- Joined
- Jun 24, 2011
- Messages
- 91
- Reaction score
- 12
For transition metals, why does half-filled stability (5 electrons in the d-orbital) result in a larger radius?
Thanks!
MDPhDJourney
Thanks!
MDPhDJourney
For transition metals, why does half-filled stability (5 electrons in the d-orbital) result in a larger radius?
Thanks!
MDPhDJourney
Are you sure you have this right??For transition metals, why does half-filled stability (5 electrons in the d-orbital) result in a larger radius?
Thanks!
MDPhDJourney
Calculated
And empirical
Not much changes when they're half full but they do change drastically when their d shell is 9/10 filled. Sup with that?
Where do you see a drastic change when the d shell is 9/10 filled?
Cu is 4s2 3d9 (actually 4s1 3d10) and has atomic radius of 145. Zn is 4s2 3d10 and has radius of 142
In 5s, Ag and Cd differ by 4 and in 6s Au and Hg differ by 3.
Should we be paying attention to calculated or empirical? I thought empirical might be more telling.
I suppose I should of said around d9, excluding copper:
Pd --> Ag increases.
Au --> Hg increases.
It seems that a lot of the larger atoms seem to be very sluggish or unlike smaller atoms in their atomic radius change. Perhaps that is not relevant to mcat...
I think OP might be referring to e.g. when we are writing the electron config for Cr we write it as 3d5 instead of 3d4 and saying it is more stable and has a smaller radius... and if so, then you have to consider where the electron came from that made it 3d5 instead of 3d4.... and it was from the 4s orbital... which is a bigger n.... so we technically moved an electron from n=4 to n=3 (and from -s- orbital to a -d- orbital)
But does 4s1 3d5 have a larger radius than 4s2 3d4? Wouldn't the 4s1 atom have less shielding and therefore have a smaller radius than the 4s2 atom?
I think you mean more shielded from protons, since we added the electron to 3d, so it's larger
mmm yeah I kinda thought about that too!! lol idk I went from lower in energy, but this makes more sense
I meant less shielded. But maybe I am misunderstanding the concept. I thought the shielding electrons were the ones in between the nucleus and the valence shell, so the 4s electrons shield the 3d electrons from the attractive force due to the protons in the nucleus.. Thus, if you excite a 4s electron and move it to 3d, haven't you removed a shielding electron, thereby reducing the amount of shielding and decreasing the atomic radius?
yes your right... I keep confusing myself
that's what I was tryin to say