Does metallic bonding count as giant structure

AI Thread Summary
Metallic bonding is discussed in relation to giant structures, with a focus on identifying elements based on their group classifications. The conversation suggests that P is a noble gas and Q belongs to group I, leading to the cancellation of certain options. S is identified as a transition metal, contributing to the metal lattice structure. The conclusion leans towards classifying the structure as a giant structure, with D being proposed as the answer. Overall, the discussion clarifies the classification of elements and their bonding types in the context of giant structures.
TT0
Messages
210
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement


Screen Shot 2016-07-04 at 2.18.10 PM.png


Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I am guessing P is a noble gas and Q is in group I. Therefore A, B, C and E can be canceled out. S is a transition metal. It is a metal lattice structure. But I guess it could be described as a giant structure, so would you say D is the answer?

Cheers!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
TT0 said:
I am guessing P is a noble gas and Q is in group I.

Good.

TT0 said:
S is a transition metal.

Doesn't necessarily follow.
 
  • Like
Likes TT0
I see, thanks a lot!
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'

Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'

TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
View full post »

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 How do we know ##BF_3## has Lewis structure but ##Al_2S_3## does not?
Replies
1
Views
2K
How many covalent bonds make a giant molecular structure?
Replies
2
Views
1K
Electronegativity / predicting structure / ranking order
Replies
3
Views
5K
Chemistry Molecular Structure: Thorium & Rubidium; Thorium & Phosphour
Replies
1
Views
1K
Counting d-electrons in M(I) transition metals
Replies
4
Views
2K
Why does C-C have a higher bond energy than B-N in hBN and graphene?
Replies
4
Views
2K
Stability of Sulfides: Lewis Acid-Base Covalent Bonding
Replies
1
Views
2K
Why does a Phospholipid have an unsaturated fatty acid tail?
Replies
3
Views
2K
How Do You Draw Correct Resonance Structures for H3CHCHC=NH?
Replies
1
Views
2K
What is the bond order of NO-, NO, and NO+?
Replies
1
Views
6K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top