The discussion revolves around the differences in the representation of the electric dipole moment of the water molecule as seen in various sources, including textbooks and videos. Participants explore the implications of these differences in directionality and labeling, as well as the definitions used in physics and chemistry.
Participants express differing views on the representation of the dipole moment, with no consensus reached on the reasons for the discrepancies or the implications of the differing representations.
There are unresolved questions regarding the implications of the differing representations in physics and chemistry, as well as the choice of coordinate system origins for vector representation.
Dale said:What is the difference?
Where do you place the origins of your coordinate system for drawing ## \vec{r} ## vectors?nasu said:The direction shown in your book is the usual one, as is derived from the definition of the dipole moment ## \vec{p}=\sum q \vec{r} ##
where ## \vec{r} ## is the position vector of the charge q.
Why they show it the other way in that video is hard to say, especially without watching the video.
Aren't they vectors? So how can we reverse the direction of a vector and not changing it?Dale said:They both show the dipole moment as positive towards the H and negative towards the O. One draws the arrow from positive to negative, but they both are labeled correctly.
Dale said:One draws the arrow from positive to negative, but they both are labeled correctly.
It looks like indeed in chemistry they choose to represent the dipole moment vector pointing from positive to negative even though the definition formula looks to be the same as the one used in physics.AdrianMachin said:Where do you place the origins of your coordinate system for drawing ## \vec{r} ## vectors?
Somebody said that the direction of the dipole moment in Physics is reverse than what it is in Chemistry, is it true?