Mixing
Strongest oxidising agent
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I searched it , all have different results ClF3, HArF, F2 are the 3 participants . Many said ClF3 is most powerful as it oxidise everything even abestos , sand , concrete and can set fire to anything which can't be stopped , can only be stored in Teflon
And as HArF can be a good oxidant due to high instability as a compound of argon with fluorine , but not much stuff is available
So, who wins the title
inorganic-chemistry redox
edited 2 hours ago
Ivan Neretin
21.9k34481
asked 3 hours ago
Harsh jain
293
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I searched it , all have different results ClF3, HArF, F2 are the 3 participants . Many said ClF3 is most powerful as it oxidise everything even abestos , sand , concrete and can set fire to anything which can't be stopped , can only be stored in Teflon
And as HArF can be a good oxidant due to high instability as a compound of argon with fluorine , but not much stuff is available
So, who wins the title
inorganic-chemistry redox
edited 2 hours ago
Ivan Neretin
21.9k34481
asked 3 hours ago
Harsh jain
293
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I searched it , all have different results ClF3, HArF, F2 are the 3 participants . Many said ClF3 is most powerful as it oxidise everything even abestos , sand , concrete and can set fire to anything which can't be stopped , can only be stored in Teflon
And as HArF can be a good oxidant due to high instability as a compound of argon with fluorine , but not much stuff is available
So, who wins the title
inorganic-chemistry redox
edited 2 hours ago
Ivan Neretin
21.9k34481
asked 3 hours ago
Harsh jain
293
I searched it , all have different results ClF3, HArF, F2 are the 3 participants . Many said ClF3 is most powerful as it oxidise everything even abestos , sand , concrete and can set fire to anything which can't be stopped , can only be stored in Teflon
And as HArF can be a good oxidant due to high instability as a compound of argon with fluorine , but not much stuff is available
So, who wins the title
inorganic-chemistry redox
inorganic-chemistry redox
edited 2 hours ago
Ivan Neretin
21.9k34481
asked 3 hours ago
Harsh jain
293
edited 2 hours ago
Ivan Neretin
21.9k34481
asked 3 hours ago
Harsh jain
293
edited 2 hours ago
Ivan Neretin
21.9k34481
edited 2 hours ago
Ivan Neretin
21.9k34481
edited 2 hours ago
Ivan Neretin
21.9k34481
21.9k34481
asked 3 hours ago
Harsh jain
293
asked 3 hours ago
Harsh jain
293
asked 3 hours ago
Harsh jain
293
293
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
There is no definitive answer; if you think you have one, you are wrong.
See, this is much like asking "what is the northernmost big city". Depending on where you draw the line for being "big", the answer may be Moscow (latitude $55^circ$N, population 13M), St. Petersburg ($60^circ$N, 5M), Murmansk ($68^circ$N, 300K), and quite a few others. There is no natural and universally accepted way to draw that line; it is inherently arbitrary.
How's that similar, might you ask, as you don't have any such line in your question? Yes you do, and here is it: you want the compounds which exist. Really, you don't want any compounds which don't exist, do you?
Now there's a catch: we have quite a few different subtle grades to "exist", and no natural way to draw the line that would make it clearcut black-and-white. In fact, in absence of further context it is about as ill-defined and vague as "being big" for a city. In my personal taste, $ceHArF$ does not exist; if you point me to the papers that claim otherwise, I'll throw at you (figuratively) $ceHe^2+$, AKA an $alpha$ particle, which was known for a good century longer, surely does exist, and will easily oxidize $ceHArF$, I'm pretty confident on that.
There is another dimension to the problem. Oxidative ability of any compound is not measured by one number so that you could compare them. True, there is redox potential, but it is measured in standard conditions, and in different conditions things may turn out other way around. So there is not going to be an answer even if we would unanimously agree on the definition of "exists" (which we wouldn't).
So it goes.
answered 2 hours ago
Ivan Neretin
21.9k34481
HArF exist , its mentioned on wikipedia with all information with melting point and bond energies . What about F2 can protonate From F+ . I don't think so
– Harsh jain
20 mins ago
Yeah, I've seen that page, and that's what I call "don't exist"; also, the page doesn't claim it has a melting point, even if a cursory glance might have convinced you otherwise. The rest is puzzling to me; I never said a thing about anything protonating anything.
– Ivan Neretin
11 mins ago
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
There is no definitive answer; if you think you have one, you are wrong.
See, this is much like asking "what is the northernmost big city". Depending on where you draw the line for being "big", the answer may be Moscow (latitude $55^circ$N, population 13M), St. Petersburg ($60^circ$N, 5M), Murmansk ($68^circ$N, 300K), and quite a few others. There is no natural and universally accepted way to draw that line; it is inherently arbitrary.
How's that similar, might you ask, as you don't have any such line in your question? Yes you do, and here is it: you want the compounds which exist. Really, you don't want any compounds which don't exist, do you?
Now there's a catch: we have quite a few different subtle grades to "exist", and no natural way to draw the line that would make it clearcut black-and-white. In fact, in absence of further context it is about as ill-defined and vague as "being big" for a city. In my personal taste, $ceHArF$ does not exist; if you point me to the papers that claim otherwise, I'll throw at you (figuratively) $ceHe^2+$, AKA an $alpha$ particle, which was known for a good century longer, surely does exist, and will easily oxidize $ceHArF$, I'm pretty confident on that.
There is another dimension to the problem. Oxidative ability of any compound is not measured by one number so that you could compare them. True, there is redox potential, but it is measured in standard conditions, and in different conditions things may turn out other way around. So there is not going to be an answer even if we would unanimously agree on the definition of "exists" (which we wouldn't).
So it goes.
answered 2 hours ago
Ivan Neretin
21.9k34481
HArF exist , its mentioned on wikipedia with all information with melting point and bond energies . What about F2 can protonate From F+ . I don't think so
– Harsh jain
20 mins ago
Yeah, I've seen that page, and that's what I call "don't exist"; also, the page doesn't claim it has a melting point, even if a cursory glance might have convinced you otherwise. The rest is puzzling to me; I never said a thing about anything protonating anything.
– Ivan Neretin
11 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
There is no definitive answer; if you think you have one, you are wrong.
See, this is much like asking "what is the northernmost big city". Depending on where you draw the line for being "big", the answer may be Moscow (latitude $55^circ$N, population 13M), St. Petersburg ($60^circ$N, 5M), Murmansk ($68^circ$N, 300K), and quite a few others. There is no natural and universally accepted way to draw that line; it is inherently arbitrary.
How's that similar, might you ask, as you don't have any such line in your question? Yes you do, and here is it: you want the compounds which exist. Really, you don't want any compounds which don't exist, do you?
Now there's a catch: we have quite a few different subtle grades to "exist", and no natural way to draw the line that would make it clearcut black-and-white. In fact, in absence of further context it is about as ill-defined and vague as "being big" for a city. In my personal taste, $ceHArF$ does not exist; if you point me to the papers that claim otherwise, I'll throw at you (figuratively) $ceHe^2+$, AKA an $alpha$ particle, which was known for a good century longer, surely does exist, and will easily oxidize $ceHArF$, I'm pretty confident on that.
There is another dimension to the problem. Oxidative ability of any compound is not measured by one number so that you could compare them. True, there is redox potential, but it is measured in standard conditions, and in different conditions things may turn out other way around. So there is not going to be an answer even if we would unanimously agree on the definition of "exists" (which we wouldn't).
So it goes.
answered 2 hours ago
Ivan Neretin
21.9k34481
HArF exist , its mentioned on wikipedia with all information with melting point and bond energies . What about F2 can protonate From F+ . I don't think so
– Harsh jain
20 mins ago
Yeah, I've seen that page, and that's what I call "don't exist"; also, the page doesn't claim it has a melting point, even if a cursory glance might have convinced you otherwise. The rest is puzzling to me; I never said a thing about anything protonating anything.
– Ivan Neretin
11 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
There is no definitive answer; if you think you have one, you are wrong.
See, this is much like asking "what is the northernmost big city". Depending on where you draw the line for being "big", the answer may be Moscow (latitude $55^circ$N, population 13M), St. Petersburg ($60^circ$N, 5M), Murmansk ($68^circ$N, 300K), and quite a few others. There is no natural and universally accepted way to draw that line; it is inherently arbitrary.
How's that similar, might you ask, as you don't have any such line in your question? Yes you do, and here is it: you want the compounds which exist. Really, you don't want any compounds which don't exist, do you?
Now there's a catch: we have quite a few different subtle grades to "exist", and no natural way to draw the line that would make it clearcut black-and-white. In fact, in absence of further context it is about as ill-defined and vague as "being big" for a city. In my personal taste, $ceHArF$ does not exist; if you point me to the papers that claim otherwise, I'll throw at you (figuratively) $ceHe^2+$, AKA an $alpha$ particle, which was known for a good century longer, surely does exist, and will easily oxidize $ceHArF$, I'm pretty confident on that.
There is another dimension to the problem. Oxidative ability of any compound is not measured by one number so that you could compare them. True, there is redox potential, but it is measured in standard conditions, and in different conditions things may turn out other way around. So there is not going to be an answer even if we would unanimously agree on the definition of "exists" (which we wouldn't).
So it goes.
answered 2 hours ago
Ivan Neretin
21.9k34481
There is no definitive answer; if you think you have one, you are wrong.
See, this is much like asking "what is the northernmost big city". Depending on where you draw the line for being "big", the answer may be Moscow (latitude $55^circ$N, population 13M), St. Petersburg ($60^circ$N, 5M), Murmansk ($68^circ$N, 300K), and quite a few others. There is no natural and universally accepted way to draw that line; it is inherently arbitrary.
How's that similar, might you ask, as you don't have any such line in your question? Yes you do, and here is it: you want the compounds which exist. Really, you don't want any compounds which don't exist, do you?
Now there's a catch: we have quite a few different subtle grades to "exist", and no natural way to draw the line that would make it clearcut black-and-white. In fact, in absence of further context it is about as ill-defined and vague as "being big" for a city. In my personal taste, $ceHArF$ does not exist; if you point me to the papers that claim otherwise, I'll throw at you (figuratively) $ceHe^2+$, AKA an $alpha$ particle, which was known for a good century longer, surely does exist, and will easily oxidize $ceHArF$, I'm pretty confident on that.
There is another dimension to the problem. Oxidative ability of any compound is not measured by one number so that you could compare them. True, there is redox potential, but it is measured in standard conditions, and in different conditions things may turn out other way around. So there is not going to be an answer even if we would unanimously agree on the definition of "exists" (which we wouldn't).
So it goes.
answered 2 hours ago
Ivan Neretin
21.9k34481
edited 1 hour ago
answered 2 hours ago
Ivan Neretin
21.9k34481
answered 2 hours ago
Ivan Neretin
21.9k34481
answered 2 hours ago
Ivan Neretin
21.9k34481
21.9k34481
HArF exist , its mentioned on wikipedia with all information with melting point and bond energies . What about F2 can protonate From F+ . I don't think so
– Harsh jain
20 mins ago
Yeah, I've seen that page, and that's what I call "don't exist"; also, the page doesn't claim it has a melting point, even if a cursory glance might have convinced you otherwise. The rest is puzzling to me; I never said a thing about anything protonating anything.
– Ivan Neretin
11 mins ago
add a comment |Â
HArF exist , its mentioned on wikipedia with all information with melting point and bond energies . What about F2 can protonate From F+ . I don't think so
– Harsh jain
20 mins ago
Yeah, I've seen that page, and that's what I call "don't exist"; also, the page doesn't claim it has a melting point, even if a cursory glance might have convinced you otherwise. The rest is puzzling to me; I never said a thing about anything protonating anything.
– Ivan Neretin
11 mins ago
HArF exist , its mentioned on wikipedia with all information with melting point and bond energies . What about F2 can protonate From F+ . I don't think so
– Harsh jain
20 mins ago
HArF exist , its mentioned on wikipedia with all information with melting point and bond energies . What about F2 can protonate From F+ . I don't think so
– Harsh jain
20 mins ago
Yeah, I've seen that page, and that's what I call "don't exist"; also, the page doesn't claim it has a melting point, even if a cursory glance might have convinced you otherwise. The rest is puzzling to me; I never said a thing about anything protonating anything.
– Ivan Neretin
11 mins ago
Yeah, I've seen that page, and that's what I call "don't exist"; also, the page doesn't claim it has a melting point, even if a cursory glance might have convinced you otherwise. The rest is puzzling to me; I never said a thing about anything protonating anything.
– Ivan Neretin
11 mins ago
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f102502%2fstrongest-oxidising-agent%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password