1

I believe similar questions have been asked but this is different and the answers I have looked at don't answer this question. I have read that oxidation states of heavier transition elements (Ru, Os etc) are more stable than first row transition metals.

I understand how they can get to the oxidation state (which is the usual answer to this question) but im asking why they are more stable then the oxidation state is reached. And although an element like Os is bigger meaning the ionisation energy should be small for the first few electrons doesn't the lanthanide contraction mean the valence electrons have a stronger effective nuclear attraction.

By more stable I mean why is RuO4 explosive but OsO4 on the other hand is stable and FeO4 doesn't exist.

bobsburger
  • 748
  • 5
  • 15
  • 1
    And see the attached links therein. – Nilay Ghosh Sep 03 '20 at 03:37
  • 1
    Basically saying " they can get to the oxidation state (which......" is basically the answer. There is one answer whatever worded, as there is one question. – Alchimista Sep 03 '20 at 05:22
  • 1
    @Alchimista but doesn't the lanthanoid contraction lead to a stronger effective nuclear attraction between outer electrons and the nucleus. So it shouldn't be that easy to ionise an element like Os. Or is the contraction not big enough to increase the ionisation energy by that much? – bobsburger Sep 03 '20 at 16:29
  • @NilayGhosh to sum up the answer it seems to say the weak effective nuclear attraction causes ionisation energies to be lower and let the heavy metal to get to the higher oxidation state. but for Os doesn't the lanthanoid contraction lead to a stronger effective nuclear attraction between outer electrons and the nucleus? – bobsburger Sep 03 '20 at 16:31
  • @muhammadhaider at the moment I have no idea about particular elements. I commented on your passage. How they can get to an higher ox state and stay in that high ox state is the same question/answer. – Alchimista Sep 03 '20 at 16:57

0 Answers0