Timeline for Diatomic halogens - bond strength
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 27, 2014 at 19:08 | vote | accept | Dissenter | ||
| Oct 10, 2014 at 2:39 | history | edited | Geoff Hutchison | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
fix pasted quote
|
| Oct 10, 2014 at 2:35 | comment | added | Geoff Hutchison | Let us continue this discussion in chat. | |
| Oct 10, 2014 at 2:34 | comment | added | Dissenter | Hutchinson so may the lone pairs in the Lewis picture be considered anti-bonding electrons? | |
| Oct 9, 2014 at 18:48 | comment | added | Geoff Hutchison | Yes. But this depends on the magnitude of the overlap of the orbitals (large in the 2nd row). Since $\ce{F2}$ has a lot of occupied anti bonding orbitals, there's a large amount of destabilization. That is, from an MO picture, the "bond order" might be 1, but it's a weaker single bond than say $\ce{B2}$ because of this destabilization. | |
| Oct 9, 2014 at 18:34 | comment | added | Dissenter | Yes, but isn't that universally true as well? | |
| Oct 9, 2014 at 18:33 | comment | added | Geoff Hutchison | Yes. But in your figure, the bonding orbitals have the same amount of stabilization as the amount of destabilization in the anti-bonding orbitals. In fact, the $\Delta E$ between the atomic orbital levels and the anti bonding MOs is much greater. I guess I'd say the anti-bonding orbitals are less stable than you'd expect simply from the bonding stabilization. | |
| Oct 9, 2014 at 18:22 | comment | added | Dissenter | Aren't anti bonding orbitals always higher in energy than their corresponding bonding orbitals ? | |
| Oct 9, 2014 at 15:58 | comment | added | Geoff Hutchison | There's also a nice article I just found on The Antibonding Effect. | |
| Oct 9, 2014 at 15:56 | history | answered | Geoff Hutchison | CC BY-SA 3.0 |