Brett Nortj Posted August 3, 2018 Posted August 3, 2018 This I have been staring at for about half an hour now, and, have found that the elecronegativity can be worked out like the weights of elements I depicted at a earlier point. Basically, you take the atomic number, or, number or protons, and, observe that every time the number increases, (-1) [Atomic radius] (+1) [Ionization] (+1) [Electronegativity], coming to +2 per atomic listing. This means that Hydrogen is [3], and Lithium is [5], okay? Then, that number that it comes to is divided by the row it is on, times by half the column it is listed in, okay? ~ This is still a work in progress, so please help me find out the formula?
Bender Posted August 4, 2018 Posted August 4, 2018 What is the point? Fitting a curve through 100+ data points is going to produce a complex formula. Much easier to just look at the PSE.
John Cuthber Posted August 4, 2018 Posted August 4, 2018 Just looking at the coloured picture , gold, manganese and lead are going to mess up any nice smooth curve through the data. So it's not just pointless, but doomed.
studiot Posted August 4, 2018 Posted August 4, 2018 Let's try this nonsense out shall we? Boron, row 2 column 13 (number +2) = 7 [math]\frac{{7*2}}{{6.5}} = 2.2[/math] Carbon row 2 column 14 (number +2) = 8 [math]\frac{{8*2}}{7} = 2.3[/math] Aluminium row 3 column 13 (number +2) = 15 [math]\frac{{15*3}}{{6.5}} = 6.9[/math] Silicon row 3 column 14 (number +2) = 16 [math]\frac{{16*3}}{7} = 6.8[/math] Falls apart pretty quicky don't you think? Wouldn't you be better finding out what electronegativity is? Fo rinstance what are the units of EN?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now