Browsing by Author "Szentpály, László von"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

Open Access
Theorems and rules connecting bond energy and bond order with electronegativity equalization and hardness maximization
(2020) Szentpály, László von
Bond orders are attributed a new role in rationalizing the electronegativity equalization (ENE) and maximum hardness (MH) rules. The following rules and theorems are formulated for chemical species (atoms, groups, molecules), X, Y, XY, their ionization energies, I, electron affinities, A, electronegativity, χ = ½(I + A), and chemical hardness, η = ½ (I − A). Rule 1 Sanderson’s principle of electronegativity equalization is supported (individual deviations < 10%) by association reactions, X + Y → XY, if the ionic bond dissociation energies are equal, D (XY+) = D (XY−), or, equivalently, if the relative bond orders are equal, BOrel (XY+) = BOrel (XY−). Rule 2 Sanderson’s principle of electronegativity equalization is supported (individual deviations < 10%) by association reactions, X + Y → XY, if the formal bond orders, FBO, of the ions are equal, FBO (XY+) = FBO (XY−). Theorem 1 The electronegativity is not equalized by association reactions, X + Y → XY, if the formal bond orders of the ions differ, FBO (XY+) − FBO (XY−) ≠ 0. Theorem 2 The chemical hardness is increased by nonpolar bond formation, 2X → X2, if (and for atomic X: if and only if) the sum BOrel (X2+) + BOrel (X2−) < 2. Rule 3 The chemical hardness is decreased, thus the “maximum hardness principle” violated by association reactions, X + Y → XY, if (but not only if) BOrel (XY+) + BOrel (XY−) > 2. The theorems are proved, and the rules corroborated with the help of elementary thermochemical cycles according to the first law of thermodynamics. They place new conditions on the “structural principles” ENE and MH. The performances of different electronegativities and hardness scales are compared with respect to ENE and MH. The scales based on valence-state energies perform consistently better than scales based on ground-state energies. The present work provides the explanation for the order of magnitude better performance of valence-state ENE compared to that of the ground-state ENE. We here show by a new approach that the combination of several fuzzy concepts clarifies the situation and helps in defining the range of validity of rules and principles derived from such concepts.
Open Access
Understanding the uniqueness of 2p elements in periodic tables
(2020) Wang, Zhen‐Ling; Hu, Han‐Shi; Szentpály, László von; Stoll, Hermann; Fritzsche, Stephan; Pyykkö, Pekka; Schwarz, W. H. Eugen; Li, Jun
The Periodic Table, and the unique chemical behavior of the first element in a column (group), were discovered simultaneously one and a half centuries ago. Half a century ago, this unique chemistry of the light homologs was correlated to the then available atomic orbital (AO) radii. The radially nodeless 1s, 2p, 3d, 4f valence AOs are particularly compact. The similarity of r(2s)≈r(2p) leads to pronounced sp‐hybrid bonding of the light p‐block elements, whereas the heavier p elements with n≥3 exhibit r(ns) ≪ r(np) of approximately -20 to -30 %. Herein, a comprehensive physical explanation is presented in terms of kinetic radial and angular, as well as potential nuclear‐attraction and electron‐screening effects. For hydrogen‐like atoms and all inner shells of the heavy atoms, r(2s) ≫ r(2p) by +20 to +30 %, whereas r(3s)≳r(3p)≳r(3d), since in Coulomb potentials radial motion is more radial orbital expanding than angular motion. However, the screening of nuclear attraction by inner core shells is more efficient for s than for p valence shells. The uniqueness of the 2p AO is explained by this differential shielding. Thereby, the present work paves the way for future physical explanations of the 3d, 4f, and 5g cases.