The first three hydrogen atoms are bonded to the nitrogen atom via a covalent bond. The fourth bond is a dative covalent bond. The nitrogen donates its lone pair of electrons to a hydrogen ion to form a co-ordinate bond. This picture shows the process.
I'm not very good at explaining but hope this helps
The first three hydrogen atoms are bonded to the nitrogen atom via a covalent bond. The fourth bond is a dative covalent bond. The nitrogen donates its lone pair of electrons to a hydrogen ion to form a co-ordinate bond. This picture shows the process.
I'm not very good at explaining but hope this helps
All the bonds are equivalent and it is impossible to determine which is the 'coordinate' bond in your diagram. Electrons don't care where they came from with regards to carrying a label saying i'm an H proton. So yeah, probably ignore this as it wouldn't float in an A-level exam.
All the bonds are equivalent and it is impossible to determine which is the 'coordinate' bond in your diagram. Electrons don't care where they came from with regards to carrying a label saying i'm an H proton. So yeah, probably ignore this as it wouldn't float in an A-level exam.
Are you saying that my explanation is wrong or did you just not like the way I phrased my answer (using the first three bonds etc). I do know that there is no difference between the bonds. They are all just single bonds. I'd actually like to know why it isn't correct. I'm a bit of a chemistry ,umm, enthusiast.
All the bonds are equivalent and it is impossible to determine which is the 'coordinate' bond in your diagram. Electrons don't care where they came from with regards to carrying a label saying i'm an H proton. So yeah, probably ignore this as it wouldn't float in an A-level exam.
I'm sorry, but I am very confused now. Is it correct or incorrect? You say its correct, then you say you should ignore it!!??
I'm sorry, but I am very confused now. Is it correct or incorrect? You say its correct, then you say you should ignore it!!??
He is saying that it is philosophically correct, BUT will not be accepted for an exam answer, as it does not show the lone pair being used from the nitrogen for dative coordinate bonding.
He is saying that it is philosophically correct, BUT will not be accepted for an exam answer, as it does not show the lone pair being used from the nitrogen for dative coordinate bonding.
What I have said is more correct, but you need to bear in mind that has no resemblance to the A-level mark scheme. Basically it's uni stuff so it's ignored for simplicity by A-level.
Are you saying that my explanation is wrong or did you just not like the way I phrased my answer (using the first three bonds etc). I do know that there is no difference between the bonds. They are all just single bonds. I'd actually like to know why it isn't correct. I'm a bit of a chemistry ,umm, enthusiast.
Uhhh, I suppose I am saying it's wrong, but not your fault. It's a fine A-level answer but it's wrong once you learn Uni chem.
What I have said is more correct, but you need to bear in mind that has no resemblance to the A-level mark scheme. Basically it's uni stuff so it's ignored for simplicity by A-level.
Nobody said that it is not correct ...
... but the other could also be said to be correct.
For example, if you consider the ammonium ion as a species then there is no doubting that the four pairs of electrons are identical.
However if you consider the reaction between ammonia and hydrogen ions as a process then the lone pair of electrons is donated by the nitrogen atom.