MHB Charge & Valency of Chemistry Formulas: Explained

  • Thread starter Thread starter markosheehan
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chemistry
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on confusion regarding the charge and valency of various chemical formulas, particularly carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitrogen monoxide (NO). Participants clarify that oxygen typically has a charge of -2, while carbon can exhibit +2 or +4, leading to stable compounds like CO and CO2. The complexity arises with nitrogen and its bonding with oxygen, as nitrogen has five outer electrons and can form stable bonds despite not always adhering to the octet rule. It is emphasized that learning these formulas and their charges is essential, as many elements have multiple stable valences. Overall, understanding the bonding and electron configurations is crucial for grasping these concepts in chemistry.
markosheehan
Messages
133
Reaction score
0
i am confused with charge and valency of some formula.

for carbon dioxide CO oxygen has a charge of -2 and carbon has a charge of +2. I thought though carbon is in 4 so its charge should be +/- 4.for nitrogen monoxide NO oxygen has a charge of 2- usually and nitrogen usually has a charge of -3 so this makes no sense to me as the charge is supposed to balance of the compound and both atoms want to gain electrons which also does not make sense to me.

i have the same problems with dinitrogen tetroxide, nitrogen dioxide,sulfur dioxide, sulphur trioxide, and phosphorous(v) chloride. how are you supposed to know the formula and for these if they all have random charges and do not follow the rules? do you just learn them off?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
markosheehan said:
i am confused with charge and valency of some formula.

for carbon dioxide CO oxygen has a charge of -2 and carbon has a charge of +2. I thought though carbon is in 4 so its charge should be +/- 4.for nitrogen monoxide NO oxygen has a charge of 2- usually and nitrogen usually has a charge of -3 so this makes no sense to me as the charge is supposed to balance of the compound and both atoms want to gain electrons which also does not make sense to me.

i have the same problems with dinitrogen tetroxide, nitrogen dioxide,sulfur dioxide, sulphur trioxide, and phosphorous(v) chloride. how are you supposed to know the formula and for these if they all have random charges and do not follow the rules? do you just learn them off?

Yes. Basically you just learn them off, or look them up.

There are some patterns though.
Oxygen always has -2 in practice.
But many other elements have multiple valences in which they have a stable bond.
For instance C is known to have +2 and +4 as stable valences.
Consequently both CO and CO2 are stable.
 
ok thanks. could you explain the bonding in NO. both of these elements want to gain different numbers of electrons so how do they bond to each other.
 
Nitrogen is in group 5, meaning it has 5 electrons in its outermost shell. Oxigen is in group 6 and 'stronger'. So oxigen completes the octet in its outer shell.
A bar or 2 dots close together represent a pair of 2 electrons that is somewhat stable.
A loose dot indicates a single electron, which is highly reactive - it wants to make a pair.
Molecules with a loose electron are called radicals, and they won't exist long given the opportunity to bind another molecule.
 
thanks
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Is it possible to arrange six pencils such that each one touches the other five? If so, how? This is an adaption of a Martin Gardner puzzle only I changed it from cigarettes to pencils and left out the clues because PF folks don’t need clues. From the book “My Best Mathematical and Logic Puzzles”. Dover, 1994.
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top