Formal Charge Compared To Oxidation State
The concept of oxidation states constitutes a competing method to assess the distribution of electrons in molecules. If the formal charges and oxidation states of the atoms in carbon dioxide are compared, the following values are arrived at:
The reason for the difference between these values is that formal charges and oxidation states represent fundamentally different ways of looking at the distribution of electrons amongst the atoms in the molecule. With formal charge, the electrons in each covalent bond are assumed to be split exactly evenly between the two atoms in the bond (hence the dividing by two in the method described above). The formal charge view of the CO2 molecule is essentially shown below:
The covalent (sharing) aspect of the bonding is overemphasized in the use of formal charges, since in reality there is a higher electron density around the oxygen atoms due to their higher electronegativity compared to the carbon atom. This can be most effectively visualized in an electrostatic potential map.
With the oxidation state formalism, the electrons in the bonds are "awarded" to the atom with the greater electronegativity. The oxidation state view of the CO2 molecule is shown below:
Oxidation states overemphasize the ionic nature of the bonding; most chemists agree that the difference in electronegativity between carbon and oxygen is insufficient to regard the bonds as being ionic in nature.
In reality, the distribution of electrons in the molecule lies somewhere between these two extremes. The inadequacy of the simple Lewis structure view of molecules led to the development of the more generally applicable and accurate valence bond theory of Slater, Pauling, et al., and henceforth the molecular orbital theory developed by Mulliken and Hund.
Read more about this topic: Formal Charge
Famous quotes containing the words formal, charge, compared and/or state:
“The conviction that the best way to prepare children for a harsh, rapidly changing world is to introduce formal instruction at an early age is wrong. There is simply no evidence to support it, and considerable evidence against it. Starting children early academically has not worked in the past and is not working now.”
—David Elkind (20th century)
“One can only call that youth healthful which refuses to be reconciled old ways and which, foolishly or shrewdly, combats the old. This is nature’s charge and all progress hinges upon it.”
—Anton Pavlovich Chekhov (1860–1904)
“Love has been not unaptly compared to the small-pox, which most people have sooner or later.”
—Philip Dormer Stanhope, 4th Earl Chesterfield (1694–1773)
“It’s important to remember that feminism is no longer a group of organizations or leaders. It’s the expectations that parents have for their daughters, and their sons, too. It’s the way we talk about and treat one another. It’s who makes the money and who makes the compromises and who makes the dinner. It’s a state of mind. It’s the way we live now.”
—Anna Quindlen (20th century)