Electronegativity and bonding | Chemical bonds | Chemistry | Khan Academy

[@vh6772]

That moment when you pay a college 20k+ to teach this stuff to you and you still end up on KZbin looking for answers.

[@blissfulfragrance2511]

Victoria Harned yup this sucks😭😭 I basically just sit and surf through youtube to make some sense of what my teacher babbled about in class that day. The education system truly sucks dude

[@wvadam]

My Prof. has a PhD. That is all that matters to the college

[@gissellplasencia3690]

lmfao

[@Luka1180]

@@wvadam They should have a test for all potential teachers that determine whether they are engaging, cooperative, and good at describing before they hire them. Also whether they are able to remain neutral and humanistic when it comes to questions of politics, race, sex, gender, culture, ethnitcity etc. They must be compassionate, sometimes resolute, but most of all able to describe things and if someone doesn't get it, help them to get it. It isn't enough to just show all the calculations and throw around jargon. Explain what the jargon means in relation to the calculations and what it means irl too. Some teachers just ramble and spout out pre-fab like sayings.

[@jesiahjakob2180]

I guess I'm kinda off topic but do anyone know a good place to watch new movies online ?

[@andrewturner2002]

i needed you more now than ever sal. thank you.

[@blairhqy]

so helpful!

[@hey-go4dg]

Amazing explanation!!!!!

[@rohitkings8263]

vey gud explanation

[@nathanpenick959]

asl?

[@Luka1180]

@@nathanpenick959 1 tree klingon

[@marutigarikiparthi1632]

*good

[@persona7506]

very noice

[@skinblanketed]

The electronegativity number being shown where the atomic weight normally is threw me for a loop. I thought, all this time, I'd misunderstood atomic weight to be about mass when it's really about the "weight" of the electrical charge. They're totally different numbers describing totally different things. Viewers beware.

[@YusufSiddiqi]

why "Okshan" i first thought its a new element.

[@blissfulfragrance2511]

Khwaja Yusuf lmao

[@meatpie29]

He does indeed says okshan several times in a row.

[@ht-mq9sx]

So anyone know the exact spots where a polar covalent bond turns into a non polar, as in that what values after you subtract do you classify the different bonds in

[@vijaysinghchauhan7079]

rwidder such a good question u asked acc. to me ''its kinda complicated to say''... Those aren't my words, I heard this from our chemistry's teacher from KA.

[@Sidharthanj]

excellent

[@chissstardestroyer]

I guess what I'm asking about is why is this scale right, or why would we even trust it to begin with, especially as with chemistry we've got to be so sure of being accurate that not even the merest possibility of getting it wrong could possibly exist, anywhere.

[@tejara01]

this is all good and well but how could you use this method to tell if a molecule containing 3 elements is polar or non polar?

[@mariabeatricepasion6480]

THANK YOU!

[@chissstardestroyer]

About Carbon's bond with Lithium: since when is the atomic science at the will or whim of the human observer at all to begin with; since when do we as humans command atoms and make them and their electrons obey us?! Never! we are rightly bereft of any and all say over atomic science, all we can hope to do is to observe what they do and report it in any given situation... or try to deduce, given the sizes and movement rates of the observation targets as well as the difficulty in finding them to observe them to begin with.

[@sarahivargasgarcia5714]

how do you know the values of each element?

[@nirmawashingpowder7993]

Sarahi Vargas Garcia its given in the table

[@Luka1180]

@@nirmawashingpowder7993 but based on what? I don't really understand Pauling's calculations well... or what they're based on. I've heard people say it's based on something referred to as atomic radius and the atomic number??? But also energy, number of electrons, number of electrons in the outer shell. It's all confusing to me.

[@Rick_Stilgard]

@@Luka1180 ​ From my very limited understanding, it's to do with all of the things you mentioned, but it's probably not as confusing as you think, most of them are linked. Think of atoms as a balance between positive (protons in the nucleus) and negative (electrons) charges. Having a more positive charge will result in the atom being able to attract other electrons more easily, just like a strong magnet can attach to a fridge more easily than a weak one. So really grabbing an electron is a battle of magnetic attraction between the atoms. The strongest ones tend to have less electron shells, meaning there is less distance between the nucleus and that electron it wants to grab (this is the same idea as the atomic radius, just meaning the size of the atom including its shells). However, it's not just the distance between them, it's what separates them too. Those electron shells in-between the two, push the electron away from the nucleus (negative charges repel each other), meaning the less shells the better, as the nucleus doesn't need to be too strong in order to overpower their repulsive force with its attractive one (shells increase by 1 with every row of the periodic table you go down). Also, as you'd expect, increasing the number of protons (number of protons is the atomic number) results in a more positive charge and therefore a greater attraction. So the most attractive atoms (most electronegative, or ready to grab other electrons) are those which have less shells (remember number of shells goes up as you go down the periodic table) and those which have the most protons. Hydrogen (top left of PT) has the least number of shells, but it also only has 1 proton. Similarly, ununoctium (Uuo, bottom right of PT) has the most protons, at 118, but also has the most electron shells. This leaves us with those elements in the middle ground, those at the top right of the PT, with a good balance of number of shells vs. number of protons making F the most electronegative element (just pretend the noble gases don't exist here, He, Ne, Ar, Kr etc. they are a different conversation).

[@mr.quirkless3064]

is it just me or is he saying Auction and not oxygen?

[@khanalimohammadkhan2170]

I was just gonna comment that

[@sircartier2903]

you're not alone

[@persona7506]

can't unhear now

[@doctor9278]

How to find electronegativity of ch3?....why it more electronegative than carbon but less electronegative than carbon with double bond? Plz 😭clear my doubt🙏

[@sk83below]

thank you wow

[@vsalukir7019]

I don't quite understand how Nitrogen can have an electronegativity of 3 and an electroaffinity of zero.

[@Luka1180]

The electronegativity refers to the fact that it needs 3 electrons in the valence shell to fulfil the octet rule (I.E. be stable, like noble gasses). Electron affinity is something completely different. It is defined as the energy change that occurs when an electron is added to a gaseous atom or ion. The thing with nitrogen is that it doesn't require a lot of energy at all to add or take electrons from it. In truth, though, this number is only approximately zero, I.E. very very very close to zero. But not quite zero. The reason WHY it has this zero electron affinity is that nitrogen has a half-filled 2p subshell, which makes its electronic configuration quite stable already.

[@vsalukir7019]

@@Luka1180 This is an electronegativity table. As you can see, the numbers do not indicate the number of electrons needed to fill the valence shell. www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fsciencenotes.org%2Felectronegativity-definition-and-trend%2F&psig=AOvVaw2ZSDDpmzNjK8EpMvqc2qf1&ust=1590614254087000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCIj50v-50ukCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAD

[@aakmo18]

how can i get this periodic table???

[@chissstardestroyer]

What I mean, I guess, is how do they determine how much is a polar vs a nonpolar covalent bond; and why that size difference for making the difference, pray tell?

[@rhubarbcheese]

Why do you draw two red dots instead of one, when the carbon only steals one electron?

[@chissstardestroyer]

Why would they consider a difference of 2/5 to be a nonpolar bond, pray tell? That's still pretty significant of a difference overall.

[@chissstardestroyer]

How did he figure out the absolute values of the electronegativity of these atoms? How do we even know he's right, the fellow who made this table edition I mean?

[@natashasmith4050]

Have any of you used Numerade to help with chem homework??

[@josiemoreau7049]

whoever is watching this to study for a chem test, good luck

[@likeydolly]

According to my periodic table C has an electronegativity of 2.55. How did 2.55 became 2.5? I am confused pls explain.

[@itsbunessa]

In the video he explained that he is using the "Pauling" scale of electronegativity and that there are various other scales. Electronegativity cannot be perfectly measured and thus it is not the same across different scales. It is also possible that your textbook dropped a number off the end to make it simpler for students since the basic idea is still the same. Don't worry about it.

[@likeydolly]

Vanessa Vestal wow :D such detailed explanation! Thanks!

[@itsbunessa]

No problem. :)

[@FDunne]

Yeah my tables say carbon is 2.55 under the Pauling scale

[@fozhlccrn1999]

My lecturer told me that C-H bond is polar so is my lecturer correct or khan? :( omg im confuse can anyone help mee

[@pulkitchauhan9669]

i think u meant non polar

[@amanusmani1105]

fozhlccrn1999 they said that the electronegativity difference is very less, so that's why some claim that it is polar and some say that it's non polar. But I think that it would be non-polar covalent bond, because their range of electronegativity difference is from 0-0.4(approx)

[@blissfulfragrance2511]

fozhlccrn1999 in case you're still confused, technically if you *strictly* stick to the values then yes it is polar but in practical sense the difference is so small it can be ignored and thus the bond can be considered non polar. Hope that helps 👍

[@vijaysinghchauhan7079]

What's his name???

[@leonrraci9028]

Sal Khan I think

[@sakshiupadhyay7633]

I came here directed by chemistry stack exchange

[@zakirhossain9554]

why CO2 is non polar

[@anuragelectronics6521]

CO2 is non polar because of it's linear structure Polarity of C-O bond is in opposite direction thus it vanishes Hence CO2 is non polar

[@marutigarikiparthi1632]

Y'all fucking rock 🙏

[@batspeling7909]

According to my periodic table C has a electronegativity of 2.6??

[@Hazeyiv]

+bat speling Nah man thats a error in your book its definitely 2.5

[@Luka1180]

Error in your book.

[@justindessilas7708]

speaking way too fast my guy

[@blissfulfragrance2511]

...Learning through khan academy seems very impersonal and distant, you know what I mean? I appreciate *all* the wonderful things they're doing for us. But they never reply to the genuine doubts people have.. I know they must get hundreds of comments a day but still.. @.@

[@rebeccahu7297]

go to khanacademy.com and post questions in the videos there, they get answered much more frequently and you can read questions other people had that might be similar to yours

[@fahimahmed6330]

@@rebeccahu7297 yeah facts that's what I did when I had questions to study for the physics regents they helped me with everything and I got a 98 in the regents

[@Preet_1223]

Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior ✝️❤️

[@09ak31]

shits made a million times more interesting smh

[@dfgfhggfrhhgazthgqrhg]

so nice