I'm having trouble understanding an excerpt of the question. Whether there is a deep meaning (nd1). I adopted it as valence d to answer the question. See my answer in the attachment. I would like to understand nd1.

help.docx

8 hours ago, LUFER said:

I'm having trouble understanding an excerpt of the question. Whether there is a deep meaning (nd1). I adopted it as valence d to answer the question. See my answer in the attachment. I would like to understand nd1.

help.docx 199.48 kB · 2 downloads

I'm sorry but I am not downloading attached files from unknown sources. You will need to post a relevant extract directly in a post. I assume this is something to do with how the energy levels of the d orbitals are split, according to crystal field theory.  

 

1 hour ago, exchemist said:

I'm sorry but I am not downloading attached files from unknown sources. You will need to post a relevant extract directly in a post. I assume this is something to do with how the energy levels of the d orbitals are split, according to crystal field theory.  

 

Livro_Quimica_Quimica Inorganica II.ind
On pages 85, 88, 93, 94.
Electronic Structure and Properties of Transition Metal Compounds, Second Edition (teacher's book).
Page 89
https://www.bdtd.uerj.br:8443/bitstream/1/12871/1/Tese_Ludiane.pdf
page 21 onwards

2 hours ago, LUFER said:

Livro_Quimica_Quimica Inorganica II.ind
On pages 85, 88, 93, 94.
Electronic Structure and Properties of Transition Metal Compounds, Second Edition (teacher's book).
Page 89
https://www.bdtd.uerj.br:8443/bitstream/1/12871/1/Tese_Ludiane.pdf
page 21 onwards

Yes, page 21 and 22 describes the standard splitting of the energy levels of d orbitals in an octahedral and in a tetrahedral ligand field, into E and T groups, the tetrahedral case being the opposite way round from the octahedral case.  Any text on crystal field theory or ligand field theory will explain how this arises.

What's the issue? 

 

6 hours ago, exchemist said:

Yes, page 21 and 22 describes the standard splitting of the energy levels of d orbitals in an octahedral and in a tetrahedral ligand field, into E and T groups, the tetrahedral case being the opposite way round from the octahedral case.  Any text on crystal field theory or ligand field theory will explain how this arises.

What's the issue? 

 

my difficulty is related to:
(nd1) and (d) not the same thing, or have different meanings?
Found nothing about (nd1) .

1 hour ago, LUFER said:

my difficulty is related to:
(nd1) and (d) not the same thing, or have different meanings?
Found nothing about (nd1) .

There is nothing about nd1 in the paper you linked, so far as I can see, and it has no special meaning that I am aware of. I suspect it has a meaning in the context of the problem you have been asked to solve.  I can't comment more without seeing the text of the actual problem you have been given.