Talk:Electron counting

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Chemistry (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Octet rule and electron counting[edit]

This page is getting a bit messy, the 8VE rule is the octet rule and already discussed in that article, should not be restated, the Wade's rules should be in the Polyhedral skeletal electron pair theory see the borane page. Would these points be sensible modifications? V8rik 21:16, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I would say that if we are going to have different pages for each of the different electron counting rules then we should have one page which is about electron counting rules to act as an index for the different rules.

At my last count there are three main rules, these are things which have changed the way we think about chemistry.Cadmium 21:30, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

the 18 electron rule can be moved to a separate page and electron counting reserved for general introduction. However, the octet rule should stay as it is because it is elementary chemistry and the others are advanced topics. Fullerenes have their own counting rules and aluminium speudohalogens too V8rik 23:26, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

I do agree that octet-rule should have it's own page (but it should clearly define it's boundaries). Furthermore, electron-counting is dendrimental to 2, 8, 18 ánd 32 electron rules. The implications of nót obeying the 18 electron rule are getting some roots in complex (chemistry) now, but should this have an own place (since similar implications go for atoms not obeying the octet rule (for boron compounds, e.g.)). --Dirk Beetstra 22:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


Ionic vs. Neutral counting[edit]

I see only the neutral counting is explained, should 'ionic counting' (correct name?) also be included? --Dirk Beetstra 22:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Ionic and Neutral counting has been worked out. Dirk Beetstra 07:05, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Apparently we need to define stability[edit]

TiCl4 is a fully stable compound, full stop. Yes like many other compounds, it reacts with water. Also the implication that octet molecules are more stable is dubious, although such comments are comforting to beginning students who want to also believe that the 18e rule prevails more than it does. Similarly, we dont say that CH4 reacts violently with O2? Or is SF6, a serious violator of the octet rule, is unstable. But the cmpd is incredibly stable. We need to be careful to explain stability. . Ferrocene is unstable in air (heat of combustion is quite favorable). --Smokefoot 13:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree, I did not look at it in this way. I will be more careful with these statements. --Dirk Beetstra 14:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Neutral Counting and Fragments[edit]

I made a few changes, One was the changing of Period 3 to Period 4. Looking at a periodic table you can see the atoms listed are from Period 4 not 3. I also added Sc to the list because skipping this element could confuse elementary chemistry students who are not intimately familiar with the periodic table. Also, I added the H+ fragment to the list of fragments, because it is mentioned in the examples but is not listed in the table. For an elementary chemistry student who is going by the table. When they see H donating two electrons they may not realize that it is for a special case of H (the Hydride ion). This would then result in some confusion for them if they are trying to learn ionic counting.--PedroDaGr8 20:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Some references suggested by Gerard Parkin[edit]

Prof. Ged Parkin sent me an email with some references which, he thinks, could be used to upgrade this article. Please have a look:

  • J. Chem. Educ., 2006, Vol 83, p 791
  • A chapter in 'Classification of Organometallic Compounds', 1.01, 2007
  • Polyhedron 2004, 23, 2879-2900. doi:10.1016/j.poly.2004.08.004

(He is co-author in all three of them, it seems best that I suggest them here). --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:24, 1 February 2008 (UTC)