|WikiProject Chemicals||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
|This article contains a translation of Poloniumwasserstoff from de.wikipedia. (496558629 et seq.)|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Polonium hydride article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Hydrogen polonide is referred to as "hydropolonic acid" in some other Wikipedia articles. On the other hand, hydrogen astatide is described to have properties rather like a metal hydride, because astatine is slightly more electropositive than hydrogen and highly polarizable, possibly resulting in the dissociation of HAt in H- and At+. Of course this is only an estimation, but if this is true for HAt, the same thing must also be true for H2Po, since polonium has an even lower electronegativity than astatine and a comparable polarizability... --18.104.22.168 (talk) 17:38, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
- This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. Rask at the Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. Plasmic Physics (talk) 20:56, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
- What is it for then? Polonium hydride is a compound probably nobody has ever seen. Most of its properties are only estimated, either from observation of tiny amounts of H2Po, or from extrapolations. So questions of this kind are the only ones you can ask here (except indicating dangling links etc). I wanted to indicate some inconsistency between Wikipedia articles which deal with hydrogen polonide or closely related compounds... --22.214.171.124 (talk) 14:41, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
- I tend to agree with the IP here, having a rather more liberal view on what you can have on talk pages (anything related primarily to the article), and I believe this counts.
- I removed the unsourced statement here that PoH2 was acidic. It's probably wrong anyway. Double sharp (talk) 15:19, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
Name of the Article: Hydrogen polonide or Polonium hydride?
Personaly I think that the article name and all places which "Polonium hyride" is/are mentioned should be changed to Hydrogen polonide. I have decided this because other articles on hydrides of Group 16 elements (excluding oxygen) start with the Group 16 element's name; eg. Hydrogen Sulfide, Hydrogen selenide, Hydrogen telluride. I conclude that this article should then be name Hydrogen Polonide insted of Polonium hydride because it would look more neat as opposed to Polonium hydride. Hyperclassic (talk) 02:15, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
- Po is less electronegative than H, so "polonium hydride" makes more sense. Additionally, it seems to be the more common name. Double sharp (talk) 06:27, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Other possible polonium hydrides
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1503/1503.08587.pdf Double sharp (talk) 15:48, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
The infobox image File:Polonium-hydride-2D-dimensions.svg, gives geometric measurements of rH–Po=171 pm and θ=88°. There is no article content about the geometry, nor any cite in the infobox, nor any cite on the file description page, nor any cite or commentary in the ru:Гидрид полония(II) article for which the image was originally/apparently created. The only ref I can find so far is:
- Sumathi, K.; Balasubramanian, K. (1990). "Electronic states and potential energy surfaces of H2Te, H2Po, and their positive ions". Journal of Chemical Physics. 92 (11): 6604–6619.
which calculates r=1.835 Å and θ=90.9°. Does anyone know any more-recent data? I'm going to remove the infobox image as "disputed", and already tagged the image itself on commons and left a question about its origin on its creator's talkpage (though that editor has been inactive for over a year). DMacks (talk) 21:33, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
- I don't see why it should be less than 90°. This far down the periodic table, I would expect the bond angle to be essentially 90° (corresponding to theoretical pure 6p-orbital involvement from Po), but it should not be any smaller. In fact, the relativistic stabilisation of the 6s lone pair (bringing it closer to the nucleus) should make it even a little larger than the 90° of H2Te. I have not found any more recent sources on H2Po, but this simple analysis convinces me that the image cannot be right. Double sharp (talk) 01:58, 26 September 2016 (UTC)