Why electron affinity of noble gas is endothermic?

AI Thread Summary
The electron affinity of neon is endothermic due to its full valence shell, which is stable and cannot accommodate additional electrons without moving to a higher energy orbital. The stability arises from the effective nuclear charge (Z eff) and the shielding effects of core electrons, making it energetically unfavorable to add an electron. When an electron is added, it must occupy a higher energy level with more radial nodes, resulting in increased kinetic energy. The principal quantum number (n) defines the shell structure, where each shell can hold a maximum of 2n² electrons, reinforcing the concept of a full shell. Thus, the underlying mechanics of electron affinity in noble gases reflect the balance between kinetic and potential energy in their electron configurations.
NuclearBoofluff
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
Why is the EA of Neon endothermic even though it has a high Z eff?
Basically, what makes a full valence shell so stable?

The attempt at a solution

I know it has to do with shielding, core e-, and valence e-. But I don't know how to word it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A full valence shell is stable because it is full :-) Namely an additional electron can't be added to the valence shell but has to occupy an orbital of the next shell, which are energetically much higher because they have an additional radial node and therefore a higher kinetic energy.
 
DrDu said:
A full valence shell is stable because it is full :-) Namely an additional electron can't be added to the valence shell but has to occupy an orbital of the next shell, which are energetically much higher because they have an additional radial node and therefore a higher kinetic energy.
But that's just circular reasoning. Of course it's going to increase in energy (I thought it was potential) as it goes up. But what is the underlying mechanics behind these rules? Why is a full shell defined as a full shell; and what makes moving up an orbital/energy level so energy consuming?
 
The orbitals also of complex atoms are similar to the orbitals in the hydrogen atom. There you find that the orbitals have energies proportional to ##-1/n^2##, where n-1 is the number of nodal planes of the orbitals. This is to be expected from the wavefunctions being standing waves. The kinetic energy of standing waves increases the higher the number of nodes. In the Coulombic potential of the nucleus, this effect is partially compensated by the orbitals with more nodes becoming more extended, which however increases their potential energy. Anyhow, the quantum number n is known as the principal quantum number which defines the shell. Now due to the Pauli exclusion principle, each orbital can hold at most 2 electrons (with anti-parallel spin). There are ##n^2## orbitals for each shell n, so each shell can hold at most ##2n^2## electrons. This defines what is meant by a full shell. E.g. in He, n=1 and He has 2 electrons, in Ne, the maximal n=2 and Ne has two full shells, the one with n=1, holding 2 electrons and the one with n=2 holding 8 electrons. Any additional electron would have to go to the next shell, with much higher energy.
 
  • Like
Likes NuclearBoofluff
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top