What is the calculation for effective nuclear charge using Slater's Rules?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Yh Hoo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Charge Nuclear
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the effective nuclear charge (Z_eff) using Slater's Rules for Group 2 elements, specifically Beryllium (Be), Magnesium (Mg), Calcium (Ca), Strontium (Sr), and Barium (Ba). The calculated effective nuclear charges are 1.95 for Be and 2.85 for the other elements. Contrary to some literature, the increase in atomic radius down Group 2 is attributed to the increasing principal quantum number rather than a decreasing effective nuclear charge. Additionally, alternative methods for determining effective nuclear charge, such as analyzing atomic spectra and Rydberg series, are mentioned as providing different results.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Slater's Rules for effective nuclear charge calculation
  • Familiarity with atomic structure and quantum numbers
  • Knowledge of atomic spectra and Rydberg series
  • Basic principles of molecular structure and chemical bonding
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the detailed application of Slater's Rules for various elements
  • Explore the relationship between effective nuclear charge and atomic radius
  • Learn about the Rydberg formula and its application in calculating effective nuclear charge
  • Investigate alternative methods for calculating effective nuclear charge beyond Slater's Rules
USEFUL FOR

Chemistry students, educators, and researchers interested in atomic theory, effective nuclear charge calculations, and the implications for atomic structure and bonding.

Yh Hoo
Messages
73
Reaction score
0
I have come across the Slater's Rules that is used to calculate the numerical value of effective nuclear charge of elements.
Can somebody please show to me the calculation of effective nuclear charge of atoms of element down the group 2 by using the Slater's rule??
I calculate by using the information from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slater's_rules.
many books mention that increment in atomic radius down the group 2 is caused by the decreasing effective nuclear charge. is it true? Thanks for your help and i really need all your help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Firstly, I am not sure that Slater's rules as presented in the wikipedia article are a correct interpretation. However , let us suppose that they are.

I calculate effective nuclear charges of 1.95, 2.85, 2.85, 2.85, and 2.85 for Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, and Ba respectively.

The increase in atomic radius is not the result of a decreasing effective nuclear charge. It is mostly the result of an increasing principal quantum number for the outermost electrons, and the increase in atomic radius is lessened by the increasing effective nuclear charge.
 
Last edited:
JohnRC said:
I calculate effective nuclear charges of 1.95, 2.85, 2.85, 2.85, and 2.85 for Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, and Ba respectively.

I calculated the same thing also. If our calculation are correct ,that means the effective nuclear charge is increasing and then go to constant. But many books wrote that the effective nuclear charge is decreasing down the group.
Or could you please share with me your knowledge and understanding on Slater's rule ?? Thanks a lot.
 
Slater's rules were designed for the specific purpose of trying to calculate molecular structures and chemical bonds in a simplistic model where only valence electrons were considered, with single electron wave functions, and "hydrogen-like orbitals" -- that is,

psi(3px) = x * exp(-alpha*r) rather than the truly hydrogen-like (b – x) * exp(-alpha*r)

They were also "tuned" for energy -- ionization potentials and bond strengths -- rather than atom size.

There is another method that is used for obtaining effective nuclear charge. It involves a close examination of the atomic spectrum of an element and identifying particular groups of lines as "Rydberg series". If this method is used, you can arrive at a significantly different pattern for effective nuclear charge.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K