Get The Full 1 Hour Video: www.patreon.com/MathScienceTutor Direct Link to The Full Video: bit.ly/3vShovS Chemistry PDF Worksheets: www.video-tutor.net/chemistry-basic-introduction.html
You dont even need college. All you neeed is this guys videos and its much better than college lecture slides. Thank you so much. Your videos are so well explained. Awesome
Facts. Literally we are out here paying college tuition to lecturers that just leave us confused, when Organic Chem Tutor deserves all our tuition and explains things under an hour. He is a legend!
Literally my situation , paid so much for the lectures , but all the lecturer does is read , does practices where she skips all the steps , and expects us to just know the content and then throw hw and exams and tests , like wth . This dude is saving my life
Dear chemistry tutor, I am a chemistry laboratory technician trainee from Berlin. I want appreciate your work and the way you chop every topic into digestible and understandable pieces. I wanted to ask you, wether you´d like to do a video conference with my school and explain us hwo we can learn chemistry easily and show us your methods. you are very inspirational. The chemistry department would appreciate it.
I have to say this man ,it's been a hell of a year for me you know first year of chemical engineering...and i got to tell you how much I'm appreciate what you doing I'm really glad that i found your channel ,you've helped me much more than my college did ,you just simplified anything and this made me suffer much less , if i could i would've donate more ,glad you here man :).
The pairing energy contributions to the CFSE are done incorrectly here. The CFSE is the stabilization energy of the d electrons due to the energy splitting of the d orbitals. So, for both the high-spin and low-spin (weak- and strong-field) cases, the comparison should be with a system with zero splitting of the d-orbitals. For a zero-splitting case, there would still be one orbital with two electrons when there is a total of 6 d electrons. Therefore, the CFSE for the d^6 high-spin system does NOT include any pairing energy contribution because that electron pair would still be paired even if the d orbitals weren’t split at all. And the low-spin case would include only 2P, not 3P - again, because one electron pair would still be paired even if the d orbitals weren’t split at all.
Tell me if i'm wrong, but shouldn't the PE in the final exercise be equal to zero. This because you only add P for electrons that pair due to the pairings energy being smaller than going into the eg levels and therefore you add it, otherwise you should have added the +3/5 delta oct. Therefore with high spin, there is never PE involved and for low spin for PE, you only count the pairs that are formed that would not have formed if it had been a low spin complex.
This is exactly what i wanted to point out. As you say, you only count the pairing that ocurrs in comparison with the hypothetical situation of espherical charge surrounding the metal, when all d orbitals are degenerate. That is because the crystal field stabilization energy is the relative stabilization of the complex vs. the ideal situation where no splitting of the orbitals takes place. This means that, for a d6 in an espherical charge distribution situation you already have one electron paired, so the crystal field stabilization energy for a high spin complex doesnt involve electron pairing.
@@gabrielhigginbotham7101 Yeah. In the video, he explains it in a way that the dx2-y2 orbital isn’t directly along the x axis and y axis. Now I’m so confused…
I was confused about this too, he said that x2y2 is not on the axes and that xy is on the axes.. although it seems that he might have mixed them up? I can only find the orientation with x2y2 on the axes
Thank you so much for this! I was struggling to understand this since we just went over an entire chapter in 40 minutes and have a test the day after tomorrow on it. Your way of explaining stuff is amazing. Thank you once again!
I noticed that he handles the axes quite loosely during his drawings of the d orbitals. The xy, xz, and yz orbitals are off axis, while x2-y2 is along the axes as well as z2 being along the z axis.
I thought x^2-y^2 was right on the axes, and the ligands are also right on the x, y, and z axes, which is why x^2-y^2 is unstable (as well as z^2)?? I think you taught the opposite..
So i had this doubt that while calculating CFSE for d⁶ for WFL that last electron that got paired was natural pairing and not forced pairing so we are not suppose to consider that energy same for the last electron of SFL
Thank you so much for this amazing tutorial video!! You’re the greatest professor I’ve ever seen!! I’ll be writing my inorganic exams late next month, and I’m assured of an excellent performance due to your help. May God continue showering his abundant blessings upon you! 🙏
I donno he explains so perfectly Like I blindly just listen to him Thanks to him I completely so many topics for neet May God bless you Thanks a ton 🥺🌼✨
hwo do we know now tho which field applies to the complex we are naming? do we just look which orbital arrangement filled with the electrons is the most stable?
At 20:05, the pairing energy is included in the CFSE calculation, even though there would be an equal pairing energy in the original d energy level (as in, prior to crystal field splitting). Therefore, should the pairing energy really be included in the CFSE calculation?
Basically, transitions between the t2g and eg levels are responsible for the colours the metal complexes show. The energy gap between the levels depends on the metal and the ligands.
Ok like you are Bae! Da fuck I need to pay thousands of dollars in tuition when I could just support people like this who put work into actually teaching the subjects! Like it is mind blowing!
So actually pairing energy was more in case WFL so the electron that was suppose follow Pauli exclusion principle felt that if It get paired it will be unstable (cuz pairing energy was high)so it instead went to eg cuz that required less energy so yeah pauli's principle is kind of violated
@@manishagangwar2035 haha sorry 🤣🤣back then i was preparing for my grade 12 exam .Now i am clueless what i wrote🤣🤣I think i even forgot what pauli exclusion principle states🤣🤣
![ได้เวลา! พาน้องแฝดฉีดวัคซีนครบ 1 เดือน🫣 [cc] แดนแพทตี้ SS2 | EP.52 |](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IzeLtaXBLNE/mqdefault.jpg)
Get The Full 1 Hour Video: www.patreon.com/MathScienceTutor
Direct Link to The Full Video: bit.ly/3vShovS
Chemistry PDF Worksheets: www.video-tutor.net/chemistry-basic-introduction.html
Thank you so much for your content!
Tq
Dislikes from professors who couldn’t explain it this easily.
😂😂
That’s why I’m here
Ekdam Sahi❤️
What? 💀
Low brain
Hellow sir,
Could please explain about tetrahedral and square plannar?
❣️
I hope you realize how much we all appreciate these! Thank you so much 😊
This man is insane. I was just here last week learning about calculus 2 and here I am again learning about crystal field theory
🙌
That man was different. Any other person.
you guys are learning this in college?
Yes
You dont even need college. All you neeed is this guys videos and its much better than college lecture slides. Thank you so much. Your videos are so well explained. Awesome
Facts. Literally we are out here paying college tuition to lecturers that just leave us confused, when Organic Chem Tutor deserves all our tuition and explains things under an hour. He is a legend!
Literally my situation , paid so much for the lectures , but all the lecturer does is read , does practices where she skips all the steps , and expects us to just know the content and then throw hw and exams and tests , like wth . This dude is saving my life
Dear chemistry tutor,
I am a chemistry laboratory technician trainee from Berlin. I want appreciate your work and the way you chop every topic into digestible and understandable pieces. I wanted to ask you, wether you´d like to do a video conference with my school and explain us hwo we can learn chemistry easily and show us your methods. you are very inspirational. The chemistry department would appreciate it.
I have to say this man ,it's been a hell of a year for me you know first year of chemical engineering...and i got to tell you how much I'm appreciate what you doing I'm really glad that i found your channel ,you've helped me much more than my college did ,you just simplified anything and this made me suffer much less , if i could i would've donate more ,glad you here man :).
bruh .. u learning this at chemical engineering ????!!!!!!!!!!!!,... we are having this as our 12th std topic ☠☠
@@Parakeetboy_yt exactly 💀
@@Parakeetboy_ytyou'll get those again in engineering
@@Parakeetboy_yt same. INDIA
@@Parakeetboy_yt9 th class
Just small correction: d(x^2-y^2) is on the X Y axis, and d(XY) is between the axis.
ahh yes i got confused thinking i was wrong thank u!!!
This confused me too! So much easier to remember the squared ones together and was afraid that didn't work
Yes, I checked in the comments section to see if anyone pointed this out...
We really appreciate your efforts ❤️
Your videos are always the first one I click on when I search up a difficult concept such as CFT, thank you man!
The pairing energy contributions to the CFSE are done incorrectly here. The CFSE is the stabilization energy of the d electrons due to the energy splitting of the d orbitals. So, for both the high-spin and low-spin (weak- and strong-field) cases, the comparison should be with a system with zero splitting of the d-orbitals. For a zero-splitting case, there would still be one orbital with two electrons when there is a total of 6 d electrons. Therefore, the CFSE for the d^6 high-spin system does NOT include any pairing energy contribution because that electron pair would still be paired even if the d orbitals weren’t split at all. And the low-spin case would include only 2P, not 3P - again, because one electron pair would still be paired even if the d orbitals weren’t split at all.
Tell me if i'm wrong, but shouldn't the PE in the final exercise be equal to zero. This because you only add P for electrons that pair due to the pairings energy being smaller than going into the eg levels and therefore you add it, otherwise you should have added the +3/5 delta oct. Therefore with high spin, there is never PE involved and for low spin for PE, you only count the pairs that are formed that would not have formed if it had been a low spin complex.
This is exactly what i wanted to point out. As you say, you only count the pairing that ocurrs in comparison with the hypothetical situation of espherical charge surrounding the metal, when all d orbitals are degenerate. That is because the crystal field stabilization energy is the relative stabilization of the complex vs. the ideal situation where no splitting of the orbitals takes place. This means that, for a d6 in an espherical charge distribution situation you already have one electron paired, so the crystal field stabilization energy for a high spin complex doesnt involve electron pairing.
@@sonemaster yes you are right
I THINK IN THESE FOUR MONTHS HE MUST HAVE BEEN BUSY IN HIS MARRIAGE
what do you say
th-cam.com/video/ihoypNO3L3M/w-d-xo.html
he's married?
You don't need a perfect drawing because it's those perfect drawings that sometimes confuse the hell out of me.
I'm writting my exam tomorrow, this video was better then my 3hour×5 lectures.
Yes ! I love this video. Could you do some more inorganic chemistry videos and along with formal mathematics?
th-cam.com/video/ihoypNO3L3M/w-d-xo.html
this man explained what my professor couldnt explain in just 20 min. legend
Thankssss❤❤❤❤
How do you know if it is weak field or strong field?
From the streptochemical series
We have to learn this in high school, this is so frustrating
Great video! Just one question: I thought the dx2-y2 orbitals are parallel to the x and y axis?
i believe parallel to the plane of x and y and within the actual x and y axis
@@gabrielhigginbotham7101 Yeah. In the video, he explains it in a way that the dx2-y2 orbital isn’t directly along the x axis and y axis. Now I’m so confused…
@@crevect4799 but he literally drew them along the x and y axis bruh
I was confused about this too, he said that x2y2 is not on the axes and that xy is on the axes.. although it seems that he might have mixed them up? I can only find the orientation with x2y2 on the axes
This guy is literally saving us from being weeded😭, we survive another year in college, sigh🚶♀️
my prof zoom link he took me over 50 mins to explain the crystal field theory, but I couldn't understand it. But you guy do it. Thank you so much.
I need your help
Thank you so much for this! I was struggling to understand this since we just went over an entire chapter in 40 minutes and have a test the day after tomorrow on it. Your way of explaining stuff is amazing. Thank you once again!
I noticed that he handles the axes quite loosely during his drawings of the d orbitals. The xy, xz, and yz orbitals are off axis, while x2-y2 is along the axes as well as z2 being along the z axis.
I thought x^2-y^2 was right on the axes, and the ligands are also right on the x, y, and z axes, which is why x^2-y^2 is unstable (as well as z^2)?? I think you taught the opposite..
I think he misspoke a bit but still came to the right conclusion
Is this a person or a computer? Whatever it's, it's too good
So i had this doubt that while calculating CFSE for d⁶ for WFL that last electron that got paired was natural pairing and not forced pairing so we are not suppose to consider that energy same for the last electron of SFL
I am just baffled by your level of understanding and explanation. Where do you store all the information??
The plane-orientation of dx2-y2 and dxy is probably mixed up in this video?
dx2-y2 is on the axes and dxy is between is my previous understanding
YOU ARE A KINGGGGGGGGG
But this energy distribution after splitting is only for octahedral config if there's a tetrahedral config then the distribution is totally opposite
Yes guys he didnt die
btw it's Delta sub o not sub 0. The o stands for octahedron
Appreciate your vids
Bro, dxy are not on axis but inbetween and dx2y2 is on the axis .
Professor you have helped me understand Crystal field Theory, well done. I really appreciate your effort
Lopez Susan Thompson William Taylor Brian
No views?
can anyone please tell me which one is more stable, Fe2+ or Fe3+ on the basis of octahedral distortion? please
holy moly dude, where have you been? thankyou so much xx
only 13k views?
Must be really easy ;)
Very nice
you just save my chem exam
This man can teach me something in 20 minutes that took my professor a week.
Please also do molecular orbital for octahedral complexs
kinda sad not the whole thing is there but pog vid thanks bruh
Sir I have doubt in d orbital shape
I am from India and last in last year of my high school I find this video very helpful thankyou.
06273 Deion Stravenue
pov: you're cramming T-T
I was saw last week
09744 Kutch Ridges
4381 Constantin Spur
I finally got it.... thank you! ♥️
hey why are the units of cfse in cm-1
Thank you so much for this amazing tutorial video!! You’re the greatest professor I’ve ever seen!! I’ll be writing my inorganic exams late next month, and I’m assured of an excellent performance due to your help. May God continue showering his abundant blessings upon you! 🙏
313 Javon Fords
Usadzafe uzangosowa
I donno he explains so perfectly
Like I blindly just listen to him
Thanks to him I completely so many topics for neet
May God bless you
Thanks a ton 🥺🌼✨
Welldone unlike man or women that come to university just for their budjet.
hwo do we know now tho which field applies to the complex we are naming? do we just look which orbital arrangement filled with the electrons is the most stable?
Thank you kind sir. My inorganic professor's lecture notes are a fragmented disaster XD
Thanku Happy New Year🤗👍🥳
It was smooth 😎.
If I study chemistry from you I think I will fall in love with it 😂.
At 20:05, the pairing energy is included in the CFSE calculation, even though there would be an equal pairing energy in the original d energy level (as in, prior to crystal field splitting). Therefore, should the pairing energy really be included in the CFSE calculation?
yes
hii
Can you please explain the coordination number 4 complexes also
why does he say zee? and not zed?
hey, it's harry potaaah!
Maybe because he's American
❤
Thank you so much
Thanks, your videos are pretty useful ❤
dx²-y² is directly on xy axis and dxy is in the XY plane but not directly on x and y axes
thank u
Nice
Thank you so much for all these videos. It is providing more help than you think.
I love u
you have a vid for everything man, thank you thank you thank you
Well explained, I am almost 🎓, keep up good work
😊What A clear Explanation!!!!! Loved It ❤
You are a lifesaver!!
th-cam.com/video/ihoypNO3L3M/w-d-xo.html
Good
Thanks
That was great. Thanks
th-cam.com/video/ihoypNO3L3M/w-d-xo.html
Can you please explain walsh diagram
sweet
you helped us alot thank you brother
wait a one hour video?!
o nghakolla blind ko bolelle khutmane. big ups👍👍
i rlly hope ur having an amazing day
yay! please make more inorganic videos
Hello. Can anyone please help. How does CFT account for the colour of transition metals? ?
Basically, transitions between the t2g and eg levels are responsible for the colours the metal complexes show. The energy gap between the levels depends on the metal and the ligands.
Ok like you are Bae! Da fuck I need to pay thousands of dollars in tuition when I could just support people like this who put work into actually teaching the subjects! Like it is mind blowing!
thx for explanation much love!!!
Thank you!
I love you
Best ever,,bro deserve hon.nobe world prize
14:50
wont that violate pauli exclusion principle
So actually pairing energy was more in case WFL so the electron that was suppose follow Pauli exclusion principle felt that if It get paired it will be unstable (cuz pairing energy was high)so it instead went to eg cuz that required less energy so yeah pauli's principle is kind of violated
@@manishagangwar2035 haha sorry 🤣🤣back then i was preparing for my grade 12 exam .Now i am clueless what i wrote🤣🤣I think i even forgot what pauli exclusion principle states🤣🤣
@@heybeast8878 my bad it was not Pauli exclusion principle ig u were talking maybe it was hund's rule I also went with flow nvm wish u luck