Chemistry: Polar or non-polar? Dipolar moment?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on determining whether a molecule is polar or non-polar based on its dipole moment. One participant argues that despite the molecule having a zero dipole moment due to its triple symmetry, it may still exhibit polar characteristics because oxygen atoms attract electrons more strongly than carbon atoms. The concept of dipole moment as a vector is acknowledged, with clarification that a zero dipole moment refers to a null vector. The debate raises the question of whether a molecule can be considered polar if its net dipole moment is zero, suggesting that individual polarities of atoms could still exist. Ultimately, the discussion highlights the complexity of defining molecular polarity in relation to dipole moments.
tsuwal
Messages
105
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Is this molecule polar or non polar? What is its dipolar moment?
MOLECULE.jpg




Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


The molecule has triple symmetry so its dipolar moment is 0. But I think it is polar because the oxygens atract the eletrons much more strongly than carbons.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
tsuwal said:
The molecule has triple symmetry so its dipolar moment is 0. But I think it is polar because the oxygens atract the eletrons much more strongly than carbons.

Dipole moment is a vector.
 
yes i know, by 0 i meant null vector. so what's the answer?
 
tsuwal said:
yes i know, by 0 i meant null vector. so what's the answer?

If the net dipole moment is zero, is the molecule polar or non-polar?
 
that's my question, everyone treats dipole moment as a measure of polarity but I think it is possible for a molecule to have 0 dipole moment and be polar as the one in the figure. I think there is a negative pole in each oxygen even though the dipole moment is zero
 

Thread 'Prove that evolution is constant (Provide at least two arguments to support your position)'

I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
View full post »

Similar threads

Chemistry What Defines a Polar Molecule?
Replies
2
Views
2K
Predicting Acidity of PH3: Comparison to NH3 Dipole Moments
Replies
1
Views
3K
What are the Electron Dot Diagrams and Polarities of IO3- and CHCl3?
Replies
16
Views
8K
Non polar molecule with polar bonds?
Replies
34
Views
4K
Chemistry Which one is the most polar molecule?
Replies
2
Views
3K
Chemistry Determining the positive and negative poles of a molecule
Replies
6
Views
5K
Chemistry About the dispersion force in polar molecules
Replies
6
Views
7K
Chemistry How do we know ##BF_3## has Lewis structure but ##Al_2S_3## does not?
Replies
1
Views
2K
Ordering Rf of Aspirin with Polar Eluents
Replies
1
Views
2K
Titration of amino acid with strong base
Replies
16
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top