Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Response to Geoffrey Neuss on how to teach the 4s and 3d orbital conundrum

  • Published:
Foundations of Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the accompanying article in this issue Neuss challenges the explanation that was first suggested by Schwarz for how to teach the relative occupation and ionization of atomic orbitals in the atoms of metals in the first transition series. The present article is a response to Neuss’ critique which includes a detailed examination of his claim that there is no conclusive evidence for the view that the scandium and other first transition metal atoms lose 4s electrons in preference to those located in 3d orbitals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. I only know of very few exceptions. They include the textbooks by Oxtoby et al. (2007) as well as by Atkins and Jones (2013).

  2. The only way to resolve this question conclusively would be to calculate the energies of the three candidate configurations that Neuss and I discuss. This would necessitate enumerating each of the Coulombic and exchange terms in the Sc atom and would represent a formidable calculation that none of the theoreticians that I consulted on this question were willing to undertake. I would like to think the following for suggestions on this response, Mike Melrose (London), Eugen Schwarz (Siegen), Chas McCaw (Winchester) and Michael Everest (Westmont College, Santa Barbara).

References

  • Atkins, P.W.A., Jones, L., Laverman, L.: Chemical Principles, The Quest for Knowledge, 6th edn., p. 43. Freeman and Company, New York (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  • Oxtoby, D.W., Gillis, H.P., Campion, A.: Principles of Modern Chemistry. Cengage Learning, Boston (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  • Pilar, F.L.: 4s is Always above 3d! J. Chem. Educ. 55, 2–6 (1978)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scerri, E.R.: The trouble with the aufbau principle. Educ. Chem. 50(6), 24–26 (2013). (See this article on the Education in Chemistry website: http://rsc.li/EiC0613aufbau)

  • Schwarz, W.H.E.: The full story of the electron configurations of the transition elements. J. Chem. Educ. 87(4), 617–622 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA

    Eric Scerri

Authors
  1. Eric Scerri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric Scerri.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Scerri, E. Response to Geoffrey Neuss on how to teach the 4s and 3d orbital conundrum. Found Chem 23, 247–251 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10698-021-09395-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10698-021-09395-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation