>>13581385>I would consider the adsorptive association NOT a chemical bond because usually it is mediated by some transient interaction like polarity or somethingI have the exact same concept in my head.
> I believe multiple adsorptive bonds are shown to complete the octetSo can adsorptive bonds contribute to completing an octet? I thought that because there wasn't a new molecular orbital to share electrons this didn't happen. I am a chemical engineer so my knowledge on some of these things is shallow at best.
>most mechanisms are theoretical anyway unless the paper is specifically investigating the transition states with timed NMR experiments and stuff like thatThis one was trying to understand the mechanism of electroreduction of CO2 on metallic surfaces. I've seen many papers that use DFT to study these things, not so much experimental ones. I will have to try to search with those keywords and see what I can find.
> if you see inconsistency in the literature, that's your signal that you can get away with a bit of nonspecificity on your side as well.I guessed this could be the case, but I was a bit afraid of relaxing too much and ending up "buliding" these concepts wrongly in my head.
>e I said before the interaction is usually transient, if a complete bond was formed to the metal then it probably wouldn't be catalytic because it would be difficult for the final product to detatch from the surfaceThis is actually an excellent point, I had not thought about that. It's true, from what I see most catalytic reactions need adsorbate/surface interactions strong enough to allow the intermediates to react between them but not so strong they can't be detached afterwards or stuff like that.
Thanks a lot anon, it's not easy to find good guides on these things. It seems that many things are not standarized yet in textbooks and the like so there are many terms,names,etc that change a bit from paper to paper. I take you did a PhD related to material science?
