Valence Bond and Molecular Orbital: Two Powerful Theories that Nicely Complement One Another
-
John Morrison Galbraith [1] ; Sason Shaik [2] ; David Danovich [2] ; Benoît Braïda [3] ; Wei Wu [4] ; Philippe Hiberty [8] ; David L. Cooper [5] ; Peter B. Karadakov [6] ; Thom H. Dunning Jr. [7]
-
[1] Marist College
Marist College
City of Poughkeepsie, Estados Unidos
-
[2] Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Israel
-
[3] Pierre and Marie Curie University
Pierre and Marie Curie University
París, Francia
-
[4] Xiamen University
Xiamen University
China
-
[5] University of Liverpool
University of Liverpool
Reino Unido
-
[6] University of York
University of York
Reino Unido
-
[7] University of Washington
University of Washington
Estados Unidos
-
[8] Universite de Paris-Sud, France
-
- Localización: Journal of chemical education, ISSN 0021-9584, Vol. 98, Nº 12, 2021, págs. 3617-3620
- Idioma: inglés
- Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
-
Resumen
Introductory chemistry textbooks often present valence bond (VB) theory as useful, but incorrect and inferior to molecular orbital (MO) theory, citing the electronic structure of O2 and electron delocalization as evidence. Even texts that initially present the two theories on equal footing use language that biases students toward the MO approach. However, these “failures” of VB are really just misconceptions and/or misapplications of the theory. At their theoretical limits, both VB and MO are equivalent; they simply approach that limit from different sides. Certain concepts may be easier to grasp with one theory or the other so that having a commanding knowledge of both is extremely beneficial. However, presenting one theory as superior to the other suppresses the ability to look at a problem from both sides and is therefore detrimental to students and the whole of chemistry. It is time for VB and MO to be taught on equal footing like the complementary theories they are.
