This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles
Ah, goodie...we updated the bond strength of the molecule. I was using Chemical Structure and Bonding by R.L. DeKock and H.B. Gray (1989). --HappyCamper19:33, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not convinced that protonated molecular hydrogen is the best title for this article. From what I've seen in the literature, most people call it H3+, although I understand that it might not be the best title on Wikipedia. As an alternative, I propose trihydrogen cation or triatomic hydrogen cation. Both are listed as possible names by CAS, unlike protonated molecular hydrogen. Here's the full list:
Why is it not a good title for Wikipedia? There used to be a restriction that the software would not allow article titles with plus signs, but that has been fixed. H3+ --HappyCamper22:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I thought using a formula as a title might be discouraged by the style guide, but perhaps I'm mistaken. --Itub23:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know about that. Wikipedia is so big now that there are too many things to remember. How about moving it to H3+ ion? I've always called this "H-three-plus" though. Has less syllables than any of the alternatives above. --HappyCamper23:56, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can H3+ from any ionic compounds apart from being in a plasma? The article does not mention if any search has been conducted for this kind of substance - eg H3+I-GB11:36, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure that it does not form any stable compounds other than itself in interstellar space. It does exist as an intermediate in some terrestrial reactions, but I don't know anything about them. --jdigangi 22:25, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, recently I read that some one was predicting that it may be stable in solid noble gases such as solid neon. But as yet not tested. GB12:13, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
While technically interesting, of what use is this phenomenon? Are astrophysicists exploiting it for some sort of interstellar NMR? --Belg4mit (talk) 21:48, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not common to this field of physics, and glad to find an article about this cation in wikipedia.
I need to know the total potential energy of this ion, i.e. the released energy after recombination with an electron.
(I assume, neutral trihydrogen does not exist, so i also would be glad about the released energy in the reaction which i assume to happen if the ion hits a metallic surface!)
Thanks, HRM --193.174.254.3 (talk) 13:02, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Which of the two is more stable? I'd guess para, due to the Pauli Exclusion Principle and the fact that para-H2 is also more stable than the ortho version. Has anyone come up with a definitive answer? Stonemason89 (talk) 14:40, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
How can there be three different electron spins?[edit]
Did you read the ortho para section which says the spins are in the protons, and that there are only two distinct ones? The electrons spins will be U and D fitting with the Pauli exclusion principal. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:06, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
History section refers to Central Molecular Zone but had to search outside Wikipedia to understand. Maybe needs a reference? Tiddy (talk) 07:45, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The paragraph on destruction of H3+ mentions a few ways in which the particle is destructed. I was amazed to see not only the particle, but also its charge being destructed. Who knows where did it go? T.vanschaik (talk) 17:10, 21 January 2013 (UTC).[reply]
The mentioned charge destruction not only aplies to reactions of H3+, but also to those of H3O+! T.vanschaik (talk) 07:26, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The article says "H2+ can only be produced in interstellar space by the ionization of H2 by a cosmic ray." But surely a starlight photon can do that too? The energy can't be that high...--Jorge Stolfi (talk) 03:21, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
IIRC the ionization energy of H2 is about 15 eV, which would be about 80 nm, which is in the far-but-not-too-far ultraviolet range. Isn't that normal in starlight? Should the article be fixed? --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 03:32, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What I read: H2 is mainly in dense molecular clouds. UV light is rapidly absorbed on the edges, but cosmic rays can penetrate deeply and can ionise many molecules. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:19, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]