RichRobX
- 11
- 0
When writing oxidation states, is there a difference between 2+ and +2?
The discussion clarifies the notation of oxidation states, emphasizing that 2+ is preferred over +2 to avoid confusion with exponential expressions. Participants agree that oxidation states can be represented in Roman numerals, such as SVI for sulfur, but the sign is crucial for clarity. The notation Fe^{+II} is less common, with Roman numerals typically used in complex compounds, often appearing in brackets. The consensus is that while both notations exist, the choice depends on context and clarity for the reader.
PREREQUISITESChemistry students, educators, and professionals involved in inorganic chemistry, particularly those focusing on oxidation states and chemical nomenclature.
dextercioby said:Even with Roman numerals,u still need the sign.Dor example Sulphur:S^{II} is it for a metalic compound or for a nonmetalic compound...?
Daniel.
I must say that I have never come across Roman Numerials in formulae either. Is there an reason to use one instead of the other or are they interchangeable?Gokul43201 said:I have never come across the notation, Fe^{+II} , for example. I've usually seen Roman Numerals designate oxidation states in complexes, but then the oxidation state appears in brackets, not as a superscript.
Ex : dichlorotetramminecobalt(III) chloride