to show him how to shop and cook on a budget.I hired someone else to cut the lawn. My son had no time, and I didn't want to be arguing with him about chores.He was no longer a child. I had my chance raising him. That period of both our lives was over. He was trying his best to be an independent adult in a difficult financial climate, so I treated him like an adult. I also treated him like any other tenant I've had.My thinking was if I wouldn't say it to my tenant downstairs, I didn't say it to him.All of this meant that our only interaction was social, so we became good friends.It worked a treat. We get along great now.Your son is trying to be an adult, taking small steps. Let him. Make him a tenant, and treat him like any other tenant.Charge him $200 a month, which is low enough to keep him there, but high enough that he will have to budget to make sure he can pay it.Treat him the same way you would treat a tenant who is a stranger. Treat him like the adult he wants to be.Let him do his own laundry. Make up a schedule, if necessary. He gets the weekends, you get weekdays; he gets Wednesday and Sunday, you get the rest of the time.Hire someone to mow the grass. Do not expect “family chores" from him, just as you wouldn't from a tenant who is a stranger.Put a full size fridge, a microwave, and a hot plate in his suite if there isn't a kitchen. Then take him grocery shopping and show him how to shop, and cook, on a tight budget.Do not expect him at the family dinner table every night. You will find yourself chasing him to find out when he'll be home for dinner every day. Let him set his own schedule, cook for himself, eat what he wants. If he needs cooking lessons, teach him, or sign him up for a class. After he's settled, invite him for Sunday dinner, but not every week.If he needs to be driven when he drinks too much, pick him up. Ask no questions.Try very hard not to judge as he navigates the difficult time of young adulthood. Help him get through without any life altering issues — everyone alive, no one pregnant, no record.All of this will help him learn how to organize his life successfully in the adult world while he is in a safe place. It will also provide a foundation for your future relationship, and your respect for each other.He wants to be an independent adult. Let him, and help him.It has nothing to do with whether or not you need the rent money. It has everything to do with helping your son become an adult.My son stayed for 2.5 years. It was great having him here. When he left, he got in his car and drove, alone, across the country to live in Toronto, which he felt well prepared to do. I then offered his room to a young, aspiring musician who wanted to live semi-independently, with someone around. She pays market rent, I listen to beautiful music every day, and we both have someone to talk to.If you read my thread, you'll see some of my experiences with my son as he went through young adulthood, and how we navigated to what I now consider successful adulthood.

This is actually a fascinating question. Perhaps like many things of that era, it depended on how much money you had and your station in life.We all must sleep: there’s no escaping it, but how we sleep today is different in many ways from the people back then. In the developed world, at least, most people sleep in a bed, on a mattress in a comfort-controlled environment, but this was not always the case.Perhaps the greatest difference in sleeping now versus the 18th Century (circa the 1700s) is that we now have uniform mattresses (all things considered). But in the 17th Century there was no such thing. The mattress we are familiar with today didn’t arrive until 1899 when the inner-coil spring was invented. Until then, a mattress was “ticking” (a type of fabric) stuffed with feather, straw, horsehair or cotton “batting”. The effects were much different in both comfort, hygiene, longevity and maintenance. The word “mattress” is arabic in origin and was brought back to Europe from the Crusades where soldiers saw how Arabs slept on cushions and brought the practice back. In the 17th Century there was a wide variety of mattresses in use; sometimes no mattress was used at all. Mattresses were often called a “paliasse” in those days, usually a sack stuffed with straw. Straw breaks down and the paliasse would have to be stuffed over and over again. Also, any mattress with organic materials could be home to mice and other vermin. A paliasse was something that could be emptied and carried to a new location and refilled with local materials.Many beds had springs made of rope stretched across the frame from which we get the expression “Sleep tight” as the ropes would sag and have to be tightened from time to time, although evidence exists that the word “tight” was also a synonym for “well”, so the expression “Sleep tight” could also mean “Sleep well”. The second part of that expression is “Don’t let the bed bugs bite”. Bed bugs were a horrible nuisance and a fact of life. Rooms would be painted thoroughly to eliminate bed bugs hiding in the cracks. The bugs would be hunted and crushed whenever possible. In addition lice were a frequent problem. Killing both effectively was often a losing battle - bed bugs are very hard to eradicate.In addition, homes were much, much smaller then and centered around the kitchen. It was not unusual for a type of bed (that we call a Murphy Bed today) to be permanently installed in the kitchen so that an elderly, or sick person could be monitored and kept near the fire. The bed would be hinged and pulled up against the wall when not in use. In addition, many homes were not insulated so large wooden cranes would be installed on either side of the fireplace and at night blankets would be hung over the cranes to make a small room where the entire family would sleep. The blankets held in the heat during the night. In the US, examples of crane-kitchens and kitchen beds can be seen in the historic village of Storrowton in Springfield, MA.Sleep followed the sun. People went to bed early and got up early. Daylight could not be wasted. The rhythm of life followed in this fashion for centuries and was only seriously disturbed by the invention of the electric light. There is evidence that until the electric light people slept in shifts: they went to bed in the dark, woke up four hours later and accomplished something then went back to bed again until morning. I think this was not universal, however, though it seems to have been common in some areas. I don’t think it was universal because it was really dark at night. Unlike now, there was no light pollution and ambient light was very weak. Modern people really have little perception of what pervasive darkness is like. Candles and oil lamps threw a very, very weak light - possibly no more than 15 or 20 lumens, about 100 times less than even a modern 15 watt bulb you might use in an electric window candle at Christmas, certainly too little to do much detail work such as sewing or extensive reading (most books used 8 or 9 point type to conserve paper and corrective lenses were much less available. It would have been difficult to read at night by light of a candle although many people did do it - at the expense of their eyesight.). In addition there would have been risk of injury moving around in the dark, especially on the non-standard steps and tread widths of the day. Most humble homes with an upstairs used a winding, narrow stair arrangement to save space. You can see this over and over again in the preserved villages of Strawberry Banke in New Hampshire, at Storrowton, in Mystic Village, the Fairbanks House, the Peak House, Sturbridge and other places where there are preserved homes of that era. Only the “better” homes had sweeping, straight staircases because they could afford the loss of space required for such things. There were no stair rails in most homes. If you slipped in the dark you would go head over heels down the steps, a distinct possibility in the darkness. Perhaps in the roles of farming where tending animals or preparing for morning chores there might have been more shift-sleeping but I believe that people worked very hard during the day on the whole and would have slept through the night. Preparing food would have been out of the question - no one would use a sharp knife under those conditions and kitchens in those days had no sinks. There was no running water. In many houses the kitchen was actually outside the house to prevent the cooking heat from sweltering the house in summer. Finally, there was no easy way to strike a light to light a candle in the dark. There were no matches until the 1820s - 30s. If you wanted to light a candle you had to use a piece of “spill”, a long tapering stick to transfer flame from the fireplace to a candle or lamp, or strike flint and steel, which was an challenging task.Another issue that impacted sleeping was the blanket. Today we take blankets for granted, it’s a common, inexpensive item. But back in the 18th Century a blanket was a precious and dear thing. Giving a blanket was a dear wedding gift because to make one, a family had to shear the sheep, card the wool, spin it into thread and then weave it on a home loom. It was a substantial undertaking to make and own a blanket. In the early 18th Century blankets were traded for beaver pelts. One of the most famous manufacturers of the day was Hudson Bay in Canada, which made standard blankets in sizes called “points”. These blankets were all wool and highly prized, so much so that they are still made and a 5 point, Queen sized blanket can cost 500 dollars or more. The blanket was particularly prized by people who traveled or who spent much time on foot or outside because it could be converted into a “capote” or jacket with a hood and be used indoors or out. As a re-enactor I own a 5 point Hudson Bay blanket and a capote. The blanket is never used for sleeping outdoors anymore - it’s too luxurious. The capote is without a doubt the warmest outer garment I have ever worn and wool retains its heating properties even when wet. However, the issue with blanket costs changed radically with the Industrial Revolution in England in the early - mid 1700s and in the US in the mid 1700s with the construction of the Slater Mill and Lowell’s American Manufacturing Company in Waltham, MA. Not only were sleeping habits changed as the price of a blanket plummeted but the entire social fabric of the region changed as workers moved from being farm hands to factory workers. But the always-falling price of blankets was a marvel at the time no less remarked-upon than today’s “Moore’s Law” which talks of the price of technology being cut in half every seven years.Another thing that is often overlooked is the cleanliness of the bed linens. Washing for the majority of people was a low priority task because of the hours of work and expense required to do a load of laundry. It was common for weeks and even months to go by before most things were washed. Washing was so infrequent that many people did it only twice a year. It was called “The Great Wash” when everything would be “bucked”. Bucking was the term for soaking laundry in a giant cauldron overnight in strong lye to clean, degrease and whiten it. The work required boiling a great deal of water or boiling water outside in a giant metal tub, which was beyond the budget of most people so wooden tubs were used with hot water poured in from a bucket or kettle heated over a fire. Just to fill the tub could take hours.y A load of laundry could take an entire day to do, longer if stains had to be treated or cloth needed to be whitened. Therefore, washing was rare. When it was done, it was done all at once with boiling water and soft lye soap made from ash and urine and animal fat. Urine has been used since Roman times to make whites whiter. Ash and urine form lye and if the proportions were wrong the cleaned fabric could literally burn the skin, or at least be very irritating. There was also a chemical called “Dolly Blue” that was used to whiten clothing or bleach them by adding a slight blue tint to faded, grey or yellowing whites. Clothes were stirred in the boiling water with soap using a “beetle” or washing bat, then rinsed in a nearby river, even in winter, even if the ice had to be broken to do it. This had to be done to wash out the excess lye to prevent skin irritation and it was sometimes ineffective. Then the laundry was spread on the hedges or bushes to dry in the sun. “Mangles”, or boxes of heavy rocks, were often used to press the clothes or sheets. There were all kinds of remedies for removing various stains. In any case, you more than likely went to bed in sheets that hadn’t been changed in three or more months. We won’t even discuss the menstrual stains that often accompanied the unwashed sheets. In those days you were very fortunate if you could afford the services of a Laundress.Beyond blankets were the sleeping clothes people wore. In the early 17th Century many people wore a long “shift” which acted as a shirt but was so long that at night it was kept on after everything else was removed and used as a “nightdress”. This one piece of versatile clothing was worn day after day, night after night and must have been filthy and smelly. But owning it reduced the need for buying additional clothing. Most people owned very few changes of clothing, so few that houses didn’t have closets or even dressers but owned a blanket box at the end of the bed which was a hold-all for everything. So the nightdress functioned as the shirt during the day. This was a time when people didn’t wear any kind of underwear (sewn closed-crotch panties for women didn’t even arrive until the 1920s). In addition, people wore nightcaps to keep their heads warm since there was no kind of central heating. A woman’s nightcap was like a skull cap and tied on with string. A man’s was pointed and had a ball at the end. The length of the cap was determined to prevent strangulation during the night; it also acted as a necks scarf. There was a little fur ball on the end to allow it to be tucked into the nightshirt to keep it from moving around too much.In most houses central heating required a fireplace. Although many houses were single floor, even single room affairs, many people, especially rich people, had upstairs bedrooms. These were elaborate affairs. A great example is the Otis House in Boston, one of the last pre-Revolutionary homes left in Boston. This house has not been updated and reflects the living and sleeping ways of people in that time. What is remarkable is multi-fold. First, in those days, people, especially women, entertained guests in the bedroom. There were often comfortable chairs, a coffee table and so on near the bed for entertaining guests. This is because the bedroom always had a fireplace. Fireplaces seem romantic but they require an incredible amount of work and are very inefficient. Every fireplace required wood be carried and stored nearby; every fire had to be tended; every fireplace had to have the ashes removed, and this work was multiplied for every fireplace in the house. In the Otis House there are eight or more fireplaces requiring an army of servants simply to serve the fires on a regular basis. To cut down on this the fire was primarily maintained in the bedroom where guests could be brought in comfort; the menfolk sat and smoked cigars and drank in the dining room or parlor, which were also served with fire. It’s critical to note that even in a modest home a minimum of five cords of wood, probably more like ten, would be required for every fireplace for a year. The amount of effort required to cut, split, stack, carry 10 cords of firewood is enormous. In the cities there were “firewood wars” in the winter where the purveyors of firewood would vastly jack up the prices of firewood as the temperatures dropped. In addition, they would short the size of the cord to maximize their profits. Ships bringing firewood from Maine or Virginia would anchor off the coast until demands for a higher price were met, reminiscent of the oil tankers sitting off the coast of America during the oil crisis of 1973. (The same thing would happen when people converted from wood to coal in the mid 1800s). Finally, the cities had to bring in regulators, price limits and “Firewood Inspectors” to control the price and quantity of a cord of wood to prevent rioting. The Firewood Inspectors were so common that in New York, for example, it was common practice to bribe them to look the other way when cords were shorted. In almost every home was a bed warmer, an enclosed brass box with a handle that could be filled with hot coals or heated stones and placed under the mattress or blankets to heat the bed. A cold mattress draws the heat from the body.This underscores the continuing sleeping challenges people faced in the 1700s. The mattresses were lumpy and often havens for vermin; the rooms were cold; your shirt was your pajama and probably reeked and your bedroom was cold. So if you could, you built a four-poster bed. The four poster bed seems to have gotten its start in the late 1200s as a way to remain comfortable during the night. Blankets could be pulled from the top to enclose the entire bed and hold in the heat. In addition, in those days, since the bedroom was often the only room heated at night, the servants would also sleep in the same room as the master - to tend the fire and stay warm - and a four poster provided privacy. Four poster beds became great and important fixtures, so much so that the Great Bed of Ware, a four poster surviving from 1590, is used as an example of the lengths people would go to create a bed that was not only warm but luxurious. Even Shakespeare wrote about it. Beds were lived in. And the hanging blankets were often so voluminous that a lover or an assassin could hide in them and strike when the person was asleep. Four poster beds also had the advantage of allowing mosquito netting in the summer when all windows would be open at night.Then there is the case of the traveler. Inns of the period were much smaller and more modest than they are now and had a limited number of beds. Strangers were often required to sleep in the same bed at night and were often robbed in their sleep. This was a very common situation, to have strangers in the same bed. Of course, women travelers were very, very rare in those days and would be separated from the men but nevertheless, having five people who didn’t know each other in a single bed was not uncommon. In America, the first hotel to offer an exclusive bed to a patron was the Parker House in Boston in the early 1800s, which still exists today as a luxury boutique hotel. (Later it would be the first hotel to offer hot running water, but only in the basement).Sleeping was a constant issue in growing cities, especially for people who made the equivalent of $1.50 per day and room and board was $5.00 per week. (Incidentally, it’s called room and “board” because in those days a table was called a “board” and if you paid board it meant you were entitled to a place at the board, or table, for food). Awful bunk rooms sprung up where tiers of rough bunks with straw mattresses were provided for 1.5 - 3 cents a night. In those days a penny was denoted using the letter “d” for the Roman “denarius” for “penny” and advertised as such, showing “Beds - 3d/ night” outside the room. (Incidentally, the letter “d” for penny is still used in some areas, for example, nails are sold by size as “d”, such that a 2d nail or “two penny” nail is a certain size and so on) Sometimes the bunks could house three men at a time. This practice began to be outlawed in the early 20th Century but “flop houses” existed at least until the 1960s in some places.Another issue with sleeping in the 17th Century was the act of relieving oneself in the middle of the night, which in those days was called “the necessary”. In those days, the fire would go out in the middle of the night; the room could be freezing and yet one would have to get up to do one’s business. Houses were known for their draftiness: individual pane windows were glazed by a Fenster, a man who made windows. Often the glazing would fail over time, allowing rattling windows and drafts, hence the development of the “Wing Chair” that kept drafts off the neck. Depending upon the “business” that was required to be performed there was always a chamber pot under the bed. In wealthier homes there were elaborate commodes, disguised toilets that were built to look like a cabinet but opened to reveal a toilet and catch basin. These had to be cleaned daily by the owner or the servants. Later, in the mid 1800s there was a major problem in urban centers with people dumping the chamber pot out the window, or emptying it into the gutter in the street. Real toilets and plumbing didn’t become common until the New York Building Code required flushing toilets in 1900. Nevertheless, it was a rare individual who would run out to the “jakes” (as toilets were known) in the middle of the night to do their business. It was a bothersome procedure. It’s interesting to note that in the Otis House in Boston, which was a large mansion in its day, there is not a single room that could be considered a “wash room” or “bathroom”. Guests who visited would have to visit the outhouse. And there was no toilet paper then - that didn’t arrive until 1858 in Boston, developed by Joseph Gayetty.In addition to all of this was the concept of “bundling”. When men had to often travel great distances to court a woman there was often no “guest room” for them to sleep in. The obvious solution was to allow the man and woman to sleep in the same bed. However, the guardian or parent would “bundle” the man and woman in separate blankets to prevent sexual intercourse while allowing them to be close and become “intimate” which meant something different then than it does now. There were even “chastity partitions” that allowed a man and woman to divide the bed with a board or cushion, although even in those days if was well known that the chastity partition, or “bundling board” often disappeared during the night as people succumbed to their desires more often than not. In old New England the tradition of the engagement ring was often used as a trade for virginity. If a man and woman spent the night “bundling” and ended up in a sexual situation he would give her a ring as a “bond” for the loss of her virginity. Since a woman who was known to have lost her virginity (by wagging tongues) was “less valuable” then the ring would make up for that loss of value if the man didn’t marry her. In many cases, everyone slept in the same room, sometimes even with livestock. There were few secrets and the act of sex between parents was no big secret to children in the same room, often in the same bed.For other people, “sleeping rough”, or outside, on the ground was a very common practice. People were adept at making beds of boughs to get off the ground. As a re-enactor I have spent many a night on the ground and it is terrible. Not only does it make you hurt the next day, but the ground is damp and draws the heat from your body. Even a small layer of straw prevents many problems and wicks off some rain. People became adept at sleeping outdoors on the downhill and digging a small trench around their bed of boughs to allow rain water to drain around them. Army camps had a common practice of doing this. In this environment, the Hudson Bay Capote proved its value over and over again. People often slept in barns or wagons and coachmen would sleep in the coach during the night rather than pay for a room. Many coaches even had a brazier box under the seats where hot coals could be placed to warm the coach.As time has gone on we have elevated our sleep behaviors to an apex of comfort and luxury but in the 18th Century sleep was also held dear but getting the best night’s sleep was, as nearly everything then, a challenge.

Today, there are 118 elements on the periodic table, Four with atomic numbers \u2013 113 (Nihonium), 115 (Moskovitz), 117 (Tennyson) and 118 (Oganesson) \u2013 were added in 2016.

Most people think Mendeleev invented the modern periodic table. Dmitri Mendeleev presented his periodic table of the elements based on increasing atomic weight on March 6, 1869, in a presentation to the Russian Chemical Society.

Since 2016, the periodic table has 118 confirmed elements, from element 1 (hydrogen) to 118 (oganesson).

In the modern periodic table, the elements are arranged according to their atomic number — not their relative atomic mass. In the periodic table the elements are arranged into: rows, called periods, in order of increasing atomic number. Vertical columns, called groups, where the elements have similar properties.

The modern periodic table is used to organize all the known elements. Elements are arranged in the table by increasing atomic number. In the modern periodic table, each element is represented by its chemical symbol. ... Columns of the periodic table are called groups. Elements in the same group have similar properties.