Why Does Electronegativity Decrease Down a Group?

AI Thread Summary
Electronegativity decreases down a group in the periodic table due to increased shielding from additional electron orbitals, which diminishes an atom's ability to attract electrons. This concept is distinct from the charge of ions, as both sodium (Na+) and potassium (K+) carry a +1 charge. In a neuron, the side with more Na+ ions appears more positive than the side with K+ ions, but both ions have the same charge. The movement of K+ ions through channels leads to a membrane potential of approximately -70 mV, indicating a net negative charge inside the neuron relative to the outside. Understanding these principles clarifies the relationship between ion concentration and membrane potential in neuronal function.
MichaelXY
Messages
93
Reaction score
0
[SOLVED] Electronegativity Confusion

Homework Statement



Looking at the periodic chart and going down, the electronegativity goes down, ie Na = .9 and K = .8 From the definition electronegativity is the ability to attract electrons. So is that to say the more electronegative would actually be the more positively charged? I ask because I am getting confused with the K pump in a neuron cell. It seems as though the side that has more Na ions is more positive than the membrane side with K ions.
Could someone please help clarify?

Thanks




Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
electronegativity is not about how much positively charged a species is. It has to do with how much shielding there is on the nucleus of the species. Electronegativity is found across covalent bonds. It is the tendency with which an atom attracts a shared pair of electron towards itself.

The greater the number of electronic orbitals and the lesser the proton number, the lesser the electronegativity of the species.
 
So let me ask. If you had a Sodium atom on one side of a membrane, and a potassium on the other side, and were some how able to place a meter across each membrane, which side would read more positive? I am still trying to relate this to the membrane potential of a neuron.

Thanks
 
i've not yet done membrane potential for neurones... but from a physics point of view, and i am assuming you are talking about sodium and potassium ions, both species have the same charge, i.e +1 or both have a proton more than electrons. the sodium ion and the potassium ion have the same charge.
 
Ok, I think I got my answer. On one side of the membrane are K+ ions, the other side is Na+ ions. A potassium channel allows K+ ions to move freely between the membranes, until equillibrium of K+, so one side has more +1 ions than the other side, resulting in a net potential of -70 mv.
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
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