Central atoms in Lewis structures: basic question

  • Thread starter Thread starter nomadreid
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lewis structure
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the rules for naming covalent compounds and determining the central atom in molecules containing carbon (C), silicon (Si), nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), sulfur (S), and oxygen (O). The participants emphasize the importance of following specific rules based on electronegativity and the number of atoms present. Rule (b), which prioritizes the atom with the lowest subscript, is highlighted as taking precedence over electronegativity considerations in cases where pairs of atoms are present in equal amounts. However, the 'least subscript' rule is noted as a trend rather than a strict rule, particularly in more complex molecules or cyclic compounds, where determining the central atom can be ambiguous. Critiques are raised regarding the conventional teaching of central atoms in organic chemistry, suggesting that it oversimplifies the complexities of molecular physics and may hinder deeper understanding. The conversation reflects a balance between foundational chemistry education and the desire for a more nuanced grasp of molecular interactions and forces.
nomadreid
Gold Member
Messages
1,748
Reaction score
243
TL;DR Summary
Two rules that seem to contradict each other: given the same number of subscripts, (a) the central one will be the one with the lowest electronegativity, (b) the following elements will be preferred in this order: C, Si, N, P, S and O. Which rule takes precedence?
Last edited:
Chemistry news on Phys.org
Whenever you have the elements C, Si, N, P, S and O, follow rule (b). Otherwise, follow rule (a).
 
Thanks, docnet. You are right, I am interested in determining the central atom, not the name. I forgot to mention that if you scroll in the link, you come to "How to Determine Which Atom to Use As the Central Atom". That is the section I am asking about.

(The primary rule in that link is to find the atom with the lowest subscript. Is it correct that this rule takes precedence over all others? If so, then my question only concerns atoms with certain pairs in equal numbers in the atom or ion with covalent bonds. )

I tried to find an appropriate example of a molecule or ion with more than two atoms with any pair in equal amounts:
from (b)-----electronegativities
C, Si---------(2.5, 1.8)
C, P---------(2.5, 2.1)
N, P---------(3.0, 2.1)
N, S---------(3.0, 2.1)
in equal amounts, but did not find any. Do they exist? (If the "least subscript" rule did not take precedence, it would be easier to find examples.)

If such a molecule or ion does exist, then you would have a conflict among the two rules mentioned. Are you saying that, in such a case, I would follow the order of the list (b) and ignore the electronegativity order (a)?

Thanks for your patience.
 
The 'least subscript rule' isn't so much a rule as a trend that appears in formulas of simple molecules with a low number of atoms. What ultimately determines the central atom is physics, which you can do by drawing lewis structures and comparing electronegativities, and following rule (b).

nomadreid said:
Do they exist? (If the "least subscript" rule did not take precedence, it would be easier to find examples.)

The rule doesn't work when you have an even number of candidates, like HCN. Hence it shouldn't be used as a primary method of determining the lewis structure.

nomadreid said:
Are you saying that, in such a case, I would follow the order of the list (b) and ignore the electronegativity order (a)?

Yes, it seems that (b) always overrules (a).

I have a question though.. how do you define the central atom of a cyclic compound like Benzene? or a molecule with two cyclic parts? or a huge 40 kDa protein? or even a simple molecule like ##H-C\equiv C-H##?

This leads me to have a criticism of the website and of undergraduate organic chemistry courses in general, putting importance on identifying the 'central' atom. 'central' is a superficial label, a mere convention, that people use to describe small molecules in a general way. It does not in any way rigorously describe the high-level physics of molecules, and it only encourages thinking of molecules as 'sticks and spheres', and certain properties that you must memorize about specific elements instead of understanding the physics that allows the elements to exist and to be different from one another. For example, it is important to understand there are subatomic particles that interact via strong nuclear forces, weak nuclear forces, and electromagnetism, and that those forces are described in terms of the high level mathematics of quantum field theory. I remember learning the 'sticks and spheres' level of science in any organic chemistry class and memorizing reactions, which was tedious hell.
 
Thanks, docnet. A very good critique. I myself have very little chemistry background (more mathematics and physics) and tend to think more in terms of fields than particles, but was asked to help a student in her beginning chemistry class in secondary school. At this level the subject appears to be a collection of rules of thumb with lots of exceptions. Somewhat messy, but my student needs to start with the simple molecules, mostly inorganic, and I am trying to walk a tightrope between what will make sense to a young teenager and a representation closer to what actually happens. Thus my questions. Thanks very much for the clarification.
 
I want to test a humidity sensor with one or more saturated salt solutions. The table salt that I have on hand contains one of two anticaking agents, calcium silicate or sodium aluminosilicate. Will the presence of either of these additives (or iodine for that matter) significantly affect the equilibrium humidity? I searched and all the how-to-do-it guides did not address this question. One research paper I found reported that at 1.5% w/w calcium silicate increased the deliquescent point by...
I was introduced to the Octet Rule recently and make me wonder, why does 8 valence electrons or a full p orbital always make an element inert? What is so special with a full p orbital? Like take Calcium for an example, its outer orbital is filled but its only the s orbital thats filled so its still reactive not so much as the Alkaline metals but still pretty reactive. Can someone explain it to me? Thanks!!
I'm trying to find a cheap DIY method to etch holes of various shapes through 0.3mm Aluminium sheet using 5-10% Sodium Hydroxide. The idea is to apply a resist to the Aluminium then selectively ablate it off using a diode laser cutter and then dissolve away the Aluminium using Sodium Hydroxide. By cheap I mean resists costing say £20 in small quantities. The Internet has suggested various resists to try including... Enamel paint (only survived seconds in the NaOH!) Acrylic paint (only...
Back
Top