Talk:Diagonal relationship

Elements Low‑importance

	Chemistry portal This article is supported by WikiProject Elements, which gives a central approach to the chemical elements and their isotopes on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing this article, or visit the project page for more details.ElementsWikipedia:WikiProject ElementsTemplate:WikiProject Elementschemical elements articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Chemistry Mid‑importance

	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.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

And Mg and Sc, as well... Double sharp (talk) 03:14, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What "etc."

How far does this "etc." go? Surely not as far as N and S! Double sharp (talk) 13:17, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, apparently, yes, as far as N and S according to Greenwood and Earnshaw: see Nitrogen#Atomic, where I added something about this particular diagonal relationship back in November 2016 (although it wasn't yet in as much detail). But I haven't seen anything for the O-Cl pair, and especially not the massively unlikely F-Ar pair. ^_^ Double sharp (talk) 13:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Charge density (?)

We can read :"For example, Li+ is a small cation with a +1 charge and Mg2+ is somewhat larger with a +2 charge, so the charge density on each ion is roughly the same. Using the Li–Mg pair (under room temperature and pressure):"

This sentence uses apparently a very obscure idea of the term "charge density" at least it seems to be in grodd contradiction to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge_density , since the latter type of (electronic) charge density is for sure completely different for Li^+ with its [He] configuration and Mg^(2+) with its [Ne] configuration. The term requires specification. An alternative is to use "ionic potential" or "ratio of ionic charge to ionic radius".

--141.201.140.218 (talk) 12:35, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]