Van Vleck paramagnetism theory (VBT) is limited in explaining the paramagnetic behavior of oxygen because it does not take into account the role of electron-electron repulsions and the need for molecular orbital theory to properly describe the bonding in molecules like oxygen. Oxygen exhibits paramagnetism due to the presence of unpaired electrons in its molecular orbitals, which VBT fails to adequately account for. Molecular orbital theory, which considers the delocalization of electrons in molecular orbitals, provides a more comprehensive explanation for the paramagnetic behavior of oxygen.
Oxygen is held close to Earth by gravity, which creates a force that pulls gases toward the planet's surface. The Earth's atmosphere acts as a protective barrier that helps keep oxygen from escaping into space. Additionally, the planet's magnetic field also helps to shield the atmosphere from the solar wind that could strip away gases.
No. Earth's oxygen is provided by plants. Humans need oxygen to live, so we could not have been there before there was oxygen, so we could not have made the oxygen.
It would've been easier if I could draw the structure or paste, but since it is not supported, I shall explain. One of the oxygen atoms is bonded to the nitrogen by a double bond. The second oxygen is bonded to the nitrogen and a hydrogen by single bonds. The last oxygen is bonded to the nitrogen by a coordinate bond.
a magnet. The magnetic properties of iron allow it to be attracted to a magnet, making it easy to separate from non-magnetic substances like sand.
A non-example of oxygen could be helium, as it is an inert gas that does not readily react with other elements to form compounds or support combustion like oxygen does.
If someone could please explain who to get to the oxygen sensor and explain where it is for sure?
No. You could not live on Saturn because there is no surface to stand on, no oxygen to breathe, and it is too cold.
The basic principle of both theories is same that is distribution of electrons but mot is superior to vbt. The reason is that vbt could not explain paramagnetic character of oxygen while the mot has sucessfully explain the paramagnetic character of oxygen.
Explanatory research is research conducted in order to explain any behaviour in the market. It could be done through using questionnaires, group discussions, interviews, random sampling, etc.
The direction of the Earth's magnetic field.
ANSWER: It could be that the husband did something in the past that betrayed her trust towards him. Or someone hurt her before she met her husband and because of it its hard for her to give her trust fully. She's the only one that can explain her behaviour.
It depends what you mean, but.... ---- Magnetic ---- it could be when you make something magnetic, or when the magnetic field of a magnet attracts a piece of Iron or steel
Only some metals, with a special electron configuration could get magnetic. The most well known metals, that could get magnetic are Iron (Fe), Cobalt (Co) and Nickel (Ni). Also you can find metals in the category of rare earth elements, that could get magnetic. Neon could not get magnetic for two reasons: 1. It is a nonmetal. 2. It has a stable electron configuration.
Animals are almost all hairy which means they are all similar. The similarity makes a animal hair magnetic because they are to stupid to speak somehow. Yourwelcome.
Increasing loss of short term memory and innapropriate behaviour. Merory loss could be forgetting where the car keys are. And innapropriate behaviour could be putting the car keys in the freezer.
The iron core of the transformer concentrates the magnetic lines of force from the primary winding through the iron core. The secondary coil winding is also wound on the same iron core so the primary flux cuts the secondary winding inducing a current into that coil.Alternative AnswerWhat you have to understand is that lines of magnetic flux don't actually exist! They simply represent a 'model', created by Michael Faraday, as a means of providing a visual representation of a magnetic field, and the behaviour of these lines simply follow rules defined by Faraday as part of his model! Many teachers fail to explain the difference between a 'model', such as this one, and 'reality'. Many students are then left not understanding that what they have learnt is simply a model, and that the actual behaviour of a circuit is far more complicated and, in many circumstances, cannot be adequately explained at all!So, while Faraday's model works well to explain the behaviour of a magnetic field in some circumstances(e.g. motor and generator action), it does not in others.For example, this model completely fails when it comes to explaining the behaviour of a transformer because, if these lines of force are confined within the transformer's core, they clearly cannot 'cut' the secondary windings -as often described in many textbooks- because they merely pass through the centre of the secondary coil without 'cutting' the coiled conductors!For this reason, when we explain the behaviour of a transformer, we describe the magnetic flux as 'linking', rather than 'cutting' the secondary winding. But there is no explanation of whyflux that 'links' a coil should induce a voltage into that coil. Faraday's 'flux lines' model simply doesn't explain what is going on and, in fact, there is no simple explanation!! You could say, 'it simply happens' and leave it there!There are lots of other models used in electrical engineering, which students, unfortunately seem to accept as reality! For example, Bohr's model of the atom, used as the basis of the 'electron theory' to describe electric current, bears no relationship whatsoever to a real atom because the structure of real atoms is probably beyond most people's understanding.
Magnets have magnetic force in them, obviously, to attract or repel magnetic materials. The materials could not be attracted without the magnetic force because the magnet forces the magnetic material towards it.