Show simple item record

Electronic Structure and Stability of Hydrogen Halides and of Complex Ions XO4

dc.contributor.authorFajans, Kasimiren_US
dc.contributor.authorBauer, Normanen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-05-06T22:02:56Z
dc.date.available2010-05-06T22:02:56Z
dc.date.issued1942-07en_US
dc.identifier.citationFajans, Kasimir; Bauer, Norman (1942). "Electronic Structure and Stability of Hydrogen Halides and of Complex Ions XO4." The Journal of Chemical Physics 10(7): 410-415. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/70366>en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/70366
dc.description.abstract(1) It is shown that in the hydrogen halide molecules (internuclear distance r0) the proton penetrates the electronic shell of the anion to a depth which for the simplified case of spherical symmetry can be characterized by the condition: The amount of negative charge beyond the sphere of radius r0 equals −1e. (2) From the dipole moments μ=xer0 of the hydrogen halide molecules it can be concluded: The wave mechanical distribution of the negative charge of the free halide ions is changed by the introduction of the proton in such a way that the center of gravity of an amount of charge equal to —(1−x)e is shifted from the halogen nucleus to the proton. The fraction (1—x) increases with the electronic polarizability of the anion, and would be equal to 1 for an ion of infinitely large polarizability, leading to a completely unpolar type of binding in this case. (3) It is shown that for the complex ions SiO44—, PO43—, SO4=, and ClO4−, the gradation of the X☒O distances and of the molar dispersion can be easily understood from the point of view used in 1924 for the case of the molar refraction: These ions represent the result of the polarization of O= by Si4+, P5+, S6+, and Cl7+, and the X☒O binding in them shows gradual changes toward the unpolar type. (4) It is pointed out that the relatively unstable HI and ClO4− approach the unpolar type of binding more closely than any other of the compounds considered here. The generalization of this connection between instability and the degree of deformation of electronic shells explains why compounds like FO4− and BrO4− are unknown.en_US
dc.format.extent3102 bytes
dc.format.extent432536 bytes
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.publisherThe American Institute of Physicsen_US
dc.rights© The American Institute of Physicsen_US
dc.titleElectronic Structure and Stability of Hydrogen Halides and of Complex Ions XO4en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPhysicsen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelScienceen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Chemistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/70366/2/JCPSA6-10-7-410-1.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1063/1.1723742en_US
dc.identifier.sourceThe Journal of Chemical Physicsen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSee the presentation in K. Fajans, Chemical Forces and Optical Properties of Substances (Cornell Lectures), (McGraw‐Hill Book Company, New York, 1931).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSee the presentation in L. Pauling, Nature of the Chemical Bond, second edition (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1940).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIn respect to HF, its ionic character is estimated in reference 2, p. 49 to be 60 percent. On p. 297, however, the extreme ionic concept of the H‐F bond is supported by the statement that calculations on this basis lead to an excellent agreement with the observed value for the internuclear distance in HF and to a close agreement for the F‐F distance in HF2−.HF2−. See also Fig. 38‐1.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceK. Fajans and G. Joos, Zeits. f. Physik 23, 1, 1924. See also reference 1, pp. 21 and 86, and reference 6b.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSee K. Fajans and W. M. Spurgeon, 103rd meeting of the Am. Chem. Soc., April 1942, Symposium on the Hydrogen Bond, and papers to follow.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencea. F. Haber, Verh. d. D. Phys. Ges. 21, 750 (1919); b. K. Fajans, Zeits. f. Elektrochemie 34, 502 (1928); c. P. Debye, Polar Molecules (The Chemical Catalog Company, 1929), p. 59; d. J. G. Kirkwood, Physik. Zeits. 33, 259 (1932); e. L. Pauling, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 54, 988 (1932); f. Th. Neugebauer, Zeits. f. Physik 102, 305 (1936); g. H. Hellmann and S. J. Pshejetzkij, Acta Physicochemica 7, 621 (1937).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThe values of ρ(r)ρ(r) in the curve for Cl−Cl− are taken from D. R. Hartree and W. R. Hartree, Proc. Roy. Soc. 156, 59 (1936) who used the well‐known method of the self‐consistent field; those for F−F− are based on values of the wave functions which were calculated by D. R. Hartree, Proc. Roy. Soc. 151, 96 (1935) by a similar method. The curve for Cl−Cl− is the more reliable, exchange terms having been included. The values of ρ(r)ρ(r) for Br−Br− and I−I− were calculated on the basis of empirical rules given by J. C. Slater, Phys. Rev. 36 (2), 57 (1930) for the screening constants and effective quantum numbers in his analytical expression for the wave functions. This empirical method is likely to give too small values of ρ(r)ρ(r) at low electron densities, when compared with the Hartree curves. This is the case for Cl−.Cl−.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThe R values for the D line of the aqueous ions (see K. Fajans and R. Lühdemann, Zeits. f. Physik. Chemie B29, 150 (1935)) were used in the figure because they are better known than the theoretically more significant R values for λ  =  ∞λ=∞ of the gaseous ions. a Note added in proof: This agrees as closely as can be expected with the experimental value (between 2.47 and 2.71 debyes) of the dipole moment of HF in dioxane, communicated by M. E. Hobbs, A. J. Weith, and P. M. Gross at the 103rd meeting of the American Chemical Society, April 22, 1942.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAs molar refraction generally goes parallel to size and is sometimes considered as a measure of the “true” volume of a particle, the negative value of ΔRΔR is in full agreement with the conclusion reached under 1 and 2 that the extension of halide ions is diminished by the combination with a proton.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceK. Fajans, Zeits. f. Physik. Chemie B24, 133 (1934).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIt appears surprising that in spite of the great differences in the values (1−x),(1−x), the areas between r0r0 and ∞ under the four curves in Fig. 2 are approximately equal, i.e., exceed the charge −1e−1e by about the same amount for all hydrogen halides. It is difficult to decide how much this is due to the lack of spherical symmetry and how much to uncertainties in the curves in the region of small electron density. (See footnote 7.)en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSee, e.g., E. E. Hanson, Phys. Rev. 48, 476 (1935); D. R. Hartree, Trans. Roy. Soc. A238, 229 (1939).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSee J. E. Mayer and M. M. Maltbie, Zeits. f. Physik 75, 748 (1932); H. Hellmann and M. Mamotenko, Acta Physicochimica 7, 127 (1937); O. K. Rice, Electronic Structure and Chemical Binding (McGraw‐Hill Book Company, 1940), p. 101.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceN. Bauer, Dissertation, University of Michigan, 1941. The results will be published soon; they show that the relative change of dispersion (defined by RD−R∞RD−R∞) caused by a given influence on the electronic system is about twice that for the refraction RD.RD.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceObtained by subtraction of the values for the gaseous cations (see reference 10, p. 118) from those for the crystals (see reference 6b, p. 511).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencea The values of refraction and dispersion are based on measurements of dilute solutions, whereas strictly one should compare gaseous ions. However, a comparison of crystallized salts, e.g., of potassium sulfate and perchlorate (see P. Wulff and D. Schaller, Zeits. f. Krist. A87, 64 (1934)) shows the same gradation. This is understandable because in the case of such large anions with small polarizability, one would not expect strong hydration or lattice effects. The contrary conclusion was reached by Pauling (see Introduction) because the S‐O distance in SO4−SO4− is not the sum of his single bond radii for S and O. As will be explained in a future paper this deviation from additivity is to be expected from the point of view of the polarization theory without the assumption of double bonds.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceK. Fajans, Naturwiss. 11, 165 (1923).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceD. R. Corson, K. R. MacKenzie, and E. Segrè, Phys. Rev. 58, 672 (1940).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceK. Fajans, J. Chem. Phys. 9, 281, 378 (1941).en_US
dc.owningcollnamePhysics, Department of


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.