Chemical Bonding Introduction: Hydrogen Molecule, Covalent Bond & Noble Gases
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 лис 2013
- Chemical bonding introduction video shows how covalent bond means 2 hydrogen atoms can stick together to form a hydrogen molecule, H2. The video also explains why helium cannot form bonds and hence is called a noble gas.
Subscribe to watch more online chemistry courses & science videos:
/ @atomicschool
About Atomic School:
Atomic School supports the teaching of Atomic Theory to primary school & science students .
We provide lesson plans, hands-on classroom resources, demonstration equipment, quizzes and a Teacher's Manual to primary school teachers. Animated videos that clearly explain the scientific ideas supports learning by both teachers and students. As a teacher, you don't have to look anywhere else to implement this program.
Our work has been verified by science education researchers at the University of Southern Queensland, Dr Jenny Donovan and Dr Carole Haeusler, who confirm that primary students are capable of learning much more complex scientific concepts than previously thought, and crucially, that they love it. Students run to class!
The program has been trialed in Australian schools as well as schools in the Philippines, Iran and India. It is conducted as holiday workshops at the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, the Queensland Museum as well as the World Science Festival.
It has attracted wide media interest, including TV, radio and print, and the research data has been presented at prestigious American Education Research Association and Australian Science Education Research Association conferences.
Atomic Theory underlies all the other sciences- genetics, electronics, nanotechnology, engineering and astronomy- so an early understanding will set them up for a more successful learning sequence for all their science subjects, and support their mastery of mathematics as well. We also have extension programs that cover Biology, Physics and Astronomy to an equal depth.
About Ian Stuart (Email: ian.douglas.stuart@gmail.com):
The founder of Atomic School, Ian Stuart, taught Chemistry and Physics for 25 years at senior levels before he realized that his 8-year old son, Tom, could understand Atomic Theory at a much deeper level than he expected. After visiting Tom's class at school, he discovered that his peers could also grasp the abstract scientific concepts, as well as apply it usefully to the real world.
Ian then developed a program to teach the advanced concepts of high school Chemistry, Physics and Biology to students 10 years younger than they normally would. He found that this engaged their interest in modern science early, and sustained it through to high school and beyond. It also sets them up for future success in their academic and career paths.
Ian has a Bachelor's Degree in Chemistry from the University of Queensland and a Master's degree in Electrochemistry from the University of Melbourne.
Connect with Atomic School on social media:
/ atomicschool
/ atomicschools
/ atomicschools
Video transcript:
Let's do a thought experiment. Imagine a box filled with hydrogen atoms. Like billiard balls on a pool table, atoms actually move, and they do it in straight lines until they hit something … like another hydrogen atom. Oh! See that? They stuck together. They’re not separate hydrogen atoms any more, but a pair of hydrogen atoms moving together. There goes another pair. 4.1 When atoms join up like this, scientists call it a molecule. And they call the join between them a chemical bond.
Here comes another hydrogen atom crashing into the hydrogen molecule. But this time it doesn’t stick. Instead it just bounces off. Hydrogen atoms bond once, and that’s it. They’re just like that. Pretty quickly all the hydrogen atoms will collide and pair off into molecules. They will keep hitting each other, but they'll just bounce off.
Scientists like to have a shorthand way of writing this molecule thingi. Here’s one way to show it, with the hydrogen symbols joined by a stick to show the chemical bond between the atoms. Another way is to write H2, with the little 2 after the H and a bit lower. A number written this way is called a subscript. What do you think the 2 stands for? It counts the number of hydrogen atoms in the molecule. Easy, heh! So when we have a balloon filled with hydrogen gas, it really contains trillions of trillions of H2 molecules.
Let's do another thought experiment. We'll go back to our box filled with hydrogen atoms, but this time put an oxygen atom in there too. When a hydrogen atom crashes into an oxygen atom, they stick together. But wait, when another hydrogen atom hits, it also sticks to the oxygen. What about a third hydrogen atom? No, that’s if for oxygen. It can only make 2 bonds and then it’s done.
How many people from all in one science
I have scourged the internet and this is by far the simplest and most effective way of teaching this concept. Everywhere else I looked was very vague about how bonds were formed. One question though. If electrons are attracted to protons, why don't they just stick to them?
this is the best and simplest way to understand molecules I have ever seen! thank you sooo much!
If I had been taught this way, I would be working in the field !
Lovely video! Very simple and to the basics. Great for students who are having issues understanding the fundamentals.
excellent way of teaching understanding . Please share more.
Thanks ......an amazing video ....i searched all internet but i understood urs only .....thank u very much
Nice. Impressive presentation.
Thanks for the video this video helped me
awesome videos!
the first thing you should ALWAYS cover is stability, stability is the reason why you won't have H4 molecules forming, or why H3+ is very unstable at room temperature, you should always mentions that molecules form because you can have more stable arrangements , and to prove this you should introduce the concept of energy, and how energy is gained or lost in these kinds of processes...
wonderfully explained the structure of atom-----present generation of students is lucky to have all knowledge at their desks.Great
wow thanks it really helped
A good example of Frank Zappa's "circular motion". Great explanation , seriously.
thank you so much...was very useful
hey enna eppayum chemistry ya preethi
your videos are excellent !!! thank you so much for making them :)
this is good explanation!
Hi, great video, but If Helium is a noble gas on its own, then how does helium 3 form as I thought that was stable too?
Nice video! Is there any explanation why a Helium shell is full so it can not accept other electrons, and Hydrogen shell is not full?
The first shell can hold two electrons. Hydrogen only 'wants' one because it has only one proton. But Helium has two protons, so it wants two electrons to balance the charge.
I love this topic and appreciate the graphics. However we too often make confident statements based on a theoretical understanding, which is limited by our perception (language and beliefs). This means if I think an electron (-ve ball?!?) is in an orbit then all kinds of false assumptions can follow.
What are other explanations for how a nucleus can capture an electron and also share an electron with another atom? When I think of an object in orbit, even if the mass is low, how can it so easily change to orbit another nucleus and remain stable? What if electrons are not in orbit? What if it is something else?
Covalent bond- up to how many would actually bond?does the nuclear strong force cause it to collapse?
Great simple basic explanation.
thnx it was nice
awesome
great explanations. thank you.
Thank you.......i fine it very easy to understand.....U ARE THE BEST TEACHER
What I would like for someone to address is whether or not it takes some energy to bring the two atoms together.
Like, if we put two monatomic hydrogen atoms a meter apart in a perfect vacuum, and moved them very slowly towards each other - would they then jump together like two magnets and make H2? Or does it take some initial energy to pass some sort of "barrier"? (I am aware that when they actually join it *releases* energy)
VERY NICEVIDEO
this helped me a lot, thank you
But how could BOTH electrons spend most of their time between the two nucleii? Wouldn't they REPEL each other (they are 'like' charges).
Thank you.
+Ian Stuart
Good explanation in this comment!
i think that the answer is about the Pauli exclusion principle and the symmetry conditions for fermions in quantum mechanics
vroom!
vroom!
Electrons dont circle the proton they are a field in themselves around the proton.
+Red .Rotten yes but you shouldn't need to explain quantum science to teach beginner chemistry so that's why this simplified model is used
There's something to be said for being careful about the wording, though. Like I had a problem with the video saying that the electron moves in a circle around the nucleus incredibly quickly ... that's not true. You can say that the electron can be found in the circle around the nucleus and that satisfies the popular perception without being inaccurate from the quantum mechanical perspective. You can even mention in passing that the electron isn't whizzing around in a big circle, but you'll nevertheless find it ambling about in that circular area.
Consider that the electron in a hydrogen atom has no angular momentum. So how can it move in a circle around the nucleus?
The answer is that it doesn't move in a circle around the nucleus; what it does is zip in and out towards and away from the nucleus in random directions, but you're almost always going to find it somewhere in that circle around the nucleus, or very near the circle anyway. Not that it's necessary to go into any of that for the purposes of this video, the point is that, if it's possible to avoid saying something that's untrue, one should make an effort. About the time chemistry students start learning about orbitals in more detail, they'll be grateful to not have been led astray as to how S-orbital electrons can have zero angular momentum while moving in a circular path.
Did I miss something? How do I know if an electron shell is full?
zeroizeable Ahh, the next video explains the electron shell.
covalent bond between two hydrogen molecules-if one of the atoms were missing its electron, would they share the remaining electron between the two atoms or just push each other away?
good
Wondrful explainatin and very good effort on the graphics. I just have want to say that it is the orbitals that are full and can not be shared any more. It would be great to show what is Shell, Subshell and Orbital and Spin. Thank you again and such video are woderfull to have on youtube.
How can it be like a marble if it's a sphere?
+Charmaine Czora a marble is a sphere lol
pencils are made of graphite now!
That model here is outdated electrons don't travel in circles rather in an electron cloud or a cloud containing the possibility of the electrons. Take a look at Erwin Schrodingers model of the atom also known as the modern model.
It would be nice to involve spin of electrons too. Bonding between electrons with different spin is (energetically) preferred in nature.
If you see this - send it immidiatly to your teacher or just give him a short link on paper next time!
THIS IS HOW YOU TEACH! PERFECT! THANKS!
@Ian Would you mind, if I translate it to german, sub and dub it and use the Video with credits to you and your channel ?
Would be amazing! :)
Hi Ian, basically I already translated it and subbed it 3 Months ago, but I would like to have your permission to put it on my channel in german (with your credits) Would be great, please tell me if I could do so. Thanks and have a great day ;)
I'm interested in this becuase I found out that the first planes use to run on hydrogen but nowdays it uses helium.
you're thinking of blimps :) yup they use helium now because it is not explosive
N Marbletoe Interesting. These people were brave to fly on those things. I wouldn't even get on todays normal airlines
Explain what we are seeing at 0:03 to 0:22. It doesn't look like the conventional depiction of an atom.
Yes. So this would be wave function as some describe?
I mean 6.4
i understand you're trying to simplify this for kids, but it's just not working ...there are far too many bad analogies here that simply won't help because they will instill some false concepts into kids, who then will grow up realising this was all fake , and they won't really learn anything, there are easier ways to picture this
You are treating the matter based on an obsolete theory which is the Bohr model of the atom!!!
I was thinking that myself. Isn't the electron a cloud of probability?
This isn't even accurate to schroedinger's model
wish my teacher could explain it this simply.
Suggesting that hydrogen is the oldest atom is based on pure speculation and zero scientific basis. The size of it is not related to how long hydrogen has been around. Apart from that the video is well made.
***** I know that orthodox scientists have agreed upon this. My point is this: the Big Bang Hypothesis is rather speculative in nature. One problem I find with it is the singularity, which implies that the pressure at the beginning was infinite but quantum fluctuations lead to the explosion. Infinite pressure (immeasurable) can not be overcome by a measurable amount of quantum energy changes, suggested by those who invented the hypothesis.
Also, there is strong evidence suggesting that the universe was not build up from small to large (mass) as it is also suggested by modern cosmologists.
***** Well, based on the Big Bang hypothesis the lighter elements formed first and eventually more (heavier) elements formed. The redshift recently has been shown to not be a reliable measure of distances. Newly discovered objects directly contradict the assumption that is implied by the redshift.
I believe that the universe did not start from a big bang explosion, in fact I don't think the universe has a beginning as most believe.
Hawkins believes that the universe had zero size and infinite hotness. This is a complete contradiction because temperature is defined as particles in motion, and the higher the energy the higher their kinetic energy. IF you don't have volume, which is defined mathematically as zero, there is not motion of particles, thus no infinite or any for that matter hotness.
***** The evidence points otherwise. I have talked to a few astrophysicists and no one was able to counteract my arguments. Also, when I include mathematical proofs that their ideas are wrong I virtually get no replies.
Facts, in my opinion, support my side rather than theirs...
***** Correct, a few astrophysicists' opinion I not enough. My point here is this: there is a large (and I can't stress that enough) number of contradictions in the BB theory, or rather hypothesis. Those contradictions are mathematical and also based on reasoning. One thing to remember is that the fact that the majority of astrophysicists have agreed upon the correctness of the BB model does not in any way validate it.
There is also this fear of breaking away from the established dogma, which endangers one's reputation and career.
*****
Let me try to illustrate my point using a few citations.
Here is what Hawking said: "At the Big Bang itself, the universe is thought to have had zero size, and to have been infinitely hot."
Here is what Lawrence Kraus said: "But I would argue that nothing is a physical quantity. It's the absence of something."
Hawking said this: "The work that Roger Penrose and I did between 1965 and 1970 showed that, according to general relativity, there must be a singularity of infinite density, within the black hole."
Their erroneous thinking can be revealed through the following formula: density of singularity = (mass of black holes)/(volume of singularity) = mass/0 = infinity
Dividing by zero is prohibited by mathematical rules. Division by zero is an operation for which you can not find an answer. Yet, for Hawking and his followers this is not the case. Not only do they divide by zero, but also invent the idea of singularity.
Krauss said this: "There was nothing there. There was absolutely no space, no time, no matter, no radiation." BUT Hawking says: "energy cannot come from nothing"
Contradiction in reasoning becomes apparent.
MATERIAL CONTRADICTION:
Einstein field equation G(uv) + /\g (uv) = - kT(uv)
T(uv)=0 and /\=0, R(uv) = 0, Ricci tensor=0
energy momentum tensor = 0
This is Schwarzschild solution
The universe contains something and nothing simultaneously based on this equation. This is complete nonsense.
Also, as I mentioned as defined by Boltzmann, heat (infinite heat which was assumed in the BB hypothesis) are molecules (gas molecules in Boltzmann's definition) that move rapidly. In an infinite small space, space without volume, you do not have a physical space to allow any motion of molecules in order to expect infinite or any for that matter heat.
When you have infinite pressure, quantum fluctuations (changes in energy), can not overcome the pressure to cause the BB explosion, as it is suggested by BB proponents.
It is not easy to describe the problems in this format but I hope you understand the general idea I have.
co-vale-int
I like ur videos but just please stop the music