The contrast between Pauling electronegativity and Mulliken electronegativity becomes clearer by following the measurements into the formulas. A Pauling bond-energy excess compares three compatible bond-dissociation energies; Mulliken electronegativity takes the arithmetic mean of an ionization energy and an electron affinity. The former asks how much stronger an unlike-atom chemical bond is than a stipulated baseline; the latter combines two different isolated-species energy gaps.
Actual readouts precede those model choices. In the nitrogen dissociation threshold from fragment images, fitted squared image radii versus assigned excitation energies reveal a threshold after accounting for the product quantum states. In the chlorine photodetachment threshold experiment, mass-selected anions overlap a tunable laser, and neutral-atom counts reveal the onset of Electron detachment. Opposite laser directions control the Doppler shift. That second threshold supplies an electron affinity, not an electronegativity; the Mulliken scale still needs an independent ionization energy.[ref][ref]
For an original arithmetic comparison, stipulate isolated-species and positive attachment-release for fictitious species . Their Mulliken electronegativities are . The largest ionization energy belongs to , while the largest Mulliken electronegativity belongs to : accepting an Electron matters as well as retaining one. Using signed attachment energies in gives exactly the same results.
Figure 1.
Stipulated inputs to Mulliken electronegativity and arithmetic-baseline Pauling electronegativity: different energies, units and orderings
. Details.
Independently stipulate and for , with unlike-atom values
Thus , and the Pauling scale differences from are . If all three fictitious species are placed above on that scale, their ordering is , whereas the stipulated Mulliken scale gives . The bond-dissociation energies and isolated-species energies were invented independently: this demonstrates what the formulas do, not a measured disagreement for actual chemical elements. A unit conversion cannot force these two input models to agree.

There are no discussions about this article yet.

Articles by others on the same topic (NaN)

There are currently no matching articles.