Why is cyanide writted as CN- when the negative charge is on carbon?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Cyanide is represented as CN- due to conventions in chemical notation, where the negative charge is not localized on a single atom but is distributed across the molecule. The notation reflects the overall charge of the ion, which is -1, resulting from an extra electron in the triple bond between carbon and nitrogen. This convention aligns with the general rule of placing positive ions on the left and negative ions on the right in chemical formulas. Understanding these conventions is crucial for interpreting molecular formulas correctly in chemistry.

PREREQUISITES
  • Basic understanding of chemical notation and molecular formulas
  • Familiarity with Lewis structures and electron cloud models
  • Knowledge of polyatomic ions and their charge distribution
  • Awareness of conventions in ionic compound representation
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the conventions of chemical notation in ionic compounds
  • Study the distribution of charge in polyatomic ions
  • Learn about Lewis structures and their limitations in representing molecular geometry
  • Explore the historical context of chemical notation conventions
USEFUL FOR

Chemistry students, educators, and anyone interested in understanding chemical notation and molecular charge distribution.

gangsterlover
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
The Title pretty much sums it up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyanide

Why is it written like that when it is clear that the carbon must be the one with the negative charge?
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
Convenience. It's actually [CN]-
 
Charge on polyatomic molecules is almost never localized on a single atom, it is typically spread over part of the molecule. Doesn't mean there are equal parts of the charge on all atoms either, CN- has a "more negative end".
 
I guess this then implies to OH- as well. But how should interpret a molecular formula like that when reading it somewhere. As an overall negative molecule, or "cause I know" interpret it as a negative charge on carbon. The same goes with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxide I guess then. But this is so frustrating to me now because if the negative charge is not on Oxygen why do they not just simply write it like that. The same goes with the cyanide example why do they have to write it like that when they could just have written it C-N
 
It is not an obvious thing to someone just starting with chemistry that charge is not a point like thing, but a cloud spread around some volume, with different densities in different places. We start with simplified models (think Lewis structures) which require electrons to be point like, electron cloud is introduced much later.
 
The minus in the exponent is shorhand for -1, which is the net charge of the ion (due to the extra electron to the normal shell configuration 'melted' into the triple bond b/w C and N). It's an exponent and nothing more. I believe that the convention to write CN- and not NC- is due to another convention: namely that if you can decompose a molecule into ionic parts, the positive ion is written on the LHS, the negative on the right. That's why you don't write (OH)2 Ca but the reverse. And of course to this convention of positioning the ions as a whole you add the convention to place the element which needs electrons to obtain the octet to the left and the 'neutral' elements to the right of the ion. So it's Ca (OH)2 and not Ca (HO)2. This of course, if you picture chemistry in terms of GN Lewis's model of 1916.

Elementary (i.e. non-quantum) chemistry contains conventions which may not seem obvious.
 
Last edited:
Oh well, I guess I`ll just deal with it, I mean I can still handle myself around it and I can still do some of the tasks and questions in the book. I understand what they mean, and I don`t really want to go to deep into this. Thanks though anyway people :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
12K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
12K
  • · Replies 76 ·
3
Replies
76
Views
13K