Hello, I wonder why chlorine doesn't have even number oxidation states(such as +4), may you give me an explanation please?(=·ω·=)--AKQ（討論） 2020年2月13日 (四) 09:45 (CST)
Well I'm just a middle school student and know little about chemistry. But I talked about it in the official editor group. It's because that chlorine has 7 outermost electrons and it's impossible for them to have even number bonds.--RedstoneDave 2020年2月13日 (四) 09:52 (CST)
First of all, the statement that "chlorine does not have even oxidation states" is wrong (see ClO2 - or for an even simpler example, see Cl2).
Secondly, it is nevertheless true that chlorine in odd oxidation states tend to be more stable. This is due to two basic facts:
Electrons have the tendency to get into pairs. For a chlorine atom, having an odd number of electrons by itself, an even oxidation state would leave it with one unpaired electron, destabilizing the resulting compound.
Chlorine-chlorine bonds usually tend to break apart easily. This explains why ClO2 molecules tend not to pair their electrons with each other and form Cl2O4 molecules, and why Cl2 is a much more vigorous oxidizer than O2.
What MJH said is mostly true, however, chlorine in ClO2 is stated +3 (This is the result in the editor group, where I asked them about the question), Chemistry experts（） in the group said that ClO2 molucules are like O3 molucules where the two oxygen atoms have different states. --RedstoneDave 2020年2月13日 (四) 10:03 (CST)
I would assume that those so-called "dalaoes" would tell you that O3 has two +1/3 O atoms and one -2/3 O atom. This is downright untrue; all 3 O atoms in an ozone molecule are of oxidation state 0. Refer them to IUPAC definition of oxidation state / oxidation number if they insist otherwise. --Me.Join the talk.History., First Prize (provincial) in CChO 2011, 2020年2月13日 (四) 10:07 (CST)
No, it's not what they said that O3 has two +1/3 oxygen atoms and one -2/3 oxygen atom. They claimed that the bonding condition is similar and I didn't remember that much. BTW, %%%, and u r a true dalao. And one more thing, I think this paragraph should be moved to the talking page of chlorine --RedstoneDave 2020年2月13日 (四) 10:11 (CST)
Since this page is totally in English, I don't think that's appropriate.(--AKQ（討論） 2020年2月13日 (四) 10:14 (CST)
English doesn't matter, and u can translate them into Chinese, and WHY R U USING ENGLISH??? --RedstoneDave 2020年2月13日 (四) 10:14 (CST)
Because everything in the main user page is in English.(--AKQ（討論） 2020年2月13日 (四) 10:21 (CST)
I think that they say the two are "similar" is because the two molecules both form pi-bonds inside, but they don't have a same electron configuration. --AKQ（討論） 2020年2月13日 (四) 10:21 (CST)
Yeah, in that case I would assume the "similarity" merely refers to the existence of delocalized pi bonds. Either way, the IUPAC definition of oxidation number / oxidation state has nothing to do with how atoms in a molecule are actually bonded; instead, a simplified localized model of a molecule, where each bond is always formed by a pair of electrons between two atoms, would be employed when assigning oxidation states. Following this definition, the oxidation state of Cl in ClO2 is indisputably +4. --Me.Join the talk.History. 2020年2月13日 (四) 10:35 (CST)
I got it, so it turns out that chlorine in ClO2 is stated +4 but in a weird way, so it's not a common state. And how can I move the page to the talking page of chlorine? --RedstoneDave 2020年2月13日 (四) 10:43 (CST)
I may help you translate it and move it indirectly.--AKQ（討論） 2020年2月13日 (四) 10:47 (CST)
Well I still have some English homework to deal with, so plz move it to talk:chlorine and leave an original version and a translated version there in order to face possible mistranslation. --RedstoneDave 2020年2月13日 (四) 10:48 (CST)