This question regarding quantum number

  • Thread starter TT0
  • Start date
  • #1
TT0
211
3
What is the correct set of quantum numbers for the eighth electron that fills the orbitals in an atom of oxygen?

A. n = 2, l = 1, ml = –1, ms = –1/2
B. n = 2, l = 1, ml = +1, ms = –1/2
C. n = 2, l = 1, ml = +1, ms = +1/2
D. n = 2, l = 0, ml = –1, ms = +1/2
E. n = 1, l = 1, ml = +1, ms = –1/2

I chose B, because it is in the 2nd shell, p subshell, on the right orbital and has a negative spin. But they said the answer is A. This website sometimes has errors so could someone tell me if I am right?
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
954
117
Personally, I don't quite like the way the question is phrased - how does one define "the eighth electron in an atom of oxygen"? It only makes sense if you make reference to the ground state of the +1 oxygen ion.

The answer by the site seems correct to me. Have you heard of Hund's rules?
 
  • Like
Likes TT0
  • #3
TT0
211
3
I see, I realised I was thinking about the eighth electron on the 2nd shell and not overall, thanks!
 
  • #4
954
117
I see, I realised I was thinking about the eighth electron on the 2nd shell and not overall, thanks!
My bad - I was actually the one thinking about the eighth electron on the second shell!
So in that case, your answer is correct, and the site is wrong, because Hund's second rule is to maximise L, and so the 4th electron in the 2p shell should be in the ml = +1 orbital.
 
  • Like
Likes TT0
  • #5
Borek
Mentor
28,544
2,984
Does ml value really matter? I can be wrong, but these are degenerate orbitals (with the same energy), so the electron doesn't care what is the ml value. When there is an external magnetic field, it can make things different, but in an isolated atom question doesn't make much sense to me.
 
  • Like
Likes TT0
  • #6
DrClaude
Mentor
7,434
3,705
Does ml value really matter? I can be wrong, but these are degenerate orbitals (with the same energy), so the electron doesn't care what is the ml value. When there is an external magnetic field, it can make things different, but in an isolated atom question doesn't make much sense to me.
Indeed, the question doesn't make any sense.
 
  • Like
Likes TT0 and Borek
  • #7
954
117
Yes, taken on its own, the question doesn't make much sense. I strongly suspect the question is trying (in some way) to specifically target Hund's rules. Using Hund's rules, one would systematically "place" the electrons one-by-one to determine the J and S values for the atom. So, the "eighth electron" technically refers to the "last" electron to be "placed" in this scheme.
 
  • Like
Likes TT0
  • #8
DrClaude
Mentor
7,434
3,705
Using Hund's rules, one would systematically "place" the electrons one-by-one
That's the Aufbau principle.

So, the "eighth electron" technically refers to the "last" electron to be "placed" in this scheme.
Yes, but as Borek said, the ##m_l## and ##m_s## states being of equal energy, there is no "order" in which to put in the electron.
 
Last edited:
  • #9
Borek
Mentor
28,544
2,984
Somehow I suspect someone was confusing a convention (when drawing orbitals we always fill squares from the left) with the "real" thing, assumed this order matters and extended the idea to ml values. Pure speculation on my side, but I have seen similar thinking on several occasions :frown:
 
  • #10
TT0
211
3
So is A still the correct answer?
 
  • #11
DrClaude
Mentor
7,434
3,705
So is A still the correct answer?
As far as I am concerned, there is no correct answer, but it can't be D.
 

Related Threads on This question regarding quantum number

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
9K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
850
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
29
Views
2K
Top