Warning: Illegal string offset 'html' in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php on line 909

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php:909) in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/admin/sources/classes/output/formats/html/htmlOutput.php on line 114

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php:909) in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/admin/sources/classes/output/formats/html/htmlOutput.php on line 127

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php:909) in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/admin/sources/classes/output/formats/html/htmlOutput.php on line 136

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php:909) in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/admin/sources/classes/output/formats/html/htmlOutput.php on line 137

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php:909) in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/admin/sources/classes/output/formats/html/htmlOutput.php on line 141
Ionisation Enthalpy - HSN forum

Jump to content


Ionisation Enthalpy


6 replies to this topic

#1 Hev

    Site Swot

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 112 posts
  • Location:Peterhead, Scotland
  • Gender:Female

Posted 16 March 2006 - 09:59 PM

Explain why the second ionisation enthalpy values for sodium and magnesium are different

Explain why the first ionisation enthalpy values for sodium and rubidium are different

can anyone explain this to me please?
IPB Image
This year's Fenella Feline (CAT) in Peterhead's Pantomine Pinocchio!

#2 bred

    Brendan

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,215 posts
  • Location:Edinburgh
  • Interests:I have just graduated with a 2:1 in Geography [MA (Hons)] from The University of Edinburgh. I like sports: swimming, cycling, snowboarding, running, football, mountain biking and also travelling and photography.
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 March 2006 - 10:12 PM

It doesn't take much energy to remove one electron from a sodium atom to form an Na+ ion with a filled-shell electron configuration. Once this is done, however, it takes almost 10 times as much energy to break into this filled-shell configuration to remove a second electron. Because it takes more energy to remove the second electron than is given off in any chemical reaction, sodium can react with other elements to form compounds that contain Na+ ions but not Na2+ or Na3+ ions.

A similar pattern is observed when the ionization energies of magnesium are analyzed. The first ionization energy of magnesium is larger than sodium because magnesium has one more proton in its nucleus to hold on to the electrons in the 3s orbital.

Mg: [Ne] 3s2

The second ionization energy of Mg is larger than the first because it always takes more energy to remove an electron from a positively charged ion than from a neutral atom. The third ionization energy of magnesium is enormous, however, because the Mg2+ ion has a filled-shell electron configuration.


(edited)
Please vote for me! (Brendan Howard, 5th from bottom, only 1 vote required): http://answers.polld...m/poll/2330393/

#3 Hev

    Site Swot

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 112 posts
  • Location:Peterhead, Scotland
  • Gender:Female

Posted 16 March 2006 - 10:28 PM

thanks, but the rubidium one doesnt work out because sodium has a higher first ionisation energy than rubidium :S
IPB Image
This year's Fenella Feline (CAT) in Peterhead's Pantomine Pinocchio!

#4 bred

    Brendan

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,215 posts
  • Location:Edinburgh
  • Interests:I have just graduated with a 2:1 in Geography [MA (Hons)] from The University of Edinburgh. I like sports: swimming, cycling, snowboarding, running, football, mountain biking and also travelling and photography.
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 March 2006 - 10:39 PM

I'm sure this is all fresh in someone's head...
Please vote for me! (Brendan Howard, 5th from bottom, only 1 vote required): http://answers.polld...m/poll/2330393/

#5 Hev

    Site Swot

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 112 posts
  • Location:Peterhead, Scotland
  • Gender:Female

Posted 16 March 2006 - 10:41 PM

would it be that because rubidum has more electron shells there is less of a pull on its outer electron than in sodium?
IPB Image
This year's Fenella Feline (CAT) in Peterhead's Pantomine Pinocchio!

#6 Nathan

    Fully Fledged Genius

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,736 posts
  • Location:Aberdeen, Scotland
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 March 2006 - 08:12 AM

QUOTE(Hev @ Mar 16 2006, 10:41 PM) View Post

would it be that because rubidum has more electron shells there is less of a pull on its outer electron than in sodium?


yeah, i think that's right

bit too early in the morning to be thinking chemistry though!

#7 mystic

    Top of the Class

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 324 posts
  • Location:isle of lewis
  • Interests:BMXing, anything to get me into trouble, having fun, riding the horses, being the person your parents don't want you to be friends with! my msn address is bleeding_the_vampire@hotmail.co.uk
  • Gender:Female

Posted 18 April 2006 - 11:40 AM

yes. thats the excuse.
gizmo
x
if your thoughts are no good, its only because you don't express then clearly!
gizmo
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y175/milk...icture_0038.jpg





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users