continuation.....

We are overjoyed at the response our first page received though it amounted to just one. The fact that the responder was a practical genious in the subject, simply adds to our honour. Due to the given reasons, we have ruled in favour of the opinion that one more page should be given to our beloved octet rule, which has troubled us during the exms for so-so long.

Now, coming back to the topic, we wish to tell you all, that out theory provides an explation besides the octet rule to the chemical reactions, which play such significant roles in our lives. Our explanation rests on the fact that all particles, even atoms like to go to a lower energy state than before. Our explanation suggests that elements do not react because they wish to attain 8 electrons in their outermost shell. In fact, the octet rule is just a means of bonding among elements. And since energy is inversely propotional to bond length, the bonded atoms end up having lesser energy than the free atoms. The transfer and attaining 8 electrons in the outermost shell provides a strong force or bond between the atoms. A very close friend of mine, suggested some examples which further supports out theory. The examples he gave are :

1) In some cases where one of the elements has odd number of electrons, the element does not attain an octet even after bonding. Eg.

a) N2O

N has an odd no. of electron and does not attain an octet in this case while O does

2) H2SO4 –

In H2SO4, the middle atom (S) actually has 12 electrons in its outermost shell. 12 is not a multiple of 8. This also violates, the ‘not more than 8 electrons in outermost shell’ rule too.

3) BS3

This friend of mine, is a genious on the subject, like our responder. We thank him for his useful contribution from the bottom of our hearts.

We hope to get more and more replies to our pages next time. And from our first responder, we would like to ask for more of her valuable suggestions and replies.

Thank you

Flaw in the octet rule

THE FLAW

The octet rule is a very celebrated theory. It states that every element (atoms of them) tries to attain 8 electrons in its outermost shell. This has been observed in nature and dictates the patterns of chemical reactions.

But, forgive us for our ignorance, it has, as far as we know, a fatal flaw. It goes only for the 1st 20 elements. The rest, the transitional elements, do not go by it. Then, isn't the octet rule just as bad as the other failed theories, which failed because they could not encompass everything which concerned them into its domain.
Moreover the transitional elements react too. Its just that they react for a reason other than attaining octets.

Now suppose, we were on the wrong track. Suppose, elemnts reacted for another reason that had eluded us for all this while. What if there was another and more correct reason that encompassed, within its span, every element known to man and those yet to come ?
After all, in Physics, its not just about why's but also about why not's !! Every probability is a possibility unless proved otherwise, like we always say.


THE POSSIBLE CORRECTION FOR IT

Now we have come up with such a probability:
When 2 elements react, they lose energy. For e.g, C + O2 --> CO2 + energy. C and O2 start out with some net energy. BUt when they form CO2, they loose some of that energy.
Therefore CO2 has lesser energy than C + O2.

Now, we all know that every particle likes to exist in as low state of energy as possible. They always try to loose the energy they posses.
So, why not conclude that elements react just to lose those extra pounds ? This could go for all the elements as opposed to the octet rule .

So, how do you explain the octet attaining property found in the first 20 elements ?
Simple, it a means of getting to a lower energy state like ionic, covalent, pi bonding etc.

Why is only found in the first 20 elements only ?
I dont know but we'll try to find out. Also, in the case of noble gases, you know that they are inert. this is because the already have 8 in their outermost shell and the sub-shell rules prevent it from undergoing in chemical reactions.


[ NOTE :
This is just a vague suggestion put forward by us. It is born from our curiosity of knowing and knowing not just why, but also why not.

Please do correct us if we are wrong and we will be very grateful to you.
E-Mail : thinkers.india@gmail.com