XPost: rec.arts.sf.tv, rec.arts.tv, uk.media.tv.misc   
   From: johnr@journeyflow.spamspam.demon.co.uk   
      
   David Johnston wrote:   
   > On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:38:55 -0000, Halmyre    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >> In article ,   
   >> david@block.net says...   
   >>> On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:51:12 +0100, Halmyre    
   >>> wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> In article ,   
   >>>> david@block.net says...   
   >>>>> On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:02:07 -0500, pv+usenet@pobox.com (PV)   
   >>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> David Johnston  writes:   
   >>>>>>>> Um, no. Deuterium is an isotope of hydrogen, the same as   
   >>>>>>>> tritium and protium.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> So...why do you say "no"?  As I said, deuterium is not an   
   >>>>>>> element. That's because it's an isotope.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> WRONG! *   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> I've seen the table of elements.  Deuterium ain't on it.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Does your table of elements differentiate between, say,   
   >>>> Uranium-235 and Uranium-238?   
   >>>   
   >>> No, but then Uranium 238 isn't an element either.  _Uranium_ is an   
   >>> element.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> So what specific properties does U238 have that doesn't make it an   
   >> element?   
   >   
   > It has the same atomic number as any other kind of uranium.  If it was   
   > an element, then it would have a different atomic number.   
      
   You seem to be suggesting that a mix of U235 and U238 is an element, but as   
   soon as you separate them, neither is an element on its own.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)