Which substance has the highest boiling point?

AI Thread Summary
Water (H2O) has the highest boiling point among the substances listed due to its strong hydrogen bonding, which is influenced by the electronegativity of oxygen compared to nitrogen in ammonia (NH3). While both water and ammonia can form four hydrogen bonds, the stronger hydrogen bonds in water result from oxygen's higher electronegativity. The discussion highlights that boiling points depend on intermolecular forces rather than bonds, with hydrogen bonding being the strongest force in this context. The presence of two lone pairs of electrons on oxygen also contributes to water's unique properties. Ultimately, the electronegativity of the atoms involved plays a crucial role in determining boiling points.
tica86
Messages
79
Reaction score
0
Of the following substances which has the highest boiling point?

H20, CO2, CH4, Kr, NH3

I already know the answer is H20 but I would've initially chosen NH3 because of the nitrogen bond to hydrogen but that's obviously wrong. Is it H20 because oxygen is more electronegative then nitrogen??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What does boiling point depend on?
 
intermolecular bonds
 
More like forces (van der Waals forces are not classified as bonds). OK, what kinds of intermolecular forces & bonds will be at work in each molecule? Which of these are the strongest?
 
The hydrogen bonding between molecules in this case is the strongest.
Oxygen being more electronegative than nitrogen will form stronger hydrogen bonds.
Also water there are 2 lone pairs of electrons whereas the nitrogen in NH3 has only 1 lone pair of electrons.But ,correct me if I am wrong , in water, there are 4 possible hydrogen bonds (2 from oxygen and 2 from hydrogen) and in ammonia there are also 4 possible hydrogen bonds (1 from nitrogen and 3 from hydrogen).
So the only difference is then the electronegativity of oxygen which determines the boiling point?
 
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