I'm reading about the covalent bond in the H2+ ion. From what I see it's essentially an electron in the middle sandwiched between a proton on either
side and the whole assemblage is held together by electrical forces. But here's what I don't get, if I were to place a proton on either side of an
electron, so that the electron were in the exact middle and then release them, the electron would feel no net force because any attraction to one
proton would be canceled out by and equal an opposite attraction to the other proton. The protons, however, would be attracted to the electron and
this attractive force is always greater than the repulsive force between the protons because any one proton is always closer to the electron than the
other proton, protons have a charge that is equal in magnitude to that of an electron and both protons would be the same distance from the electron
because they started out that way and are being pulled in at equal rates, yet my book states that the bond length of the H2+ ion is 0.751 Angstroms.
What keeps the bond from collapsing in on itself and the particles from smushing?
[Edited on 9-12-2010 by SamF]
[Edited on 9-12-2010 by SamF]
[Edited on 9-12-2010 by SamF]watson.fawkes - 8-12-2010 at 19:29
I'm reading about the covalent bond in the H2+ ion. From what I see it's essentially an electron in the middle sandwiched between a proton on either
side and the whole assemblage is held together by electrical forces. [...] What keeps the bond from collapsing in on itself and the particles from
smushing?
In very short, the electrostatic repulsion between the two H+ nuclei (protons).SamF - 8-12-2010 at 20:07
Yes, but it seems to me that the electron, being closer to either proton than the opposite proton, overpowers the repulsive force.watson.fawkes - 8-12-2010 at 20:23
Yes, but it seems to me that the electron, being closer to either proton than the opposite proton, overpowers the repulsive force.
At these scales, thinking of the electron being in one single location is at odds with quantum mechanics.
The electron state is spread out over and around both nuclei.SamF - 8-12-2010 at 21:36
Then I'll just shelf this and revisit it when I learn physical chemistry.woelen - 9-12-2010 at 00:12
Moved last post to babbling thread in Detritus
[Edited on 9-12-10 by woelen]Ephoton - 9-12-2010 at 01:25
fair enough religion and chemistry can not coinside
The inability of electrons of identical spin to occupy the same state is what limits how many electrons can occupy a given energy level inside an
atom. This in turns leads to how atoms behave and how they form molecules; i.e. the chemistry of matter. This exclusion principle has to be taken into
account when you talk about string particles coming together.
still its been a long time since I did string and quantum.
I have a lot of study to do if I am to do the math.
but you do have me very interested.
[Edited on 9-12-2010 by Ephoton]turd - 9-12-2010 at 01:56
Sorry Ephoton, your last post is just as unrelated to the question as the previous one. Hydrogen bonding and the classic H-H bond are completely different things.
Actually there is no need to go into quantum chemistry at all to refute the premise of the original question: Proton repulses proton, proton attracts
electron and electron has kinetic energy. Why should something "collapse"?Ephoton - 9-12-2010 at 02:10
ye your right turd sorry that is about other atoms and hydrogen
my bad.
I found it looking for string and chaos and though it interesting.
didont read it properly truly sorry.
but I still think the answer is in string not quantum as there are two electrons.
particle in a box only works for a single hydrogen atom from my memory.
ah but
"What keeps the bond from collapsing in on itself and the particles from smushing?"
can be a very indepth question that I belive we still can not answer properly.
we still have not seen an electron and when it comes to dimensional theory
it is all in the air as there truly is no proof and realy its all belifes.
to answer the question properly I think would take me a
lot of study.
then I think the answer would change in 10 too 20 years
anyway.
I think its a lot more complex than just bond energies
