My question is asking to describe the bonding in the NO2- ion using valnece bond theory versus Molecular Orbital theory. I know that the ion is bent and that there are 2 sigma bonds and 1 pi bond and that the nitrogen is sp2 hybridized. But the latter part of my question asks how MO theory describes the pi bond in the species.
This is a general chem course and I frankly have no clue how to go about drawing a MO diagram for a non-diatomic molecule, so I’m guessing there’s something else I have to pay attention to here. I’m not sure how to even start on a potential solution, do I have to think about it conceptually or just learb how to draw multi-atom MO diagrams?
I'm a freshman, currently taking up chem. I'm having a hard time wrapping my head on the ideas on these theories. Can anyone care to explain it to me? I'll be a great help for me.
I’m so sick and tired of this situation: someone asks a question about hybridization, VBT, etc. and then some smartass invariably in the comments says “VbT iS a LiE, oRbItAls dOnT hYbRiDIzE, MO tHeOrY iS tHe OnLy rEAL tHeOrY”
We get it, you’re really fucking intelligent because you took chemistry courses past orgo II. No one cares. Just answer the question so the student understands, instead of confusing them with a bunch of information about MO theory, group theory, and quantum mechanics they don’t need.
<\rant>
Journal of the American Chemical SocietyDOI: 10.1021/jacs.0c09041
Thijs Stuyver and Sason Shaik
https://ift.tt/2IvAgfg
My questions are pretty straightforward, and hopefully will start a discussion:
What is the best way to understand why chemical bonds break and form? What are the most fundamental forces at work?
What gives you the best understanding or perspective for intuition into why atoms behave the way they do?
Even after a year of organic chemistry and a year of general chemistry I am not sure how to reconcile these two theories in my mind. In o-chem, it is common to say, for example, that the two carbons in ethylene are sp2 hybridized but that the double bond is a pi bond. Why is this correct? Why can Lewis structures, which rely on VB theory, still be an accurate representation of molecules when in reality all electrons are shared in the molecular orbital?
Note that I am NOT a chemistry major and that I have not taken physical chemistry. I have never worked with wave functions or anything of that sort. My knowledge of bonding is solely from organic and general chemistry.
I was brushing up on my chemistry knowledge and was reading about formal charge. Wikipedia says formal charge is one way to describe electron distribution in bonds while oxidation number is another. One assumes electrons are perfectly shared while the other assumes electrons are not shared at all. My understanding is that Valence Bond Theory is the truth in between and the basis for modern chemistry.
I was wondering why formal charge and oxidation state are still taught if they give an incomplete picture of chemistry. Are either of these methods used often outside of academia? Thanks for the input.
http://imgur.com/LBN3lye
I'm having a ton of trouble understanding this section. Can someone please explain how I know how many, I don't even know what they're called, red balloons to draw? Is it based on VSEPR or the number of valence electrons?
I would really appreciate an ELI5 version.
How does lewis structure, the valence bond thoery and the molecular orbital theory explain covalent bonding?
This is part of a test review. Is there a simple way to explain it?
What is the valence bond exactly and how do you use it to explain the difference between a conductor, an isolator and a semiconductor?
I know how electrons move through solid material and how they make electricity. As in example a solar panel, which uses p- and n-type semiconductors. But I can't wrap my head around the questions above.
im just curious,and if any of u guys know about it lmk
Ik google exists too but i just felt like asking here
Reading through my chemistry book, I became curious about this and sadly there were no answers to it written in and specific information like this is hard to find on Google.
