Few simple questions about atomic structure and properties

AI Thread Summary
The presence of delocalized electrons in graphite results in its layered structure, where one valence electron per carbon atom acts as a charge carrier, contributing to its electrical conductivity. Group I A metals have low melting points due to their weak metallic bonds, which arise from having only one delocalized electron per atom and loose packing. In contrast, transition metals exhibit higher melting points because their d orbital electrons are also delocalized, leading to stronger metallic bonding. The difference in bonding strength between these groups explains the variance in their melting points. Understanding these atomic structures and properties is crucial for grasping material behavior.
mjolnir80
Messages
54
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


a)what property of graphite is the result of the presence of delocalized electrons?
b)what is the reason for the generally low melting point of group I A metals as compared with the high melting points of metals in the center of the transition series?



The Attempt at a Solution



a) is it the layers?
b)i thinks it the higher charge on the transition metals

thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
well, in graphite each carbon atom is bonded to three other carbon atoms forming layers of hexagonal rings. one valence electron is left out, which acts as a charge carrier in the lattice.

in group 1 there is loosing packing and only 1 electron delocalised per atom. hence weak metallic bond. in transation metals d orbital electrons get delocalised as well, hence a stronger metallic bond.
 
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...
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...
Back
Top