Understanding the Hybridization of Sulfur and Carbon in SO2

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the hybridization of sulfur in sulfur dioxide (SO2) and carbon in acetylene (C2H2). Participants explore the implications of hybridization models, the structure of these molecules, and the correctness of claims made by a professor regarding these topics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that SO2 should have two double bonds, leading to sp hybridization for sulfur, while others question the necessity of hybridization in explaining the bonding in SO2.
  • There are claims that acetylene can be described using both sp and sp3 hybridization, with one participant mentioning "banana bonds" as a descriptor for sp3 hybridization.
  • Some participants express frustration with the hybridization model, suggesting that it is overly simplistic and does not always accurately reflect molecular behavior.
  • Discussions about the number of valence electrons for sulfur and the structure of SO2 are raised, with participants seeking clarification on these points.
  • In the context of C2H2, there are conflicting statements about the hybridization of carbon, with some asserting it is sp while others mention sp2, leading to confusion about the correct interpretation of the molecule's bonding.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the hybridization of sulfur in SO2 or carbon in C2H2. Multiple competing views are presented, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the correctness of the claims made about hybridization.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the energetic differences between hybridization schemes are minimal and that hybridization may not be necessary for explaining certain molecular structures. There is also mention of the limitations of models like the Bohr atom in accurately representing real-world phenomena.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and educators in chemistry, particularly those exploring molecular hybridization and bonding theories.

Qube
Gold Member
Messages
461
Reaction score
1
Hybridization of carbon

Pretty sure my professor is wrong once again.

me8y6yge.jpg


SO2 should have two double bonds which gives the sulfur a minimal formal charge and two signs bonds. The two sigma bonds imply sp hybridization, not the blatantly wrong circled answer.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Qube said:
Pretty sure my professor is wrong once again.

me8y6yge.jpg


SO2 should have two double bonds which gives the sulfur a minimal formal charge and two signs bonds. The two sigma bonds imply sp hybridization, not the blatantly wrong circled answer.

How many valence electrons does sulfur has? What is the structure of SO2?

The attached question is about C2H2, but the circled answer is wrong. The hybridisation is sp for carbon in C2H2.
 
It's fortunate that your professor has you around to keep him straight.
 
I am quite tired of repeating here in the forum that atoms don't "have" a certain hybridization in a given molecule over and over.
Acetylene can perfectly well be described both in terms of sp and sp3 hybrids. In the latter case, the bonds are called descriptively "banana bonds". The energetic difference is usually minute between alternative hybridization schemes in valence bond theory and can only be evaluated using dedicated VB programs.
In the case of SO2, it is not even necessary to involve hybridization: The bonds to the two oxygens can be explained using two of the p orbitals of sulphur alone.
 
Pranav-Arora said:
How many valence electrons does sulfur has? What is the structure of SO2?

The attached question is about C2H2, but the circled answer is wrong. The hybridisation is sp for carbon in C2H2.

Whoops, I was thinking of another question. Yes, the circled answer is still wrong since in the case of the hydrocarbon in the picture the carbon has a hybridization of sp2; there are two bonds with hydrogen and one triple bond between the carbons, giving us a total of 3 sigma bonds.
 
SteamKing said:
It's fortunate that your professor has you around to keep him straight.

I won't be having him around any longer; I think his job security is decreasing by the day (answer?)
 
DrDu said:
I am quite tired of repeating here in the forum that atoms don't "have" a certain hybridization in a given molecule over and over.
Acetylene can perfectly well be described both in terms of sp and sp3 hybrids. In the latter case, the bonds are called descriptively "banana bonds". The energetic difference is usually minute between alternative hybridization schemes in valence bond theory and can only be evaluated using dedicated VB programs.
In the case of SO2, it is not even necessary to involve hybridization: The bonds to the two oxygens can be explained using two of the p orbitals of sulphur alone.

You lost me at banana bond.

I do understand that hybridization is a model for explaining phenomenon such as the fact carbon forms four bonds instead of two, and that models don't always translate perfectly to the real world, just as the Bohr atom model is still used to explain things even though the model is overly simplistic (or simply incorrect).
 
Qube said:
Whoops, I was thinking of another question. Yes, the circled answer is still wrong since in the case of the hydrocarbon in the picture the carbon has a hybridization of sp2; there are two bonds with hydrogen and one triple bond between the carbons, giving us a total of 3 sigma bonds.

Take it easy. in C2H2, the hybridization of C is sp, The molecule is linear (no free electrons) and between the 2 C atoms there's a triple bond.
 
dextercioby said:
Take it easy. in C2H2, the hybridization of C is sp, The molecule is linear (no free electrons) and between the 2 C atoms there's a triple bond.

You're right sorry I keep thinking of C2H4.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
11K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K