Page 1 of 1

Abbreviating e- configurations

Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2017 10:31 pm
by Jessica Wakefield 1H
When writing e- configurations, would you always shorten it with the last element in the previous row and then add on from there?

Re: Abbreviating e- configurations  [ENDORSED]

Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2017 10:36 pm
by Miranda 1J
That's just a way of writing the short-hand e- configuration. If you're asked to write the full electron configuration then you don't shorten it from the last noble gas before it, you do it all starting from the 1s subshell.

Re: Abbreviating e- configurations

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 2:12 pm
by Andrea ORiordan 1L
Another notation style includes listing each sub-orbital (i.e. px, py, pz) with the number of electrons in that orbital (i.e. 2px1). That's also just a convention, and it's fine to just write p instead of separating it into 3 sub-orbitals.

Re: Abbreviating e- configurations

Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:26 pm
by Angel Ni 2K
It depends on what the question is asking for. I would use noble gas configuration when the question asks for it.

Re: Abbreviating e- configurations

Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 1:49 am
by MichelleT_1L
That is a shorthand way of writing the configuration. I believe it depends on what the question is asking for, but in general it is much easier to write the configuration with the noble gas shorthand.

Re: Abbreviating e- configurations

Posted: Fri Oct 27, 2017 10:20 pm
by Rithik Kumar 3E
That would be the short hand e- configuration method in which the noble gas of the previous period is used to limit the longevity of the electron configuration. However, I think the method by which we write the e- configuration will be made specific within the individual questions. I agree with the above statements in regard to the notion that unless stated otherwise, e- configurations should be written in their full form starting from the 1s orbital.

Re: Abbreviating e- configurations

Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 12:46 pm
by Alex Nechaev 1I
Andrea ORiordan 1L wrote:Another notation style includes listing each sub-orbital (i.e. px, py, pz) with the number of electrons in that orbital (i.e. 2px1). That's also just a convention, and it's fine to just write p instead of separating it into 3 sub-orbitals.

It's alright if we don't write the notations with the as px, py, pz right? We won't get marked down? Because I know he does it this way in class most times.

Re: Abbreviating e- configurations

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 4:05 pm
by Andrea ORiordan 1L
No, we won't get marked down to my knowledge. Usually he uses px, py, and pz when explaining specific concepts that require those notations to be understood, such as hybridization.