Shielding or principal quantum number predicts Covalent or Ionic?

Thread starter adf89812
Start date Jun 8, 2024
Tags

Quantum Shielding

AI Thread Summary

HgCl2 is more covalent than CaCl2 due to the additional p and s orbital shells in Hg^2+, which affect electron shielding. The extra shells may shield the chlorines from the nucleus's attraction, influencing the bond characteristics. This leads to a situation where Hg^2+ valence electrons are more attracted to the chlorine electron cloud. The principal quantum number and shielding play crucial roles in determining whether a bond is more covalent or ionic. Understanding these factors can clarify the nature of bonding in different compounds.

Jun 8, 2024

adf89812

TL;DR Summary: Why is HgCl2 more covalent than CaCl2 via shielding?

Hg^2+ in HgCl_2 has more shells of p-orbitals and s-orbitals than Ca^2+ in CaCl2
- Do those extra p and s shells of Hg^2 in HgCl2 shield the two chlorines in HgCl2 from the effect of Hg^2+'s nucleus attraction, or leave the Hg^2+ valence electrons attracted to the chlorine electron cloud in HgCl2 because by the Bohr model the valence electrons of Hg are further apart from its nucleus and should be closer to the chlorine in HgCl2?
- How can shielding or principal quantum number of the cation explain whether some bond is more covalent or ionic?

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 »