If you look at the trend in orbital energies as you go across a period the pattern is clear (orbital energy decreases with increasing effective nuclear charge) and, to my knowledge, it has no anomalies like the trend in ionization energies does when a 2p orbital is filled for the first time with two electrons (when this happens the ionization energy decreases). I expected that the graphs for ionization energy would be mirror images in the x-axis given that orbital energies are negative and measured relative to an ionized electron (which equals 0) albeit with different y-scales because ionization energy is the energy to ionize a mole of a substance in a gaseous state. Is my understanding that orbital energy = -(energy required to remove one electron from that shell) incorrect? Fundamentally, the question is, why doesn't the trend in orbital energies mirror the trend in ionization energies?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
digital communications - Understanding the Matched Filter
I have a question about matched filtering. Does the matched filter maximise the SNR at the moment of decision only? As far as I understand, ...
-
As far as I know, living people can positively affect the dead. This is the reason we say Kaddish and learn Mishnayos for the souls of the ...
-
Are there any statistics as to what percentage of Chabad still believes that their Rebbe is the Messiah? Is it the majority or simply a very...
-
I have been wondering if Japanese language include letter P. I have actually seen words like Pan in Japanese which means bread, but then I f...
No comments:
Post a Comment