5 posts • Page 1 of 1
Since metal oxides ( with metals being from groups one and two) typically produce two moles of OH- for every oxygen atom they have in their chemical formula, would they be typically stronger than metal hydroxides?
Oh this is a really good question! I always thought that it was mostly hydroxides that were strong bases and not anything else, but this is interesting to think about. My only thought is that it might be more difficult for metal oxides to dissociate than metal hydroxides? I'm really not sure though so I'm interested to see what anyone else has to say on this!
I'm not 100 percent, but it makes sense to me that because a compound produces more OH-, it would make a stronger base, similar to how strong acids give off more H+. Though the strength of base could also be dependent on things like solubility in water and the likelihood of a metal oxide to give off multiple OH- molecules.
I believe that the more moles of OH- produced, the stronger a base will be. I remember that being alluded to on the Sapling for this week; when we had to order bases in order of strength, it told me that the more OH- produced, the stronger of a base it is. Therefore, I think you're right in saying that the metal oxides that produce more OH- would be stronger bases than metal hydroxides that only produce 1 mol of OH- per mol of base.
I believe that metal hydroxides are the stronger of the two simply because they are listed in any list of strong bases while metal oxides are never present. The textbook list says to assume that the base is weak if it isn't included on the list so I wouldn't stray from that rule.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest