Gen Chem question please help!

[dentiist2be]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

There is a question in DAT DESTROYER, and it states that "The strontium cation is larger than the sulfur anion since negative ions gain electrons" is false. I don't understand why its false because the Sr cation becomes like the noble gas Kr...and the sulfur anion becomes like the noble gas Argon which has one less orbital than Kr.. so can someone please explain to me why its false...Thanks so much in advance!

 

[c3p]

There is a question in DAT DESTROYER, and it states that "The strontium cation is larger than the sulfur anion since negative ions gain electrons" is false. I don't understand why its false because the Sr cation becomes like the noble gas Kr...and the sulfur anion becomes like the noble gas Argon which has one less orbital than Kr.. so can someone please explain to me why its false...Thanks so much in advance!

idk maybe cuz gaining electrons makes it bigger since repulsion occurs....and losing electrons causes the protons to pull on the electrons harder, thus reducing the size....but then it is one n higher so im not sure about that.

 

[rromantico]

If you notice in the DAT DESTROYER book, the guy that wrote it gives you his telephone number. My friend called him like two time and he answered the phone and helped my friend. Maybe you should give it a try.

 

[wantVCUdental]

There is a question in DAT DESTROYER, and it states that "The strontium cation is larger than the sulfur anion since negative ions gain electrons" is false. I don't understand why its false because the Sr cation becomes like the noble gas Kr...and the sulfur anion becomes like the noble gas Argon which has one less orbital than Kr.. so can someone please explain to me why its false...Thanks so much in advance!

You are correct, the first part of the statement is true. However, the second part which is bolded is false, gaining an electron is not the reason for strontium to be bigger. Sr++ is bigger than S-- because Sr has an extra shell of electrons not because sulfur gained electron. Of course if there was another statement that was more false in the question then you are correct. Remember, you are chosing the BEST possible answer.

 

[UCB05]

You are correct, the first part of the statement is true. However, the second part which is bolded is false, gaining an electron is not the reason for strontium to be bigger. Sr++ is bigger than S-- because Sr has an extra shell of electrons not because sulfur gained electron. Of course if there was another statement that was more false in the question then you are correct. Remember, you are chosing the BEST possible answer.

Actually, the first part is INCORRECT, which is why the statement is wrong. Sr+2 has an ionic radius of 132pm, S-2 has an ionic radius of 170pm. The loss of electrons in Sr reduces its size so that its smaller than S-- when it gains two electrons, which greatly increases its size. Weird to imagine, but it actually makes S-- larger than Sr++

 

[c3p]

Actually, the first part is INCORRECT, which is why the statement is wrong. Sr+2 has an ionic radius of 132pm, S-2 has an ionic radius of 170pm. The loss of electrons in Sr reduces its size so that its smaller than S-- when it gains two electrons, which greatly increases its size. Weird to imagine, but it actually makes S-- larger than Sr++

so i was remotely close? sweet.

 

[americanpierg]

If you notice in the DAT DESTROYER book, the guy that wrote it gives you his telephone number. My friend called him like two time and he answered the phone and helped my friend. Maybe you should give it a try.

lol woah, talk about getting your money's worth!

 

[UCB05]

so i was remotely close? sweet.

yup, you were right.

 

[dentiist2be]

Thanks Everyone! Appreciated!😳