Log out Go to App
Go to App

Learning Materials

Features

Discover

Chapter 24: Problem 6

How does crystal field theory differ from valence bond theory?

Short Answer

Expert verified
Valence Bond Theory believes in overlapping of orbitals and uses the concept of hybridization to explain structure, while Crystal Field Theory considers the interaction between the central metal ion and ligands to be purely ionic and is better at explaining the physical properties of color and magnetic behavior. The main difference lies in how each theory comprehends the ligands and their interaction with the central metal ion.

Step by step solution

01

Understanding Valence Bond Theory (VBT)

Starting with VBT, this theory considers bonds as weakly coupled orbitals (small overlap between orbitals of central metal atom and ligand). This theory explains the directional properties of bonds. The hybridization concept helps explain the geometry of the molecules. However, it fails to explain the color and magnetic properties of complexes.
02

Understanding Crystal Field Theory (CFT)

CFT considers the interaction between the central metal ion and surrounding ligands as purely ionic. Instead of overlapping orbitals, CFT thinks of ligands as point negative charges. CFT can successfully explain the color and magnetic characteristics of the complex, but doesn't offer a reason for the structure or geometry of the complexes.
03

Distinguishing between VBT and CFT

From these descriptions, it is evident that the main difference lies in how each theory conceives ligands and their interaction with the central metal ion. Additionally, while VBT can explain the structures or geometry of complexes using the concept of hybridization, CFT explains their physical properties such as color and magnetic behavior.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Start your free trial

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

What are the limitations of valence bond theory?

Discuss the molecular orbital diagram of a tetrahedral complex with the help of a suitable example.

Discuss the crystal field splitting in a square planar complex.

Discuss the factors affecting the magnitude of crystal field splitting.

Explain the following: (a) \(\left[\mathrm{Fe}\left(\mathrm{H}_{2} \mathrm{O}\right)_{6}\right]^{3+}\) is paramagnetic and coloured. (b) \(\left(\mathrm{Ni}(\mathrm{CN})_{4}\right)^{2-}\) is square planar, but \(\left[\mathrm{Ni}(\mathrm{Cl})_{4}\right]^{2-}\) is tetrahedral. (c) \(\left[\mathrm{Co}\left(\mathrm{NH}_{3}\right)_{6}\right]^{3+}\) is more stable than \(\left[\mathrm{Co}\left(\mathrm{NH}_{3}\right)_{6}\right]^{2+}\), while \(\left[\mathrm{Co}\left(\mathrm{H}_{2} \mathrm{O}\right)_{6}\right]^{2+}\) is more stable than \(\left[\mathrm{Co}\left(\mathrm{H}_{2} \mathrm{O}\right)_{6}\right]^{3+}\) (d) Octahedral complexes are less stable than the square planar complexes. (e) \(\left[\mathrm{Co}(\mathrm{CN})_{6}\right]^{3-}\) is a low-spin complex, but \(\left[\mathrm{CoF}_{6}\right]^{3-}\) is high-spin complex.
See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Chemistry Textbooks

Ionic and Molecular Compounds

Read Explanation

Physical Chemistry

Read Explanation

Chemical Reactions

Read Explanation

Inorganic Chemistry

Read Explanation

The Earths Atmosphere

Read Explanation

Chemistry Branches

Read Explanation
View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free