Orbital Hybridisation: Myth or Misconception?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around the concept of orbital hybridization in chemistry, specifically questioning its validity and the visual representation of electron orbitals. Participants emphasize that orbital hybridization accurately describes the behavior of electrons as probability clouds rather than fixed circular paths. The conversation critiques the oversimplified depiction of orbitals, arguing that while the visual representation may seem confusing, it does not invalidate the underlying statistical principles. There is a consensus that despite initial doubts, the theory of hybrid orbitals, such as those formed from s and p orbitals, is supported by research and should not be dismissed as mere hand-waving. The dialogue invites further clarification on specific questions regarding the theory.
RK7
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
Is it basically wrong? It just seems like hand-waving...
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
What do you mean?

afaik, orbital hybridisation is pretty much how it works. You got a space of probability where you can find an electron or set of electrons. The electron(s) in question is/are essentially everywhere in that cloud at once. It's like a probability cloud.

All that stuff about neat, circular orbitals is what's wrong.
 
anisotropic said:
What do you mean?

afaik, orbital hybridisation is pretty much how it works. You got a space of probability where you can find an electron or set of electrons. The electron(s) in question is/are essentially everywhere in that cloud at once. It's like a probability cloud.

All that stuff about neat, circular orbitals is what's wrong.

I'm talking about an s orbital and 3 p orbitals nicely combining to make nice convenient orbitals which happen to point outwards tetrahedrally. I don't see how that works.
 
I haven't done orbital hybridisation in ages, but my guess is the orbitals are based on pure statistical math. Just because it doesn't make sense visually on first glance, doesn't mean it's wrong. Besides, most research likely supports the theory.

That being said, just looking at an s and 3 p orbitals, I can see how the resultant hybrid orbitals exist as they do.

Can anyone else chime in here?
 
RK7 said:
Is it basically wrong? It just seems like hand-waving...

No it's not wrong. Besides that, what precisely is your question?
 
It seems like a simple enough question: what is the solubility of epsom salt in water at 20°C? A graph or table showing how it varies with temperature would be a bonus. But upon searching the internet I have been unable to determine this with confidence. Wikipedia gives the value of 113g/100ml. But other sources disagree and I can't find a definitive source for the information. I even asked chatgpt but it couldn't be sure either. I thought, naively, that this would be easy to look up without...
I was introduced to the Octet Rule recently and make me wonder, why does 8 valence electrons or a full p orbital always make an element inert? What is so special with a full p orbital? Like take Calcium for an example, its outer orbital is filled but its only the s orbital thats filled so its still reactive not so much as the Alkaline metals but still pretty reactive. Can someone explain it to me? Thanks!!

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
7K
Replies
20
Views
14K
Back
Top