Chemistry NH3 molecule did not use sp3 hybridized orbitals

  • Thread starter Thread starter icystrike
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Molecule Orbitals
AI Thread Summary
In the discussion about the NH3 molecule, it is proposed that if the nitrogen atom did not utilize sp3 hybridized orbitals, the expected bond angle would be 90 degrees due to the orthogonal nature of the p orbitals (Px, Py, Pz). The conversation also explores the implications of sp2 hybridization, which would alter the bond angles compared to the typical tetrahedral geometry of NH3. The focus remains on understanding the geometric and bonding consequences of different hybridization states. The analysis emphasizes the importance of hybridization in determining molecular geometry and bond angles. Overall, the discussion highlights the relationship between orbital hybridization and molecular structure.
icystrike
Messages
444
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


20. If the central N in the NH3 molecule did not use sp3 hybridized orbitals. What would be the expected angle in NH3?

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



I should just consider 3 of the H: 1s^{1} bonding with the P_{x} , P_{y} , P_{z} respectively and the angle is 90deg since they are orthogonal to one another.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org


What if it hybridized sp2?
 
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

Energy level Diagram relating to SP3 hybridization
Replies
2
Views
7K
Organic chemistry hybridization and bond angles
Replies
1
Views
4K
Did I Illustrate Hydrogen Bonding in NH3 Correctly?
Replies
4
Views
15K
Is Dragos rule evidence of hybridization theory's failure?
Replies
9
Views
3K
Chemistry How do we know ##BF_3## has Lewis structure but ##Al_2S_3## does not?
Replies
1
Views
2K
Chemistry How many bonds and pi bonds does glycine have?
Replies
6
Views
5K
Point Group & Symmetry of Urea Molecule: Solution Explained
Replies
1
Views
4K
Calculating Center of Mass in NH3 Molecule
Replies
4
Views
7K
Chemistry Bigger the molecule the more polarizable
Replies
7
Views
14K
How Does Hybridization Explain Bonds in Diborane?
Replies
1
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top