The Ionic Bond between Li and Br: Understanding Electronegativity Differences

  • Thread starter Thread starter Edin_Dzeko
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ionic
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the ionic bond between lithium (Li) and bromine (Br), highlighting their electronegativity values of 1.0 and 2.8, respectively. The calculated difference of 1.8 suggests a polar bond, but rounding the values leads to a difference of 2.0, classifying it as ionic. Participants debate the validity of rounding electronegativity values, with some arguing it can lead to misleading conclusions. The conversation also touches on the nature of other compounds, questioning why aluminum chloride (AlCl3) is considered covalent despite similar reasoning. The complexities of bond classification based on electronegativity differences are emphasized throughout the discussion.
Edin_Dzeko
Messages
204
Reaction score
0
Li (Electronegativity) = 1.0
Br (Electronegativity) = 2.8

2.8 - 1.0 - 1.8

Ionic = 2.0+
Polar = .4 - 2.0+
Non polar covalent = 0 - 0.4

1.8 doesn't it fall into the polar range? I got that wrong on a h.w. question
 
Physics news on Phys.org
We round the electronegativity of lithium to 1.0, and bromide to 3.0, so the difference is actually 2.0.

It is also ionic because it is a bond between a metal and non-metal.
 
student54321 said:
We round the electronegativity of lithium to 1.0, and bromide to 3.0, so the difference is actually 2.0.

This is way too handwavy for my liking. Selectively rounding you can prove anything, including 0=1.

It is also ionic because it is a bond between a metal and non-metal.

So why is AlCl3 covalent?
 
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...
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...
Back
Top