Finally! I couldn't figure out triple bonds for the life of me. I refused to believe the other side was for snapping things together, such is the silliness of mah brain.
This was so clear. Thank you for making these videos. I bought the expansion kit during the kickstarter, but it had been sitting on a shelf because I didn't know what to make with them. Now I can get started using them. Perfect!
because triple bond is shorter than double bond .and so does the double bond in comparison to single bond.Its because greater forces exist in multiple bonds than in fewer bonds.
Ozone (O3) is three Oxygen atoms in a triangular shape with one double bond and one singular bond. It can be diagramed like so: O // \ O O I regret to tell you that it would be impossible to model Ozone using the double/triple bonding pieces in the Snatoms kits since the Oxygen pieces only have 2 snapping points; however, a more accurate-to-life model _could_ be created by attaching the two snapping points of the three Oxygen pieces into an equilateral triangle together, but it appears that he made the snapping points 104.5 degrees apart like an actual water molecule, which makes triangle formation impossible. You could also use the Nitrogen pieces to represent Oxygen since they have 3 snapping points, therefore making it possible to use the double/triple bonding pieces, although you would have to use the triple bonding side and they would be offset to one side of the atom piece.
Umm... But wouldn't the stick bonds create a visual misconception with reality. In reality, double bonds and triple bonds aren't more 'sticks' to the whole, as you said, they are a deeper overlapping of orbitals, right? And with the bond sticks, it seems they're farther apart. I'm not saying it's bad, it's a really great effort and I love it and it's probably the only way to visualise double and triple bonds, but that's one thing that should be clarified, right? Then again, I just notice that stick like bonds are better in the sense of isomerism, namely geometrical isomerism, if you just somehow deepened the overlapping to show double bond (it would be hard to recognise first), then it wouldn't take into account the restricted rotation of double and triple bonds. And you also got the free rotation of single bonds into play. And also conformational isomerism. It would be great to study isomerism via this, you know, even the single bonds in cyclic rings (am I right in this one?). And I must say, great job. And it can also be easy to show some of the reactions of hydrocarbons. I had a question, are the atoms' attracting power related to their electron-wanting, like Oxygen would strongly want electrons than say, Carbons? That could be based on the fact of bond energies, like bond energy order is HF > HCl > HBr > HI, but there isn't a general order of this, and it would be hard to notice the difference. A question that I had was that in the CO2 molecule, the bonds of the two Oxygens are perpendicular to each other, can this be an accurate description of the orbitals, as they are at angles to each other (like we say the three p-orbitals, p-x, p-y and p-z), but obviously here we have to talk about hybridised orbitals (sp for Carbon), so how does alignment of orbitals come along with this? Actually I don't get how pi bonds add on to hybridised sigma bonds. Like yeah I see that they form sideways overlapping, but I've never picturised it. Help please. :D
Finally! I couldn't figure out triple bonds for the life of me. I refused to believe the other side was for snapping things together, such is the silliness of mah brain.
This was so clear. Thank you for making these videos. I bought the expansion kit during the kickstarter, but it had been sitting on a shelf because I didn't know what to make with them. Now I can get started using them. Perfect!
These models don't differentiate between Sigma and Pi bonding?
How do you do ozone?
Where can I get those ?
I have a question, why do we need to use the small sides for triple bonds? Can't we just use the large side?
because triple bond is shorter than double bond .and so does the double bond in comparison to single bond.Its because greater forces exist in multiple bonds than in fewer bonds.
Doesn't CO2 look like a chain?
Is this available in the Philippines?
Is it possible to model CO with snatoms?
It has a triple bond with a coordinated bond, so probably not
how does ozon get created ?
can you show us with these ? plz ?
Ozone (O3) is three Oxygen atoms in a triangular shape with one double bond and one singular bond. It can be diagramed like so:
O
// \
O O
I regret to tell you that it would be impossible to model Ozone using the double/triple bonding pieces in the Snatoms kits since the Oxygen pieces only have 2 snapping points; however, a more accurate-to-life model _could_ be created by attaching the two snapping points of the three Oxygen pieces into an equilateral triangle together, but it appears that he made the snapping points 104.5 degrees apart like an actual water molecule, which makes triangle formation impossible. You could also use the Nitrogen pieces to represent Oxygen since they have 3 snapping points, therefore making it possible to use the double/triple bonding pieces, although you would have to use the triple bonding side and they would be offset to one side of the atom piece.
but.. that's impossible. that feels very impossible.
It's very nice explained, but please do not put music on the background anyway, not this one .
Umm... But wouldn't the stick bonds create a visual misconception with reality. In reality, double bonds and triple bonds aren't more 'sticks' to the whole, as you said, they are a deeper overlapping of orbitals, right? And with the bond sticks, it seems they're farther apart. I'm not saying it's bad, it's a really great effort and I love it and it's probably the only way to visualise double and triple bonds, but that's one thing that should be clarified, right?
Then again, I just notice that stick like bonds are better in the sense of isomerism, namely geometrical isomerism, if you just somehow deepened the overlapping to show double bond (it would be hard to recognise first), then it wouldn't take into account the restricted rotation of double and triple bonds. And you also got the free rotation of single bonds into play. And also conformational isomerism. It would be great to study isomerism via this, you know, even the single bonds in cyclic rings (am I right in this one?). And I must say, great job. And it can also be easy to show some of the reactions of hydrocarbons.
I had a question, are the atoms' attracting power related to their electron-wanting, like Oxygen would strongly want electrons than say, Carbons? That could be based on the fact of bond energies, like bond energy order is HF > HCl > HBr > HI, but there isn't a general order of this, and it would be hard to notice the difference.
A question that I had was that in the CO2 molecule, the bonds of the two Oxygens are perpendicular to each other, can this be an accurate description of the orbitals, as they are at angles to each other (like we say the three p-orbitals, p-x, p-y and p-z), but obviously here we have to talk about hybridised orbitals (sp for Carbon), so how does alignment of orbitals come along with this? Actually I don't get how pi bonds add on to hybridised sigma bonds. Like yeah I see that they form sideways overlapping, but I've never picturised it. Help please. :D
very Interesting
Watching my comment after a year 😂😂😂😂😂
I CHALLENGE YOU TO MAKE ANY TYPE OF MOLECULE OF BOTULINUM😆😆😆😆😆
I want metal atoms
Background music is messing with ur voice