The F atom is slightly nearer the viewer than the C atom.
Different types of approximate
calculation yield
fundamentally similar shapes, especially with respect to arrangement
of nodes.
For the qualitative purposes of Chem 125 we are interested in the
similarities rather that in the differences of detail.
A dramatic difference is in the sophistication of the graphical
presentation. In some ways the older, simpler presentation may be
clearer, but rotating the new ones on the computer display gives a
quicker feeling for their location relative to the nuclei and their 3D
shape.
in less than 1 minute on a laptop contoured where e-density would be 0.001 e/Å3 |
when it was a real accomplishment using room-filling computers contoured where e-density would be 0.07 e/Å3 |
|
Leftovers; This "LUMO" |
|
|
π HOMOs slightly
|
|
|
|
|
|
2pF σ AO (with some
|
|
|
p MOs bonding between
|
|
|
|
|
|
overlapping favorably with a little of 2pF
|
|
|
distorted by a
|
|
|
|
Organic Chemist's Book of Orbitals Academic Press, 1973 |
It is fun to find the nodes in these MOs, and to rationalize, in retrospect, what went into each of them and why. But it is not so easy to predict their exact shape without a computer, so if this look almost impossibly challenging, don't feel that you're missing something important, humans can't do it reliably in their head.
Fortunately, we don't really care about the shape of most MOs - only the LUMO (and/or HOMO), and even then only when it is unusually low (or high) in energy. These "frontier orbitals" are the only ones whose energy-match with orbitals from other molecules is good enough to make them relevant to reactivity.
High Unoccupied MOs are irrelevant, because electrons will never go there. Low Occupied MOs are nearly irrelevant, because their energy match with UMOs is too poor for them to be involved in reaction - as a set they are just one way to carve up the pie of molecular electron density into cognitively bite-sized portions. There are other ways.
|
|
|