Is the Conventional Wisdom of Energy and Bond Formation Always Accurate?

In summary, at the high-school level it is commonly stated that it takes energy to break a bond and energy is released to form a bond. However, this is only a generalization for stable bonds and not for molecules that spontaneously break. Bonds involve a lower energy state and energy must be supplied to break them, but some bonds can be easily broken due to a shallow energy depression. It is not possible for a molecule to spontaneously break without input of energy.
  • #1
QuestionMarks
64
0
Just double-checking myself on something:

Typically at the high-school level, we say that it takes energy to break a bond, but energy is released to form a bond. This has always bothered me because even with a naive understanding of enthalpies we can see formations with different signs. To me then, this conventional wisdom is a decent generalization only for stable bonds, but for molecules that spontaneously break, this wisdom is not so sound.

Sound alright?
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
  • #2
By definition, a bond involves a lower energy state the unbound state.
It follows that you need to supply energy to break a bond.

Some bonds are easily broken because the energy required is very low.
For instance, some combinations of atoms are unstable at room temperature because the hea in the room quickly supplies the energy needed to break the bond. It is also possible for a configuration to be finely balanced so the energy vs distance graph has a local minima on top of a global maxima ... thus, a small amount of energy input means that the configuration cannot come back together again.

Can you come up with an example of a molecule that spontaneously breaks without input of energy?
 
  • #3
QuestionMarks said:
Sound alright?

No. Every bond means a depression in the potential energy landscape, to leave the depression you need to deliver the energy to jump from the depression. Unstable bonds have the depression very shallow, and as energy is not distributed uniformly between molecules it often happens that part of the population of molecules have enough energy for the unstable bond to be broken - but it doesn't mean it breaks without energy.
 
  • #4
My problem then seems a poor choice of semantics as I'm willing to imagine a "molecule" effectively held together by some externally applied force (which would spontaneously break upon removal of that external energy)...but we would not call this a molecule.
 
  • #5


I can confirm that it is generally accepted that energy is required to break a bond, while energy is released when a bond is formed. This is due to the concept of bond enthalpy, which measures the amount of energy needed to break a bond. However, it is important to note that this is a simplified explanation and does not account for all types of bonds and their behaviors. In some cases, bonds may form spontaneously, releasing energy, while in others, they may require additional energy to be broken. Therefore, while the conventional wisdom may hold true for stable bonds, it is not a universal rule and should be considered with caution in more complex chemical reactions.
 

FAQ: Is the Conventional Wisdom of Energy and Bond Formation Always Accurate?

What is the concept of "takes energy to break bonds"?

The concept of "takes energy to break bonds" refers to the fact that in order to break chemical bonds between atoms, energy must be supplied. This energy can come in the form of heat, light, or electricity, and is required to overcome the attractive forces between atoms in a molecule.

What types of bonds require energy to break?

Most types of chemical bonds require energy to break, including covalent bonds, ionic bonds, and metallic bonds. The amount of energy required depends on the strength of the bond, with stronger bonds requiring more energy to break.

How is energy used to break bonds?

When energy is supplied to a molecule, it causes the atoms to vibrate and move more rapidly. This increased movement weakens the bonds between the atoms, making them easier to break. The energy is then absorbed by the bonds and used to break them, causing the molecule to dissociate into its individual atoms.

What is the relationship between bond strength and bond energy?

The strength of a bond is directly related to the amount of energy required to break it. Stronger bonds have higher bond energies, meaning they require more energy to break. This relationship is important in understanding the stability and reactivity of different molecules.

Can bonds be broken without using energy?

No, bonds cannot be broken without using energy. However, the amount of energy required can vary depending on the type of bond and the specific molecules involved. In some cases, the required energy can be provided by other chemical reactions or processes, but ultimately, energy must be supplied in order for bonds to be broken.

Back
Top