What shapes do d orbital represent?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Raghav Gupta
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Orbital Shapes
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the shapes and characteristics of d orbitals in quantum chemistry, specifically focusing on the dz2 orbital and its representation. Participants explore the nature of these orbitals, their mathematical descriptions, and their relevance in hybridization and molecular geometry.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants describe the dz2 orbital as resembling a donut shape, while others suggest it should be a parabola along the z-axis.
  • There is confusion regarding the meaning of the "2" in dz2, with some asserting it is an index and others claiming it is an exponent.
  • Participants discuss the formation of six quadratic expressions related to d orbitals, including xy, xz, yz, x2, y2, and z2, and how these relate to s orbitals.
  • Questions arise about the specific d orbitals involved in dsp2 hybridization and the reasoning behind their selection.
  • Some participants note that only certain orbitals contribute to the dsp2 hybridization, specifically those that lie in the xy plane.
  • There is a discussion about the arbitrary nature of the molecular coordinate system and how it affects the choice of orbital orientations for different geometries.
  • Participants express uncertainty about whether the understanding of hybrid orbitals is based on experimental evidence or theoretical constructs, with references to Linus Pauling's work.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the shapes and mathematical representations of d orbitals, with no clear consensus on several points, including the interpretation of the "2" in dz2 and the specific orbitals involved in hybridization. The discussion remains unresolved on these topics.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include potential misunderstandings of mathematical expressions and the nature of hybrid orbitals, as well as the dependence on definitions and conventions in molecular geometry.

Raghav Gupta
Messages
1,010
Reaction score
76
In d orbital there are 5 degenerates.
How ## d_z^2 ## represents something like a donut shape.
Shouldn't it be a parabola with respect to z axis, like when plotting graph of ## x^2 ##.
Also have confusion about shapes of other 4 degenerates.
For s it is spherical and simple.
For p there are 3 degenerates directed along x,y,z axes.

Have confusion about shapes of these orbitals. Can somebody help?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Raghav Gupta said:
How ## d_z^2 ## represents something like a donut shape.
Shouldn't it be a parabola with respect to z axis, like when plotting graph of ## x^2 ##.
The "2" is an index, not an exponent.

The orbitals are solutions to the Schrödinger equation. They just happen to look like that. What images usually show are the regions with a high probability to find the electron.
 
So what is 2 representing here as an index?
Also in square planar geometry having hybridisation dsp2 , there are certain orbital degenerates involved, totally 4. What are these and what is their reason?
 
mfb said:
The "2" is an index, not an exponent.
No, it is an exponent, not an index. However, it is an abreviation for ##z^2-(x^2+y^2+z^2)/3##. Specifically, you can form 6 quadratic expressions: xy, xz, yz, ##x^2##, ##y^2##, ##z^2##, but the combination ##x^2+y^2+z^2## transforms like an s-orbital, hence you subtract it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mfb
DrDu said:
Specifically, you can form 6 quadratic expressions: xy, xz, yz, ##x^2##, ##y^2##, ##z^2##, but the combination ##x^2+y^2+z^2## transforms like an s-orbital, hence you subtract it.
Isn't then x2 +1 a quadratic expression and so on? How total six then?
How then ##x^2+y^2+z^2## transforms like an s-orbital?

Raghav Gupta said:
Also in square planar geometry having hybridisation dsp2 , there are certain orbital degenerates involved, totally 4. What are these and what is their reason?
What is the answer for this?
 
Raghav Gupta said:
Isn't then x2 +1 a quadratic expression and so on? How total six then?
How then ##x^2+y^2+z^2## transforms like an s-orbital?What is the answer for this?
To 1: "1" isn't a quadratic expression in x, y or z.
##x^2+y^2+z^2=r^2## i.e. the square of the radial distance. It is rotational isotropic, i.e. transforms as an s orbital and doesn't carry angular momentum.

2. Formally, you can always form hybrids of d, s and p orbitals, irrespective of whether they are degenerate or not, but they will be relevant for bonding only if the s, p and d orbitals are nearly energetically degenerate.
 
DrDu said:
2. Formally, you can always form hybrids of d, s and p orbitals, irrespective of whether they are degenerate or not, but they will be relevant for bonding only if the s, p and d orbitals are nearly energetically degenerate.
But why in dsp2 hybridisation orbitals like if look at their orientation,
dx2 -y2, px,py and s are only involved?
Why not other d orbital orientations and what about pz?
 
Because these are the only functions which give your orbitals lying in the xy plane. If you would like to construct dsp2 orbitals lying in some other plane, you would have to use another set of orbitals.
 
DrDu said:
Because these are the only functions which give your orbitals lying in the xy.
But why one needs orbitals lying in xy ?
 
  • #10
You were talking about square planar geometry, weren't you?
 
  • #11
Yes. I see for tetrahedral some other 4 orbitals. But is there any specific reason that how to know which orientations for which geometry by any trick or something?
 
  • #12
As the molecular coordinate system is arbitrary, to chose the xy plane for planar compounds is convention. Which hybrids correspond to which geometries is not so easy to see.
 
  • #13
DrDu said:
As the molecular coordinate system is arbitrary, to chose the xy plane for planar compounds is convention. Which hybrids correspond to which geometries is not so easy to see.
So we analyze that by experiments?
Is there not any mathematical proof?
Do we have to rote memorize it for different geometries?
 
  • #14
No, orbitals are theoretical constructs, and not directly amenable to experiments.
The rationale behind the choice of the hybrid orbitals is due to Linus Pauling's boo: The nature of the chemical bond.
Have a look at it, it is a very good book. However, by now, quite some concepts are outdated or disproven.
 
  • #15
I would try to see the book later. Thanks for providing so much help.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K