Comments on: Are Rare Earths The Next Big Investment Opportunity?

By: my69z

my69z — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 14:45:49 +0000

What did China say…middle east’s got tha oil,,,we have REE’s.

Is it starting ???….who knows!,,,but pretty interesting to this fella.

Glta.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-23/china-denies-japan-rare-earth-ban-amid-diplomatic-row-update1-.html?cmpid=yhoo

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 19:58:34 +0000

Jack-
Your point made me think of the old question of which weighs more a pound of feathers or a pound of lead. But shouldn’t we get the investors, miners, scientists, researchers talking the same language? Those groups are going to have to interact in the very near future on the issue of REEs.

The atomic weight is based on the naturally occuring averages of the atom. So, yes…an random atom (e.g. an isotope) of Neodymium could weigh more than a random atom of Promethium…but on average, promethium is heavier.

By: Jack Lifton

Jack Lifton — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 13:18:17 +0000

Mike,

The ordinary investor and miner is not speaking of “atomic” weight, but rather of “heft,” or weight in the ordinary sense of the word as “density.” Thus, for example, the gas radon has a higher atomic weight than lead but its weight, in the ordinary sense, per unit volume is hardly comparable to that of lead.

By the way are you certain that all isotopes of the light rare earths-as you define them-“weigh” less than all isotopes of the heavy rare earths?

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:41:38 +0000

The comment about the atomic number not being related to the weight is not really accurate. The atomic number is the number of protons in the nucleus of the atom. However, the “light” rare earth elements do weigh less per atom than the “heavy” REEs. For example, Lanthanum is 138.9 grams per mole…Neodymium (atomic number 60) is 144.24 grams per mole….Dysprosium (atomic number 66) is 162.5 grams per mole.