Jump to content

mahela007

Senior Members
  • Posts

    53
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by mahela007

  1. For hybridization to occur, must electron always be promoted? Is it possible for hybridization to occur without the promotion of an electron?

     

    Secondly, if electrons DO need to be promoted, must there be at least one completely empty orbital in the shell it is being promoted to?

    For example, say an electron is promoted from 2s to one of the 2p orbitals. What if every 2p orbital already had 1 electron? (a configuration such as [math]{2s}^{2},{2p}^{3}[/math]). Would an electron still be promoted to one of the p orbitals to make a configuration like

    [math]{2s}^{1},{2p}^{4}[/math].. (my problem lies in the fact that after promotion (if it does occur) that there will be two electrons in a one of the p orbitals... Can that happen in when electrons are promoted?

  2. Whoops... In my rush to make this post I obviously made a typo.. Yeah I meant Zinc is more reactive than Fe


    Merged post follows:

    Consecutive posts merged
    iron is [Ar] 3d6 4s2

    zinc is [Ar] 3d10 4s2

     

    you don't need the inner shells for this application so they've been substituted with [Ar] which is the electron configuration of argon.

     

    pay particular attention to the 3d orbitals.

     

    I'm guessing that since it's the 4s orbitals that take part in reactions, the effects of the shielding of the 3d electrons comes into play. Since the shielding effect of the electrons in zinc is greater it can involve it 4s electron in reaction more easily.

    Am I right?

  3. When reading anything about the Max Planck's work we often come across the "oscillation of an electron".

    I've just managed to get around to understanding electron orbitals... The dumbbell shape for P orbitals, spherical shapes for S and so on.. (at a very basic level). From what I understand we can't predict with certainty where the electron will be.. This sounds to me like a random movement within the specified orbital. In that case, what's this oscillation I keep reading about?

  4. First of all.. I posted this thread under quantum mechanics because I think it has something to do with Max Planck,s equation.

     

    Anyway.. my text book says that the energy of light depends on it's frequency. Now this has me quite puzzled. In a mechanical wave, such as the wave one could make in a piece of string tied at one end to a fixed object, the energy arriving at the fixed end would be dependent on the amplitude of the wave of the string right? So why is this not true for electromagnetic waves?

    (I know there are many differences between electromagnetic waves and mechanical waves.. but I just can't figure out what makes the energy of one depend on the frequency and the other depend on amplitude)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.