Question about shells.

From: The Silver Jar... (aristocracism_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 11/23/04 

Date: 23 Nov 2004 13:09:15 -0800

Right i haven't studied any chemistry beyond GCSE (To anyone not in
the UK that's the compulsory basic stuff upto the age of 16). Nothing
more advanced than thinking of shells as one complete entity (not
breaking it down into subshells).

So no college or Uni stuff. So if this question sounds a bit stupid
then that's why.

Now i read some chemistry stuff because i've always taken an interest
in the subject and i find it light reading to relieve the monotony of
history study. Admittedly i don't take it all in because when the
maths gets involved i get very confused, because maths is not my
strong point at all.

Anyhow; Now thinking of shell structure if i take Mercury as the
example here;

Electronic shell configuration of 2:8:18:32:18:2

Now looking at say Cinnabar (HgS), it appears Hg just has to loose the
two electrons from it's outer shell to become stable, 'happy' or
whatever.

Now at school we were always taught that an atom was to have 8
electrons in its outer shell to feel complacent. But Hg would have 18
in its outer shell not 8 if it lost those two on the outer shell.

Now this leads me to conclude (although i'm expecting to be wrong),
that because the d subshell of the 5th shell is full that the atom is
happy.

But the confusion comes in it for me when we say take one of the group
2 metals that have 2 in the outer shell. Now they want to lose these
two. But yet the s subshell of that outer shell is full.

So if an s subshell being full has not convinced the atom that it is
stable why should a full p, d or f subshell?

Or have i interpreted it totally wrong?

Sylvester.

Quantcast