Stanton D. answered • 05/11/20

Tutor to Pique Your Sciences Interest

Hi Prieyankka E.,

Since this is unrelated to your above chemistry problem, guessing you have a comprehensive review test here? If you're really unsure across many areas, I do recommend you find a live tutor, to get comprehension rather than spot help. That being said:

Your atom has been restricted to the 6 energy levels given. So, from n=5 it can ONLY go down as far as n=1. Figure the ΔΕ and then use E = hν .

Ionization energy from n=1 is the opposite of the given E1 level energy. Convert from J to kJ mol^-1 using Avogadro's number.

From n=3 the electron can ONLY go up to n=6 without ionizing. Figure the ΔΕ and then use E = hν .

Just for the record, this is NOT a hydrogenlike (one-electron) atom, for which you probably know the energy equations.

I'm not quite sure about (d): the usual explanation for the 3A's is that the 2p orbital is higher energy than was the 2s orbital was even with 2 electrons in it. And for the 6A's, following Hund's Rule, the electrons prefer to distribute over the suborbitals, so when the 4th one is obliged to pair up, it's sitting at higher energy. That's just the tidiest way of thinking about what electrons do, and there's no particular reason to invoke any other forces or trends. That reasoning is true throughout a lot of science, you'll find!

-- Cheers, -- Mr. d.

Stanton D.

For the ionization energy, yes. Because that value (a negative amount of energy) IS the amount of energy the electron has, referenced to when it is completely free of the nucleus. So you would have to put that value of energy into it (as a positive number) to bring it to "zero energy" == free of the nucleus, but without any additional kinetic energy. So it is a difference of sorts, between bound in state n=1 and a free electron. By the way, electons can be tickled into very large states (high values of n). The resultant excited atom is called a Rydberg atom, and it can be very large because the electron is so far away from the nucleus!05/11/20

PRIEYANKKA E.

I am still confused for ii).Does it mean that we can take E1 and convert directly without finding any difference in energies05/11/20