Talk:Atomic orbital

Removing content

I've pulled the following content from the article, because I think that at least one of the following conditions applies: (a) It's duplicated at Molecular orbital; (b) It's false. --Smack 03:56, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

In the quantum-chemical treatment of molecules, it is usually necessary to express the solutions as linear combinations of one-electron functions which are centered on the nuclei of the constituent atoms of the molecule. These functions are referred to as atomic orbitals even though they may not actually be solutions of the Schrödinger equation for those atoms taken in isolation. This method is referred to as the linear combination of atomic orbitals molecular orbital method (LCAO MO method).

The orbitals used in the LCAO method are usually either exponentially decreasing from the atomic center (radial component of the form $r=e^{-kx}$, referred to as Slater-type orbitals) or decreasing as a Gaussian function from the atomic center (radial component of the form $r=e^{-kx^{2}}$, referred to as Gaussian orbitals), though other forms have been used.

• • More comment: agreed it doesn't belong in atomic orbitals (a) but it is accurate (not b!). I'm gearing up to revise the various items on orbitals and chemical bonding.... --Ian 10:37, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Anon edit

There was an anonymous edit correction (possibly?). I am no expert in this topic, so please check if the minor edit was factual. -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:28, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Worry not. I have this page watchlisted. That was a genuine mistake on my part. I'm no expert myself, but it'll take a smarter-than-average vandal to get one past me. --Smack 01:45, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Link suggestions

An automated Wikipedia link suggester has some possible wiki link suggestions for the Atomic_orbital article, and they have been placed on this page for your convenience.
Tip: Some people find it helpful if these suggestions are shown on this talk page, rather than on another page. To do this, just add {{User:LinkBot/suggestions/Atomic_orbital}} to this page. — LinkBot 01:04, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

orbitals, shape and energy

I've amplified the introduction to say what an orbital is, and is not, and linked to the electron configuration and periodic table pages. The former page duplicates quite a bit of this one, but why not? Having the same material in several places may not be efficient storage wise, but can help the reader. Similarly, I reckon its helpful to have large topics slpit into smaller pages, so wouldn't want to consolidate everything together. I've also clarified the description of the p and d atomic orbitals, and their relation to the orbital's energy - it isn't the shape that determines it, but the detail of the probability density in the radial direction.--Ian 10:02, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

the giguere periodic table

The giguere periodic table is a very simple table . It classifys its elements according to what orbital the electrons end in. Oh and I do'nt appreciate what you talked about about the p or s block it just not right

There is no orbit

The text and concepts as presented are extremely confusing. I understand that there are historic reasons and conventions, but if something in less fit to function, it should be deprecated.

Atomic Orbit is a concept from classical physics, representing the path of an electron around the nucleus of an atom. It assumes electrons occupy specific, fixed paths at defined energy levels This has been proven to be inexact. There are no orbits, not paths only a field.

The Electron Field, the quantum mechanical concept describing the probability distribution to finding an electron near the nucleus. It accounts for the probabilistic nature of electron positions and the dynamic, wave-like properties of electrons. Why continue to muddle the concept when it serves no purpose and creates a mental model distant our consensual reality...

Unify and correct the nomenclature, making the historic links when necessary. It will be easier to read and understand. 89.114.174.221 (talk) 03:41, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Should include orbital overlaps

Atomic orbitals are mostly used for chemical bonding, and a great part of which is orbital overlap. I believe there should be a section for that which can link to other relevant chemical bonding articles and describe their relation with orbital overlaps in brief. I can do the edit, but since I am still new to wikipedia I thought I should ask opinions. Spaceyy64 (talk) 17:22, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Origin term orbital

It is generally believed–and extensively discussed above–that Mulliken introduced the term "orbital" in the meaning of "orbit-like". The term "orbit" itself goes back to antiquity. If Brae26 believes that "orbital" is used before Mulliken, he/she/they must give a source. P.wormer (talk) 09:08, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Oxford English Dictionary dates the first occurence of "orbital" to 1541, but I don't have access to full entry.[1] Jähmefyysikko (talk) 09:24, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

I've got here the Shorter Oxford Dictionary, 3rd edition (1973). It does not give "orbital", but it has "orbit". It states that it is from the Latin orbita (wheeltrack); first occurrence is stated as 1548. If "orbital" indeed goes back to 1541 as your link states, it had then obviously a different meaning than Mulliken's orbital. It is of some interest who used it first in the quantum mechanical sense. P.wormer (talk) 14:06, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Found an access via Wikipedia Library to some Oxford dictionaries. The 16th-century usage seems to have been related to the meaning of "eye socket". The adjective has been used in physics context before 19th century (e.g. orbital motion). But Mulliken invented the noun, according to a secondary reference which I now added to the article. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 14:41, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Good work! P.wormer (talk) 07:32, 20 October 2024 (UTC)