 | This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Untitled edit
According to Zumdahl's "Chemistry", in degeneration of the the 2p orbitals, orbitals, the two pi-bonding orbitals are below the sigma bonding orbitals (the antibonding orbitals are ok however). (this e.g. is the a mode of explaining the paramagnetic character of Boron)
Anyone willing to change the scheme accordingly? —Preceding unsigned comment added by L.tak (talk • contribs) 21:44, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- I think the article is probably right as it is now. In Brown, LeMay & Bursten ("Chemistry: The Central Science", 10th edition), on p381 (Fig 9.44) it states "When the 2s and 2p orbitals interact, the σ2s MO falls in energy and the σ2p MO rises in energy. For O2, F2 and Ne2, the interaction is small, and the σ2p remains below the π2p (my emphasis), as in Figure 9.42. For B2, C2 and N2, the 2s-2p interaction is great enough that the σ2p MO rises above the π2p MOs, as shown...". I interpret that to mean that the diagram shown is right, but that you are right in thinking that B2 shows this unusual ordering of MOs. Walkerma (talk) 06:55, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- in the case of for example boron the relative ordering of orbitals has physical significance but not with oxygen except in spectra V8rik (talk) 18:02, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- @L.tak what 222.152.172.104 (talk) 04:05, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Removal of tags 2017 edit
After recent changes, I think the tags can be removed, although the article should still be expanded:
- This article needs attention from an expert in Chemistry. (March 2015)
Organic, organometallic, inorganic chemistry are my areas of expertise (in descending order of expertise)
- This article needs additional citations for verification. (October 2014)
Unreliable citations and irrelevant, unverified statements have been removed. Factual statements are now adequately referenced. Thanks, Dirac66!
- This article may be too technical for most readers to understand. (August 2015)
Intro has been rewritten to only talk about most pertinent facts, with technical language explained or at least linked. Alsosaid1987 (talk) 06:07, 20 August 2017 (UTC)