December 25, 2024, 10:32:53 AM
Forum Rules: Read This Before Posting


Topic: Titanium Violation of Hund's rule  (Read 5256 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline seanifred

  • Regular Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14
  • Mole Snacks: +1/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Physical Chemistry Graduate Student
Titanium Violation of Hund's rule
« on: January 26, 2010, 05:29:17 PM »
Hello.  I have been thinking about this problem for the past few days and have gotten nowhere.  I may just be overlooking something, but I really cannot figure it out.  In my class, we talked about the split 2p level in XPS of Titanium into 2P3/2 and 2P1/2.  We found that the latter has a higher bonding energy, which would imply that it is closer to the ground state, making it more stable than the former.  However, this is in violation of Hund's rule #3 which states that the state with the greater J value is more stable.  Where does the conflict come from?  I am drawing a blank.  Any help is greatly appreciated.
Chemistry B.S. UCD 2009
Physical Chemistry PhD UCD in progress

Offline freezard7734

  • Regular Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13
  • Mole Snacks: +1/-0
Re: Titanium Violation of Hund's rule
« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2010, 11:09:16 PM »
Are you sure about those term symbols for titanium? Ti has 2 unpaired valence electrons, so the multiplicity should be odd (like 3P2 )

Offline seanifred

  • Regular Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14
  • Mole Snacks: +1/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Physical Chemistry Graduate Student
Re: Titanium Violation of Hund's rule
« Reply #2 on: January 27, 2010, 12:27:28 AM »
Yes I Am sure. It is the 2p split. Unless the problem was asked wrong, the states are as first stated. Thanks
Chemistry B.S. UCD 2009
Physical Chemistry PhD UCD in progress

Sponsored Links