1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
jeyben [28]
3 years ago
6

1s^2 2s^2 2p^6 3s^2 3p^6 how many unpaired electrons are in the atom represented by the electron configuration above?

Chemistry
2 answers:
Sedbober [7]3 years ago
5 0
It's a combination of factors:
Less electrons paired in the same orbital
More electrons with parallel spins in separate orbitals
Pertinent valence orbitals NOT close enough in energy for electron pairing to be stabilized enough by large orbital size
DISCLAIMER: Long answer, but it's a complicated issue, so... :)
A lot of people want to say that it's because a "half-filled subshell" increases stability, which is a reason, but not necessarily the only reason. However, for chromium, it's the significant reason.
It's also worth mentioning that these reasons are after-the-fact; chromium doesn't know the reasons we come up with; the reasons just have to be, well, reasonable.
The reasons I can think of are:
Minimization of coulombic repulsion energy
Maximization of exchange energy
Lack of significant reduction of pairing energy overall in comparison to an atom with larger occupied orbitals
COULOMBIC REPULSION ENERGY
Coulombic repulsion energy is the increased energy due to opposite-spin electron pairing, in a context where there are only two electrons of nearly-degenerate energies.
So, for example...
↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−− is higher in energy than
↑
↓
−−−−−

↓
↑
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−
To make it easier on us, we can crudely "measure" the repulsion energy with the symbol
Π
c
. We'd just say that for every electron pair in the same orbital, it adds one
Π
c
unit of destabilization.
When you have something like this with parallel electron spins...
↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−
It becomes important to incorporate the exchange energy.
EXCHANGE ENERGY
Exchange energy is the reduction in energy due to the number of parallel-spin electron pairs in different orbitals.
It's a quantum mechanical argument where the parallel-spin electrons can exchange with each other due to their indistinguishability (you can't tell for sure if it's electron 1 that's in orbital 1, or electron 2 that's in orbital 1, etc), reducing the energy of the configuration.
For example...
↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−− is lower in energy than
↑
↓
−−−−−

↓
↑
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−
To make it easier for us, a crude way to "measure" exchange energy is to say that it's equal to
Π
e
for each pair that can exchange.
So for the first configuration above, it would be stabilized by
Π
e
(
1
↔
2
), but the second configuration would have a
0
Π
e
stabilization (opposite spins; can't exchange).
PAIRING ENERGY
Pairing energy is just the combination of both the repulsion and exchange energy. We call it
Π
, so:
Π
=
Π
c
+
Π
e

Inorganic Chemistry, Miessler et al.
Inorganic Chemistry, Miessler et al.
Basically, the pairing energy is:
higher when repulsion energy is high (i.e. many electrons paired), meaning pairing is unfavorable
lower when exchange energy is high (i.e. many electrons parallel and unpaired), meaning pairing is favorable
So, when it comes to putting it together for chromium... (
4
s
and
3
d
orbitals)
↑
↓
−−−−−
↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−
compared to
↑
↓
−−−−−
↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−

↑
↓
−−−−−
is more stable.
For simplicity, if we assume the
4
s
and
3
d
electrons aren't close enough in energy to be considered "nearly-degenerate":
The first configuration has
Π
=
10
Π
e
.
(Exchanges:
1
↔
2
,
1
↔
3
,
1
↔
4
,
1
↔
5
,
2
↔
3
,

2
↔
4
,
2
↔
5
,
3
↔
4
,
3
↔
5
,
4
↔
5
)
The second configuration has
Π
=
Π
c
+
6
Π
e
.
(Exchanges:
1
↔
2
,
1
↔
3
,
1
↔
4
,
2
↔
3
,
2
↔
4
,
3
↔
4
)
Technically, they are about
3.29 eV
apart (Appendix B.9), which means it takes about
3.29 V
to transfer a single electron from the
3
d
up to the
4
s
.
We could also say that since the
3
d
orbitals are lower in energy, transferring one electron to a lower-energy orbital is helpful anyways from a less quantitative perspective.
COMPLICATIONS DUE TO ORBITAL SIZE
Note that for example,
W
has a configuration of
[
X
e
]
5
d
4
6
s
2
, which seems to contradict the reasoning we had for
Cr
, since the pairing occurred in the higher-energy orbital.
But, we should also recognize that
5
d
orbitals are larger than
3
d
orbitals, which means the electron density can be more spread out for
W
than for
Cr
, thus reducing the pairing energy
Π
.
That is,
Π
W
Tanzania [10]3 years ago
4 0

Answer:

0 unpaired

Explanation:

the electron configuration of 1s^2 2s^2 2p^6 3s^2 3p^6, can also be written in noble gas configuration as [Ne] 3s^2 3p^6 which translates to the element Argon ( Ar ). Since the outer shell is full with 8 valence electrons, there is no lone electron so all elections are paired.

You might be interested in
if you could place a piece of solid silver into a container of liquid silver, would it float or sink? Explain your answer
olga55 [171]
Liquid silver is less dense than solid silver, so the solid silver would sink.
5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which of the following statement is not true?
Helga [31]

Answer: 2

Explanation: Greenhouse gases are very important in keeping our planet just right. If we have too many Greenhouse gases it would be too hot, but we can't eliminate all of them or it will be too cold

8 0
3 years ago
Please help :) ill mark you as the brainiest hope you have a good day
Hitman42 [59]

Have a wonderful day :) thanks for the points

5 0
3 years ago
Which of the following is a prokaryote that contains a cell wall, cell<br> membrane, and flagellum?
Reil [10]

Answer:

Bacteria

Explanation:

hope this helps please gimme brainliest

6 0
2 years ago
How many mL are 2.3 mol of CO2 at STP?
kupik [55]

Answer:

0.052mL

Explanation:

1mole of a gas occupy 22.4L.

Therefore, 1 mole of CO2 will also occupy 22.4L.

If 1mole of CO2 occupies 22.4L,

Then 2.3moles of CO2 will occupy = 2.3 x 22.4 = 51.52L

coverting this volume to mL, we simply divide by 1000 as shown below:

51.52/1000 = 0.05152mL = 0.052mL

8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • The largest unit of geologic time in the list below is:<br>​
    6·1 answer
  • The reaction 4al(s) + 3o2(g) --&gt; 2al2o3(s) ?h = -3351 kj is _____, and therefore heat is _____ by the reaction
    11·1 answer
  • CaCl2 + Na2CO3 → CaCO3 + 2 NaCl
    7·2 answers
  • A 60g sample of tetraethyl lead, a gasoline additive, is found to contain 38.43g lead, 17.83g carbon and 3.74g hydrogen. Determi
    15·1 answer
  • Bacteria that live around deep-sea, hot-water vents obtain energy by oxidizing inorganic hydrogen sulfide belched out by the ven
    10·1 answer
  • Which of the following is an element? aluminum bronze table salt brass
    11·2 answers
  • Which process is a chemical change
    13·2 answers
  • How many grams of a 19.6% sugar solution contain 72.5 g of sugar?
    10·1 answer
  • How are the molecules attached to each others?
    8·1 answer
  • The mass of a hypothetical planet is 1 100 that of the earth and it’s radius is 1 4 that of earth. If a person weighs 500 n on e
    11·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!