## Energy levels of orbitals?

Moderators: Chem_Mod, Chem_Admin

905085650
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2018 12:19 am

### Energy levels of orbitals?

I'm confused on the order of energy of the orbitals...

does it go s>p>d>f? or does it go s<p<d<f?

also, can someone explain why the order of the energy levels is like that?

thank you!!

ThomasLai1D
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2018 12:17 am

### Re: Energy levels of orbitals?

The energy level goes s<p<d<f. This is because s-orbitals are closer to the nucleus and therefore experience greater pull from the positive nucleus. Thought about in a different way, f-orbitals need to be of higher energy to remain farther outside the nucleus and resist the inward pull of the nucleus.

404905747
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2018 12:17 am

### Re: Energy levels of orbitals?

I am pretty sure that the energy levels are s<p<d<f. I think this is because there are less n levels and so there are less electrons and energy at lower orbitals.

jocelyntzeng
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2018 12:18 am

### Re: Energy levels of orbitals?

It is s<p<d<f because the different levels correspond with how far the electrons are from the nucleus.

David S
Posts: 54
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2018 12:15 am

### Re: Energy levels of orbitals?

Within the same energy level, the order goes s<p<d< f.

If you want to predict order the orbitals for electron configurations in order of filling (without periodic table), a little trick is to compare the sum of n and l for two different orbitals. The one with a smaller sum goes first. If the sum is the same, then the one with smaller n comes first.

E.g. electron config for Gallium (element 31) is [Ar]4s2-3d10-4p1. Note that n+l = 4+0 for s < n+l = 3+2 for d = n+l = 4+1 for p. Thus, s comes first. 3d and 4p have the same sum, but 3d comes after s because its n is smaller.

Grace Diaz 3F
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2018 12:24 am

### Re: Energy levels of orbitals?

The energy of the orbitals goes according to their distance from the nucleus. So f would have the highest energy level and d,p, and s would follow.

405098546
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2018 12:24 am

### Re: Energy levels of orbitals?

S<P<D<F because the farther the distance of the orbital from the nucleus the higher the energy that is required to keep the orbital from resisting the inward pull. As a result, the farthest orbital requires the greatest amount of energy

404982241
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2018 12:17 am

### Re: Energy levels of orbitals?

The correct order is s<p<d<f. Keep in mind that an electron traveling from d to s releases more energy than an electron traveling from f to p.

404982241
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2018 12:17 am

### Re: Energy levels of orbitals?

The correct order is s<p<d<f. Keep in mind that an electron traveling from d to s releases more energy than an electron traveling from f to p.

Maxwell S 3E
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2018 12:24 am

### Re: Energy levels of orbitals?

F is greatest, S is the least. One way to think about it is swinging a ball around a string. The longer the string is, the harder it is to control, the more wild and easier it is for the ball to fall out of "orbit". As the farther the orbital goes, the more energy is required to keep the electron in the orbit and with the atom. The shorter it gets, the easier it is to hold on to it and requires less energy.

Jackie Ngo 1C
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:06 am

### Re: Energy levels of orbitals?

The order would go s<p<d<f, and that is because s is known to typically be the ground state, and in order for it jump to another orbital, it needs to be excited. Therefore, more energy is put into the system to stabilize it at that higher orbital --> energy level goes up

Return to “Wave Functions and s-, p-, d-, f- Orbitals”

### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests