Why do the d, f orbitals of transition metals have less reactivity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MophiA
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Metal Transition
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the comparison of filling electron orbitals, specifically the sequence of n=5 and n=6 orbitals versus n=4 orbitals. It highlights that n=4 orbitals are significantly smaller and closer to the nucleus, yet they possess higher energy than the n=5 and n=6 orbitals. This raises questions about the concept of localization in relation to these orbitals. Additionally, the conversation touches on reactivity, questioning what the n=4 orbitals are less reactive compared to, given their energy levels and size. Overall, the dialogue emphasizes the intricate relationship between orbital size, energy, and reactivity in atomic structure.
MophiA
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Thinking about filling sequence 5s -> 4d or 6s -> 4f, the n=4 orbitals are way smaller than n=5 or 6.

Does this mean "localized"?

Even though the n=4 orbitals are way smaller, close to nucleus, these orbitals have more energy than n=5, 6 orbitals above.

What makes it less reactive?
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
less reactive compared to what?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
16K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
33K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K