Concept

Chemical hardness — where it appears

The curvature of an atom's energy against its electron count, half the gap between its ionisation energy and its electron affinity. It measures resistance to gaining or losing charge, and it is the second derivative where electronegativity is the first.

Named by 5 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The capacity, against whether the anion exists. Each atom at its electron affinity and the capacity the cubic model gives it — the largest amount of electron the model says it can accept. A negative affinity is an anion that is not bound, which is the statement that the true capacity at the integer is zero. The three atoms with negative affinities are beryllium, magnesium and nitrogen, and they have the largest capacities in the set: two of them infinite and the third 31.5. The three smallest capacities all belong to atoms whose anions are bound.

A capacity that is largest where there is none

A cubic through four charge states implies a largest amount of electron an atom can accept, and it is natural to ask whether the idea survives its own model. It does not. The three atoms whose anions are not bound — beryllium, magnesium and nitrogen — have the largest capacities in the set, two of them infinite; the three smallest capacities all belong to atoms whose anions are bound. And among the fourteen where the test cannot bite, the ordering is sensible.

wrong · Electronegativity
The capacity against the quantity it was supposed to be. The chemical capacity of 14 atoms against their second ionisation energy, with the capacity on a logarithmic axis because it spans nearly three orders of magnitude. The suspected relation is not there: N and K are 2.02 electronvolts apart in the second ionisation energy and differ by a factor of 193 in capacity, which no function of one variable can produce.

A correlation is not an account

A quantity called the chemical capacity is ordered against the thing it was supposed to predict and correlates instead with the second ionisation energy, which invites asking how much of it that accounts for — on the reasoning that a quantity which is ninety per cent of one input has a simpler name than the one it carries. It is three per cent of it. Nitrogen and potassium sit two electronvolts apart in the second ionisation energy and differ two hundredfold in capacity.

wrong · Electronegativity
Adding one measurement, and six of fifteen change verdict. Each atom's chemical capacity from a cubic fitted through four electron counts and from a quartic fitted through five, on a logarithmic axis, with an unbounded capacity drawn at the right-hand margin. Five atoms go from a finite capacity to an unbounded one and one goes the other way — and the five are exactly the five largest the cubic reported. The seven that stay finite keep their order and change their values.

Six of fifteen change verdict

The chemical capacity is finite or infinite according to the sign of a coefficient that is one sixth of a second difference of three measurements, and the pair test asked how much of its reported ordering is the quantity and how much is the fit's resolution. Adding a fifth point changes the verdict on six of fifteen atoms — and the five it unbounds are the five it had largest.

wrong · Electronegativity
One size scale, computed for every atom at once. Each atom's valence shell at the effective charge Slater's rules give it, with the mean radius of a hydrogenic orbital of that shell and that charge, and its root-mean-square radius. Both are closed forms in the principal and angular quantum numbers and the charge, so both are on one scale for every atom by construction — which is the difficulty a tabulated radius has and this does not. Neither quantity is anywhere in the cubic, which knows three energies and no length.

A size the fit was not made from

Every input tested against the chemical capacity so far has been inside the cubic that produced it, so the search was constrained to fail. A size is not: a hydrogenic orbital at the effective charge Slater's rules give an atom's valence shell has an exact radius, on one scale for every atom, and the cubic knows three energies and no length at all. It fails the test by sixteen times the floor.

wrong · Electronegativity
Straight segments, and the curve fitted through their ends. Cl's energy against the charge it carries. The exact theory says the energy is straight between integers, with a kink at each one: the slope below the neutral atom is the electron affinity and the slope above it is the first ionisation energy, and the two are different numbers. Every quantity in this argument comes from the smooth curve fitted through those points instead — and the curve's second derivative, which is the hardness, is a property the segments do not have at all.

Four quantities go and one question stays

The exact theory says an atom's energy against electron count is straight segments between integers, and that model gets the alkali metals right for free — which is exactly where the fitted curves give lithium a negative electronegativity. What it costs is the hardness, the capacity, the electronegativity and equalisation, and what it leaves is a question whose answer is an integer.

wrong · Electronegativity

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

ElectronegativityElectron affinityIonisation energyModel limitClosed formEmpirical scalePartial chargeUnderdeterminationApproximationCharge transferChemical potentialConvention

All concepts