How come the trend doesn't stand for Barium to Radium

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ed Aboud
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the trend of ionization energies within the alkaline earth metals, specifically addressing the unexpected increase in ionization energy from Barium to Radium. Participants explore potential reasons for this anomaly, including the influence of the Lanthanide series and the role of f orbitals.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that Barium has an ionization energy of 502 kilojoules per mole, while Radium has a higher ionization energy of 510 kilojoules per mole, questioning why this trend deviates from the expected decrease.
  • Another participant suggests that the anomaly may relate to the appearance of additional elements in the Lanthanide series or the introduction of f orbitals between the elements in question.
  • A further contribution elaborates that f orbitals are less effective at shielding than d orbitals, which may lead to an increased nuclear charge without a corresponding increase in shielding, resulting in higher ionization energy.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying hypotheses regarding the reasons for the observed trend, indicating that multiple competing views remain without a consensus on the definitive cause.

Contextual Notes

The discussion does not resolve the underlying assumptions regarding the effects of shielding and nuclear charge, nor does it clarify the specific mechanisms by which f orbitals influence ionization energy.

Ed Aboud
Messages
200
Reaction score
0
The trend in ionization energies going down a group is that it decreases between each element. How come the trend doesn't stand for Barium to Radium. Barium has an ionization energy of 502 kilojoules per mole but Radium has an ionization energy of 510 kilojoules per mole. Why is this?
Thanks for any help.

edit:
Just noticed it occurs for La to Ac, Mo to W, Tc to Re, Ru to Os, Rh to Ir, Pd to Pt, Ag to Au, Cd to Hg, In to Tl, Sn to Pb as well.
 
Last edited:
Chemistry news on Phys.org
I'd guess it has to do either with the appearance of all those extra elements in the Lanthanide series, or with the appearance of F orbitals, in between the pairs of elements you mention.

But more specifically, why this would cause a higher I.E. I don't know.
 
Redbelly98 said:
I'd guess it has to do either with the appearance of all those extra elements in the Lanthanide series, or with the appearance of F orbitals, in between the pairs of elements you mention.

But more specifically, why this would cause a higher I.E. I don't know.

It is because f orbitals are less effective at shielding than d orbitals which are less effective than p and ultimately s orbitals. The nuclear charge increases but the shielding effect is lessened resulting in a greater ionization energy.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Astronuc
Ah makes sense now. Thanks for the help.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K