The energy versus separation for a diatomic molecule in the LCAO approach found that a bonding wave function gave a deep minimum in the potential energy, leading to an equilibrium state. The antibonding wave function has no minimum in the energy-separation curve. Explain - qualitatively - what the charge distribution (or 1912 distribution if you like) looks like for the bonding and anti-bonding configurations, and why the bonding configuration is more stable. That is: where is the electron density, and why is it there?
The energy versus separation for a diatomic molecule in the LCAO approach found that a bonding wave function gave a deep minimum in the potential energy, leading to an equilibrium state. The antibonding wave function has no minimum in the energy-separation curve. Explain - qualitatively - what the charge distribution (or 1912 distribution if you like) looks like for the bonding and anti-bonding configurations, and why the bonding configuration is more stable. That is: where is the electron density, and why is it there?
Related questions
Question
The energy versus separation for a diatomic molecule in the LCAO approach found that a bonding wave function gave a deep minimum in the potential energy, leading to an equilibrium state. The antibonding wave function has no minimum in the energy-separation curve. Explain - qualitatively - what the charge distribution (or 1912 distribution if you like) looks like for the bonding and anti-bonding configurations, and why the bonding configuration is more stable. That is: where is the electron density, and why is it there?
Expert Solution
This question has been solved!
Explore an expertly crafted, step-by-step solution for a thorough understanding of key concepts.
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
