Periodic table of elements in the star trek universe

[rachel1984]

I found this table of elements not long ago, there's certainly some...unusual things in there, it's reportedly based upon glimpses of the table seen mainly in TNG ep 'rascals', but I've never noticed this, is this table at all right, because there's some funny stuff in it, "stoogeum", "paramount" etc.
I'd love to see an actual screenshot if anyone's got one around, because I've never seen (or noticed?) it on the show?

 

[Mysterion]

I think Star Trek should adopt this table instead: http://themastermind.org/science_made_stupid/periodic.gif

 

[Bill Morris]

Well, we do have this one:

http://lcars24.com/sh23.html

Here it is in timed puzzle mode:

http://lcars24.com/sh39.html

No daffyduckium, etc., just real elements.

 

[Vance]

Bad Science...

...Worse Art.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Other charts are available by accessing material under the heading "Neat stuff".

 

[Vance]

I found this table of elements not long ago, there's certainly some...unusual things in there, it's reportedly based upon glimpses of the table seen mainly in TNG ep 'rascals', but I've never noticed this, is this table at all right, because there's some funny stuff in it, "stoogeum", "paramount" etc.

It actually gets used a few times. TNG, in particular, was notorious for throwing 'in jokes' into displays which were never meant to be read at a television screen's resolution. (This is why the Bluesmobile is a Federation starship and Indiana Jones is part of Star Trek's history!)

Unfortunately 'canonistas' love to take these obvious in-jokes literally and start becoming convoluted in how they make these rediculous things work. It doesn't help that Okuda is notorious for this, even when he acknowledges that these are jokes, he still declares these 'canon', and therefore sites like Memory-Alpha does do... making Star Trek look pretty fargin' rediculous as they do.

 

[kkozoriz1]

The latest move has a graphic listing Kirk as a Lieutenant. Canon or not?

 

[Vance]

The latest move has a graphic listing Kirk as a Lieutenant. Canon or not?

No, because say it with me gang: "There is no current canon."

 

[Mysterion]

For what it's worth, there is also this chart which appeared in the Starfleet Medical Reference published by Ballantine Books circa 1977 or so:

http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars/blueprints/sfmrm/page014.jpg

 

[scotpens]

^ And the list of elements that goes with it:

 

[FordSVT]

I found this table of elements not long ago, there's certainly some...unusual things in there, it's reportedly based upon glimpses of the table seen mainly in TNG ep 'rascals', but I've never noticed this, is this table at all right, because there's some funny stuff in it, "stoogeum", "paramount" etc.

It actually gets used a few times. TNG, in particular, was notorious for throwing 'in jokes' into displays which were never meant to be read at a television screen's resolution. (This is why the Bluesmobile is a Federation starship and Indiana Jones is part of Star Trek's history!)

Unfortunately 'canonistas' love to take these obvious in-jokes literally and start becoming convoluted in how they make these rediculous things work. It doesn't help that Okuda is notorious for this, even when he acknowledges that these are jokes, he still declares these 'canon', and therefore sites like Memory-Alpha does do... making Star Trek look pretty fargin' rediculous as they do.

Is there a large, inflatable duck in one of the cargo/shuttle bays?

 

[scotpens]

. . . there's some funny stuff in it, “stoogeum”, “paramount” etc.

What, no Unobtainium? Or Upsidaisium?

And, in honor of the studio that produced the original Trek, there ought to be Desiluminum. Or, for our friends across the pond, Desiluminium.

 

[Forbin]

Daffyduckium!?!?

 

[GalaxyX]

Aren't the last elements in our current table elements that are very heavy and are artificially made?

I don't think there's any new natural ones to discover anymore, but perhaps a couple of new ones to synthize in a lab.

 

[scotpens]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmwlzwGMMwc

 

[Marten]

Aren't the last elements in our current table elements that are very heavy and are artificially made?

I don't think there's any new natural ones to discover anymore, but perhaps a couple of new ones to synthize in a lab.

True, they are heavy and unstable.

 

[Bill Morris]

In addition to the natually occurring elements 1-92 and synthetic elements 93-118 that have been produced so far, there is the exotic atom muonium, discovered in 1960, which is pretty strange:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muonium

Related:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exotic_atom

 

[diankra]

For Galaxy X: all elements are natural: they all have to be possible under the sub-atomic interactions (protons and electrons, which have to be equal in any element, and most importantly neutrons, which are the wild card that varies and causes them to be unstable).
Beyond atomic number 90 elements don't tend to get created naturally. And beyond 100, they don't tend to be stable for long.