# What's wrong with this water molecule? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 28, 2013, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-this-water-molecule/667373 "2013-08-28T05:12:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/96bed5/32.png) [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patty_O_Furniture)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-this-water-molecule/667373/1 "2013-08-28T05:12:16Z")
On this page: [http://www.medicalsciencenavigator.com/human-physiology/waters-chemistry-governs-physiology](http://www.medicalsciencenavigator.com/human-physiology/waters-chemistry-governs-physiology) There is a representation of what is supposed to be a water molecule - two hydrogen atoms covalently bonded to an oxygen atom. But the number of electrons doesn’t seem to be right, if I remember my periodic table. That looks like neon (k2+l8 electrons) and two hydrogen atoms. Or it could be two helium atoms and an oxygen atom. But the way it’s drawn, there are two extra electrons that shouldn’t be there. I scanned through the text to make sure they weren’t doing a thought experiment on some imaginary kind of water. Am I overlooking something here? ---
**Author:** ![j\_sum1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8baadc/32.png) [@j\_sum1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/j_sum1)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-this-water-molecule/667373/2 "2013-08-28T05:27:38Z")
You are right. [This diagram](http://pages.uoregon.edu/ch111/images/h2odot.gif) shows the correct configuration. There are two bonding electrons in each of the single bonds. ---
**Author:** ![engineer\_comp\_geek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/engineer_comp_geek/32/504_2.png) [@engineer\_comp\_geek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/engineer_comp_geek)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 5:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-this-water-molecule/667373/3 "2013-08-28T05:30:06Z")
Nope. You’re not overlooking anything. They goofed. It should look more like this one: [http://www.ces.fau.edu/nasa/images/module\_3/WaterMolecule.gif](http://www.ces.fau.edu/nasa/images/module_3/WaterMolecule.gif) Or maybe like this one: [http://www.nucleardarkness.org/include/nucleardarkness/images/water\_molecule.gif](http://www.nucleardarkness.org/include/nucleardarkness/images/water_molecule.gif) ---
**Author:** ![nion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c5a1d2/32.png) [@nion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nion)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 5:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-this-water-molecule/667373/4 "2013-08-28T05:32:09Z")
I have no idea, but your thread title amused me to no end. I immediately imagined a linked photo of a water molecule with a detailed description… “I was examining my locally sourced water molecules as I am wont to do and noticed something a bit off. Does this molecule circled in the photo look odd to you? It seems pudgier than the others, and appears to be donning a sombrero. What could be causing it?” 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/96bed5/32.png) [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patty_O_Furniture)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 6:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-this-water-molecule/667373/5 "2013-08-28T06:19:07Z")
> [@nion](#): > > I have no idea, but your thread title amused me to no end. > > I immediately imagined a linked photo of a water molecule with a detailed description… I tried that, but they’re a bitch to separate. Trying to snap a photo of just one water molecule is like hearding cats. Anyway it’s a shame about this picture because I quite like the way it’s drawn. I’ll have to try 'shopping-out the extra two particles. ---
**Author:** ![johnpost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f17d59/32.png) [@johnpost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/johnpost)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-this-water-molecule/667373/6 "2013-08-28T15:03:30Z")
i think there is confusion in showing the shells and subshells between all the depictions. ---
**Author:** ![chrisk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@chrisk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chrisk)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-this-water-molecule/667373/7 "2013-08-28T16:35:06Z")
I agree with **johnpost** According to my understanding, (and involving as little quantum complication as possible,) whatever drawing should make the following things clear: - Each hydrogen atom is sharing 2 electrons with the outer shell of the oxygen atom. (These are separate, no overlap between the hydrogen atoms.) - The oxygen atom should also have 4 more electrons in its outer shell, unshared, and 2 electrons in the inner shell. **j\_sum1** ’s diagram is probably the most accurate, though it leaves out the inner shell and obscures the shared electrons in the last version by drawing them as bond lines. ---
**Author:** ![ZenBeam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/3ab097/32.png) [@ZenBeam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZenBeam)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-this-water-molecule/667373/8 "2013-08-28T17:31:45Z")
> [@chrisk](#): > > According to my understanding, (and involving as little quantum complication as possible,) whatever drawing should make the following things clear: > > - Each hydrogen atom is sharing 2 electrons with the outer shell of the oxygen atom. (These are separate, no overlap between the hydrogen atoms.) > - The oxygen atom should also have 4 more electrons in its outer shell, unshared, and 2 electrons in the inner shell. If you started with **engineer\_comp\_geek** ’s first link, but moved the Hydrogen-only electrons to the circle crossings without the electrons, that would fit your requirements. ---
**Author:** ![chrisk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@chrisk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chrisk)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-this-water-molecule/667373/9 "2013-08-28T17:32:33Z")
So it would. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-this-water-molecule/667373/10 "2013-08-28T18:42:04Z")
> [@chrisk](#): > > According to my understanding, (and involving as little quantum complication as possible,) whatever drawing should make the following things clear: > > - Each hydrogen atom is sharing 2 electrons with the outer shell of the oxygen atom. (These are separate, no overlap between the hydrogen atoms.) > - The oxygen atom should also have 4 more electrons in its outer shell, unshared, and 2 electrons in the inner shell. This is correct. A more accurate representation of the hydrogen bonds are like [this](http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/bc/ahp/SDgraphics/PSgraphics/SD.PS.LG.Water.html). This is necessary to maintain the slighly polar nature of the water molecule, and also explans why the polarity varies with temperature, which gives water its unique density and freezing properties which make it such a great medium and solvent for organic molecules. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![Jinx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Jinx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jinx)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-this-water-molecule/667373/11 "2013-08-29T00:56:00Z")
Looks like a Mickey Mouse sketch! Literally! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![sich\_hinaufwinden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@sich\_hinaufwinden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sich_hinaufwinden)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-this-water-molecule/667373/12 "2013-08-29T05:03:00Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > This is correct. A more accurate representation of the hydrogen bonds are like [this](http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/bc/ahp/SDgraphics/PSgraphics/SD.PS.LG.Water.html). This is necessary to maintain the slighly polar nature of the water molecule, and also explans why the polarity varies with temperature, which gives water its unique density and freezing properties which make it such a great medium and solvent for organic molecules. > > Stranger Would the bonded hydrogen atoms and the two electron pairs be arranged radially in a plane like that? Or would they be more accurately shown arranged in 3-D with one of those four as the top of a pyramid and the other three forming a triangluar base if that make sense? Gonna see if I can find a pic like what I’m thinking… ---
**Author:** ![sich\_hinaufwinden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@sich\_hinaufwinden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sich_hinaufwinden)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-this-water-molecule/667373/13 "2013-08-29T05:06:14Z")
> [@sich\_hinaufwinden](#): > > Would the bonded hydrogen atoms and the two electron pairs be arranged radially in a plane like that? Or would they be more accurately shown arranged in 3-D with one of those four as the top of a pyramid and the other three forming a triangluar base if that make sense? Gonna see if I can find a pic like what I’m thinking… This is what I was thinking of: [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/Water-with-lone-pairs-3D-balls.png](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/Water-with-lone-pairs-3D-balls.png) ---
**Author:** ![ZenBeam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/3ab097/32.png) [@ZenBeam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZenBeam)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 11:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-this-water-molecule/667373/14 "2013-08-29T11:55:04Z")
> [@sich\_hinaufwinden](#): > > Would the bonded hydrogen atoms and the two electron pairs be arranged radially in a plane like that? Or would they be more accurately shown arranged in 3-D with one of those four as the top of a pyramid and the other three forming a triangluar base if that make sense? Gonna see if I can find a pic like what I’m thinking… Well, yes, but we’re talking 2D representations here. There’s always going to be some more accurate model until you bring in quantum mechanics and 3D models of the electron orbitals. And even then you can argue about what it _really means_.