-5

Somebody answered it before on physics StackExchange, but I couldn't follow the high-level parlance. All I could follow is that it is related to the p subshell. I cannot understand why elements form bonds when they have pairs of spins(If it matters: I may be wrong, but please apprise me about my misconceptions). An example would be Aluminium, though it's not entirely related. It losses all three of its electrons when it can conveniently lose one and have a pair of opposite spin numbers.

Please answer :-)

user324713
  • 7
  • 1
  • 2
    See the related possibly referred Physics SE – Poutnik Feb 27 '22 at 08:46
  • 2
    Also: https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/9636/do-lithium-and-beryllium-want-to-lose-electrons-to-be-like-helium/9643 – Nilay Ghosh Feb 27 '22 at 08:49
  • @Poutnik I have mentioned that I went through the answer linked by you before! It doesn't make sense to me as I am a high school student. – user324713 Feb 27 '22 at 08:55
  • @NilayGhosh I have gone through it, but it doesn't make sense. I don't need textbook answers. – user324713 Feb 27 '22 at 08:56
  • I don't know why people downvote without reading the question. If it's idiotic or unclear, then tell me! – user324713 Feb 27 '22 at 08:57
  • 2
    @user324713 "See the related possibly referred" means it is implied you are aware of it while readers may be not, so the exclamation mark is out of place. // Rudeness is not an attribute of a great scientist, unless you are the 2nd Fritz Zwicky. – Poutnik Feb 27 '22 at 09:15
  • 1
    If those answers doesn't make sense and you don't need textbook answers, then I am afraid there are no answers for you. – Nilay Ghosh Feb 27 '22 at 09:24
  • @Poutnik I assumed that you didn't read the question. I apologise-- I don't intend to be rude. I misinterpreted the answer. The thing is that somebody answered on Quora that it is about the spin numbers that electrons gain or lose electrons; when I ask about it on Physics/Chemistry StackExchange, many members comment that it isn't clear or there is no answer for it. It is a bit frustrating. Once again, sincere apologies. – user324713 Feb 27 '22 at 09:51
  • @NilayGhosh No problem :). Thank you! – user324713 Feb 27 '22 at 09:52
  • 3
    Pairing of electrons alone does not make atoms chemically inert. – Poutnik Feb 27 '22 at 10:00
  • Because beryllium is present in between the period table rather than at the extreme right of periodic table and it's outermost shell is not completely filled like inert gases – Innocent People Feb 27 '22 at 13:32

1 Answers1

3

I interpret this as a more general question of why alkaline earth elements are electropositive metals and not noble gases.

The answer is basically they do not have enough electrons in their valence shells to be strongly stabilizedcas elements. All the electrons below the outer $s^2$ pair are in shells having fewer nodes in their quantum mechanical wavefunctions, and the presence of fewer nodes makes these inner-electron waves so compact they shield almost all of the nuclear charge from the outer pair. So the outer pair of electrons have low effective nuclear charge attracting them, which translates to their own wavefunctions being relatively diffuse and their ionization energies being relatively low.

Helium and, to a lesser extent, beryllium are exceptions because helium has no such inner-shell electrons and beryllium has only one pair, whereas magnesium and heavier $s^2$ elements have multiple pairs and more nodes in their outer-shell wavefunctions. Hence the failure of helium to readily form compounds and the lesser failure of beryllium to form predominantly ionic ones. By the time we get to magnesium we already have the shielded structure described above well-enough developed to enable the ready formation of predominantly ionic compounds, even with the relatively low-electronegativity elements hydrogen and boron.

Oscar Lanzi
  • 56,895
  • 4
  • 89
  • 175