New elements added to chemistry's periodic table

[Chris_]

New elements added to chemistry's periodic table

Two new elements have been added to the periodic table after a three-year review by the governing bodies of chemistry and physics.

The elements are currently unnamed, but they are both highly radioactive and exist for less than a second before decaying into lighter atoms.

BBC

Should they really be included if they're so unstable they don't exist for more than a few seconds?  Just doesn't seem right to me.

[compaqxp]

BBC

Should they really be included if they're so unstable they don't exist for more than a few seconds?  Just doesn't seem right to me.

I don't know much about this sort of thing but if the exist, then I would say probably. I wouldn't think time would be the main factor of including them or not.

[LC EFA]

There are many elements on the periodic table that only exist for a limited time before decaying to another element or isotope.

If we consider lifespan of an element to be a primary dictator of inclusion in the periodic timetable - where do we draw the line when it comes to lifespan ?

[Odin's Hand]

There are many elements on the periodic table that only exist for a limited time before decaying to another element or isotope.

If we consider lifespan of an element to be a primary dictator of inclusion in the periodic timetable - where do we draw the line when it comes to lifespan ?

Correct, it has to to with the known possible not the theoretically achievable.

[JohnnyReb]

If it happens in nature, maybe add it but if it's totally man made, put as a side dish.

[DefiantSix]

If it happens in nature, maybe add it but if it's totally man made, put as a side dish.

So where do the outliers like plutonium come in?  If I remember my 8th grade earth sciences class, plutonium isn't naturally occurring.  Should they evict the element from the periodic table for that reason, like they evicted Pluto from the solar system for not being "planetary" enough?