Respuesta :
Answer:
a. 5 0 0 +1/2
5 0 0 -1/2
Valid
b. 4 1 -1 +1/2
4 1 0 +1/2
4 1 +1 +1/2
Valid
c. 3 2 -1 +1/2
3 2 0 +1/2
3 2 +1 +1/2
3 2 0 +1/2
3 2 +2 +1/2
Pauli violation
d. 3 1 -1 +1/2
3 1 0 +1/2
3 3 +1 +1/2
other violation
Explanation:
The four quantum number and possible values are:
n = 1,2,3.....
l = 0 , (n-1), (n-2).....
m = +l , 0 , -l
s = [tex]+\frac{1}{2}[/tex] or [tex]-\frac{1}{2}[/tex]
Pauli's exclusion principle: No two electrons in an atom can have all the four quantum numbers same.
Let us check each case:
a. 5 0 0 +1/2
5 0 0 -1/2
Valid
b. 4 1 -1 +1/2
4 1 0 +1/2
4 1 +1 +1/2
Valid
c. 3 2 -1 +1/2
3 2 0 +1/2
3 2 +1 +1/2
3 2 0 +1/2
3 2 +2 +1/2
Pauli violation
The two electrons have same four quantum numbers
3 2 0 +1/2
3 2 0 +1/2
d. 3 1 -1 +1/2
3 1 0 +1/2
3 3 +1 +1/2
other violation
As mentioned above in the condition the value of "l" can be only less than "n"
So for 3 3 +1 +1/2 : n = 3 and l= 3, which is not valid.
The arrangement of electrons in orbitals are showed by four sets of quantum numbers.
According to the Pauli exclusion theory, no two electrons in an atom should have all the four quantum numbers as the same. According to this principle, the spin quantum number of electrons in an atom must differ even if they are in the same orbital.
For the first set;
5 0 0 +1/2
5 0 0 -1/2
This set, correctly corresponds to the 5s orbital so it is valid.
For the second set;
4 1 -1 +1/2
4 1 0 +1/2
4 1 +1 +1/2
This should have corresponding to the 4p orbital so it is valid.
For the third set;
3 2 -1 +1/2
3 2 0 +1/2
3 2 +1 +1/2
3 2 0 +1/2
3 2 +2 +1/2
This set should correspond to a 3d orbital but we can see that are two electrons in the set that has exactly the same quantum numbers of 3 2 0 +1/2. This violates the Pauli exclusion theory so we should mark "Pauli violation".
For the fourth set:
3 1 -1 +1/2
3 1 0 +1/2
3 3 +1 +1/2
This set should have corresponded to a 3p orbital but remember that the values of l only range from 0 to (n - 1). This means that we can not have n =3, l=3 so the arrangement 3 3 +1 +1/2 is not possible. We should mark "other violation".
Learn more: https://brainly.com/question/18835321