Comparison of Mendeleev’s Table and Newlands Table

Both of these periodic tables were arranged with the elements in the order of relative atomic mass.
One of the differences, between these tables and a reason why Mendeleev’s is more acceptable, is
because his table didn’t always arrange the elements in the order of relative atomic mass if it made
more sense to arrange parts of it differently, due to the properties of an element. For example, he
placed potassium and copper together because it made more sense even though it broke the
pattern. In fact, every element in a group in Mendeleev’s table, was chosen because he thought
they had similar properties. In addition to this, Mendeleev’s table left a few gaps in for elements
which have not yet been discovered, whilst Newland’s table doesn’t. This makes Mendeleev’s table
more acceptable as many elements have been discovered since the creation of both of these tables.

5/6 – a very good answer. You just missed saying that when new elements were discovered, they
fitted into his table proving him right!

Both Newlands and Mendeleev arranged the elements in order of their atomic weight (now
called relative atomic mass). Both scientists produced tables in which elements with
similar properties were placed at regular intervals. However, Mendeleev left gaps for
elements that he predicted would be discovered later. He also swapped elements if that fitted
their properties better and placed them in ‘groups’ of elements with similar properties.
Newland’s strict order of atomic weights meant that elements were sometimes put into groups
with very different properties.

Mendeleev’s table was more acceptable as, when new elements were discovered, they could
easily be placed within his table. He could even use his table to predict the physical and
chemical properties of these elements.