Timeline for Variation in the energy of the $\ce{\sigma_{2pz}}$ orbital
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 14, 2022 at 23:05 | history | edited | M.L | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 349 characters in body
|
| Nov 14, 2022 at 21:53 | comment | added | Martin - マーチン♦ | @GeoffHutchison You are right and I have overreacted. I'm too easily annoyed by misleading depictions like the one in the question. However, this shouldn't be the place to comment this and it wasn't helpful. Especially given this being the answer. I'll be more careful in the future. | |
| Nov 14, 2022 at 18:14 | comment | added | Geoff Hutchison | @Martin-マーチン - I'm not justifying the diagram. I think the whole valence picture is necessary. So I completely agree with "incomplete" but I disagree with "completely and utterly wrong" .. I think that goes too far. | |
| Nov 13, 2022 at 10:57 | comment | added | Martin - マーチン♦ | @GeoffHutchison I was fully aware of this. But how do you explain orbital mixing, if you omit half of the originals that mix? | |
| Nov 13, 2022 at 0:09 | comment | added | Geoff Hutchison | @Martin-マーチン - the left diagram omits the 2s orbitals, but I have seen diagrams like this which focus on the 2p alone because of this unusual orbital energy ordering (e.g., in $\ce{N2}$. This answer is +1 from me. | |
| Nov 12, 2022 at 13:14 | comment | added | Martin - マーチン♦ | The left diagram is - if not completely and utterly wrong - at the very least incomplete. | |
| Nov 12, 2022 at 7:41 | history | answered | M.L | CC BY-SA 4.0 |