Sunday, May 28, 2017

theoretical chemistry - Hybridization in PH3


Does $\ce{PH3}$ exhibit $\ce{sp^3}$ hybridization?


Arguments against hybridization:




  1. $\ce{PH3}$ is less basic than $\ce{NH3}$.





  2. This jibes with the supposition that $\ce{PH3}$ keeps its lone pair in what is essentially an unhybridized $\ce{s}$-orbital.




  3. $\ce{s}$-orbitals are symmetrical and therefore do not concentrate electron density anywhere.




  4. This lack of concentrated electron density as opposed to $\ce{NH3}$ which is $\ce{sp^3}$ hybridized makes $\ce{PH3}$ a poorer base.





However, my professor writes in his book that it can be argued that $\ce{PH3}$ exhibits $\ce{sp^3}$ hybridization.


Another professor told me that the wave function "blows up" when putting an electron pair in an s-orbital. What does that mean?



Answer



Pre: My views may be clashing with some people. I express them as far as I know.




To start with, hybridization is a hypothetical concept$^{*1}$ just to explain all facts and make our work easier, otherwise we would have to take into account every single interaction of electron-proton and also other phenomenons; many theories developed which explained all the major/important facts at a macro-level. And what I have been saying to take into account was all micro-level analysis. Attributing hybridization is purely personal choice because neither does it account all facts (for some molecules) nor it can be dropped altogether (for its $\cdots$), if then we would look for another theory$^{*2}$ to explain observed phenomenon. Parallels similarity between this and the situation of Ideal-Gas equation, in general no perfect theory has been developed, but the most easy, practical and useful are the hybridization$^{*3}$ and van-der-Waals equation.


As we move downwards in the periodic table the hybridization concept fails at many places due to overpowering of other factors. I wonder you didn't mentioned the bond angle$^{*4}$ ($93.5^\circ$) for a $\ce{sp^3}$ hybridized (ideally $109.5^\circ$).


In general atom/molecule doesn't seek to follow a theory, it does what it is best comfortable with, it is us, who mould the theory to the observations.


As a general rule, for sake of convenience, assume all molecules show hybridisation and the tendency to hybridise decreases down the group.


In conclusion, I would say it depends on the need of the situation and such dubious statements such as "Does $\ce{PH3}$ exhibit $\ce{sp^3}$ hybridization?" should be replaced with "Does hybridization explain all (actually not all) properties of $\ce{PH3}$"



Also there are weights in $\ce{sp^\alpha}$ where $\alpha$ ranges from 1 to 3(even upto 4$^{*5}$ and maybe beyond) and is in between these for $\ce{PH3}$ and some may continue to treat it has a hybridised molecule with suitable weights.




$^{*1}$(as far as I know)
$^{*2}$(probably the MOT)
$^{*3}$(many may argue for other theories which is genuine, but in context this follows)
$^{*4}$(One may argue as we move down the group electronegativity decreases and atomic size increases. In case of $\ce{NH3}$ due to higher bond pair bond pair repulsion (since electronegativity of $\ce{N}$ atom is very high hence it attracts bonded electrons of $\ce{N-H}$ bond towards itself) bond pair moves away from each other and hence shows greater bond angle. This may be considered one of the major factors for less hybridization.)
$^{*5}$[$\ce{O}$ in $\ce{H2O}$ which means that they have 20% s character and 80% p character, but does not imply that they are formed from one s and four p orbitals]


No comments:

Post a Comment

periodic trends - Comparing radii in lithium, beryllium, magnesium, aluminium and sodium ions

Apparently the of last four, $\ce{Mg^2+}$ is closest in radius to $\ce{Li+}$. Is this true, and if so, why would a whole larger shell ($\ce{...