Talk:Isoelectronicity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It seems that on the page http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Isoelectronic exactly the same text exists. How is this possible?

The above question was asked years ago, but I'll respond anyway. thefreedictionary.com mirrors all content of Wikipedia. There was no plagiarism involved; thefreedictionary.com simply copied the article. The GFDL allows, and encourages, such copying. - Pingveno 19:34, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question about a specific pair of molecules (title added)

I have a question: Is SiF4 and SiCl4 isoelectronic species? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 218.186.9.4 (talk • contribs) .

According to the definition given here, they are, because they have the same structure and the same number of valence electrons. I vaguely remember reading something that used a stricter definition which required the whole electron configurations to be the same, but I can't remember what it was. I probably just imagined it. =P —Keenan Pepper 04:48, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

No, you didn't imagine it. Ne, HF, H₂O, NH₃, and CH₄ are all isoelectronic molecules. The definition which uses valence electons instead is a generalization of the former. Page 94 of Chemical Structure and Bonding by R.L. DeKock and H.B. Gray state this. --HappyCamper 00:30, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Now that I read this article, this needs a fixup... --HappyCamper 00:31, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

- No two elements are isoelectronic. They can only be isoelectronic if they have added an electron (negative charge) or lost an electron (positive charge). This is how Argon can be isoelectronic to Sulfur: S + 2 electrons = Ar, S^(-2) = S + 2 electrons; therefore, Ar is isoelectronic to S, if Sulfur has a negative 2 charge.

[edit] Significance?

Why would it be signioficant that two molecules are isoelectric? I was seeing notes in a couple of articles that they are isoelectric to carbon dioxide and my real reaction is: so? RJFJR 14:19, 8 March 2007 (UTC)