Why are metals in aqueous solution basic, and non-metals acidic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter adf89812
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Aqueous Metals
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the concepts of proton acceptors and lone pair donors within acid-base theory, particularly in relation to metals and non-metals in water. It is noted that metals, being less electronegative than non-metals, tend to donate electrons to hydrogen in water, leading to the release of hydrogen ions (protons) as hydrogen separates from oxygen. In contrast, non-metals, which are more electronegative, form larger acid molecules by attracting electrons from water without releasing them, resulting in a structure where hydrogen is the least electronegative atom, potentially leading to the formation of protons. The conversation emphasizes the need for clearer explanations and specific references to support these claims, as vague assertions are not deemed acceptable in the forum.
adf89812
Messages
37
Reaction score
1
TL;DR
Why are metals in aqueous solution basic, and non-metals in water acidic?
I heard an explanation about something being a better proton acceptor or lone pair donor but that doesn't make sense. I couldn't explain in in terms of acid-base theory.

The hand-waving way I saw it was that metals are less electronegative than non-metals, so in water, they'll donate their electron to the hydrogen, the hydrogen will break away from the oxygen because hydrogen hates oxygen hogging its electrons, and because hydrogen electronegative enough.

With non-metals, my hand-waving is that metals are more electronegative, when they bond with water, they'll just form one bigger molecule because they suck on other's electrons without letting go and form one big acid molecule where the least electronegative thing in there is a hydrogen, which falls of into a proton, and it may or may not be polyprotic.
 
Last edited:
Chemistry news on Phys.org
adf89812 said:
I heard

adf89812 said:
The hand-waving way I saw it
These vague "citations" are not acceptable here on PF. Please post exactly what you heard/saw.
 
What I know and please correct me: a macroscopic probe of raw sugar you can buy from the store can be modeled to be an almost perfect cube of a size of 0.7 up to 1 mm. Let's assume it was really pure, nothing else but a conglomerate of H12C22O11 molecules stacked one over another in layers with van de Waals (?) "forces" keeping them together in a macroscopic state at a temperature of let's say 20 degrees Celsius. Then I use 100 such tiny pieces to throw them in 20 deg water. I stir the...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K