Hybridization and Geometry of OH- Ion

AI Thread Summary
The hydroxide ion (OH-) has a tetrahedral electron geometry due to three lone pairs and one bonding pair around the oxygen atom. The molecular geometry is bent, not linear, because the arrangement of atoms considers only bonding pairs. The hybridization of the oxygen atom is sp3, as it utilizes hybrid orbitals to minimize energy and accommodate the bonding with hydrogen. The discussion clarifies that there are no empty 2s orbitals in oxygen, and hybridization is essential for understanding the bond angles in molecules like water and hydroxide. Thus, hybridization plays a crucial role in determining the molecular shape and bond angles in OH-.
lkh1986
Messages
96
Reaction score
0
Question: State the hybridization used and the molecular geometry shape of hydroxide ion, OH-.

Okay, so I draw out the Lewis structure, where there are 6 electrons (3 lone pairs) around the O atom, which is bonded to the H atom. So, I think base on the 3 nonbonding domains and 1 bonding domain, I think the shape is tetrahedral, but it seems weird to me, because I think it may be linear.

Then, regarding the hybridization, I think the O atom uses sp3 hybridization, but then again, I think there is no hybridization involved, because O can use the remaining empty 2s orbital to bond to the only one electron from H atom.

Which one is the correct one? :confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
lkh1986 said:
Question: State the hybridization used and the molecular geometry shape of hydroxide ion, OH-.

Okay, so I draw out the Lewis structure, where there are 6 electrons (3 lone pairs) around the O atom, which is bonded to the H atom. So, I think base on the 3 nonbonding domains and 1 bonding domain, I think the shape is tetrahedral, but it seems weird to me, because I think it may be linear.
When you are asked for the shape of the molecule/ion, you are asked to describe the relative positions of the atoms, not the relative positions of the orbitals. If you were going to describe the geometry of the orbitals (instead of the geometry of the atoms) then you'd say NH3 was tetrahedral (instead of a trigonal pyramid).

Then, regarding the hybridization, I think the O atom uses sp3 hybridization, but then again, I think there is no hybridization involved, because O can use the remaining empty 2s orbital to bond to the only one electron from H atom.
What empty 2s orbital? Is there an empty 2s in oxygen?
 
First: Identify the number of valence electrons present in the total compound.
Second: Draw the Lewis structure
Third: Remember that though the electron configuration maybe tetrahedral that does not mean that the whole molecule will have that shape. You must look at the total 'effective bonds'.

I agree with Gokul, there are no empty 2s orbitals for O. Look at everything again. Hope that helps.
 
Gokul43201 said:
What empty 2s orbital? Is there an empty 2s in oxygen?

Oh, sorry, typo there. I mean 2p orbital.
 
Okay, that makes more sense. But now, it seems you need to understand how hybridization works.

You could as well ask a similar question regarding the H2O structure. After all, you could just as well argue that the 2 vacancies in the 2p orbitals can be used to accommodate the electrons from the 2 H atoms. So, the exact same argument as the one above, would lead you to conclude that H2O requires no hybridization either.

If that were true, why then, is the H-O-H bond angle much closer to 109 than it is to 90 deg? Clearly, hybridization is involved in H2O, as it will be in the case of OH-. The reason that hybrid orbitals are closer to reality is due to the reduction in energy that results from hybridization.
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top