Difference between paramagnetic and free radical?

[Rucap09]

---

Members don't see this ad.

What is the difference between a paramagnetic species having one unpaired electron and a radical having an odd number of electrons?

For example, would a single Nitrogen atom be a free radical because it has 7 electrons? Feel like I'm missing something obvious here but I can't place it.

 

[Rucap09]

Bump, por favor 🙂

 

[The Brown Knight]

I think all radicals can be considered paramagnetic, but not all paramagnetic species are radicals. A radical has an odd number of valence electrons, so yes the N atom has 5 valence electrons and will be a radical by itself.
However, an O atom has 6 valence electrons so not a radical; but it has 2 unpaired 2p electrons, so paramagnetic.

 

[AmishExpressWay]

The above poster gave a bad example imo, but has the right idea in mind. An oxygen atom on its own would be DOUBLE radical, which is two times as a badass as a plain old radical, and also a lot more unstable. That is why you will never see it in nature.

All radicals are paramagnetic, but all paramagnetic species are not radicals. Take for example the metal Nickel. Nickel is paramagnetic, and therefore has unpaired electrons, but at the same time is not a radical because it is stable. Radicals are unstable by nature.

 

[desperadoflakes]

"In organic chemistry, paramagnetic compounds are referred to as radicals." - TBR

 

[Teleologist]

Radicals are unstable by nature.

No, radicals are not inherently unstable. Dioxygen is a radical but "stable," whatever that means. Steric hindrance can also increase stability.