2 ms·
The claim that bonds store energy is a frequent misconception. Bonds are the result of lost energy compared to free, unbound atoms. If bonds don't store energy
by nayuki 3y ago
The claim that bonds store energy is a frequent misconception. Bonds are the result of lost energy compared to free, unbound atoms.
If bonds don't store energy, how does breaking hydrocarbon bonds release energy? It doesn't - it's just that the new bonds formed in CO2 and H2O release more energy than it took to break the hydrocarbon bonds.
- hgsgm 3y agoIt's a distinction without a difference. Energy is not not a substance. Is a meaure of an entire configuration of states. Forms of energy is an "interpretation", a metpahor. C02 + H20 has less energy than CH3 + O2, because C02 + H20 are more stable (= lower energy) bonds. You can say the energy is in the electron, released as it falls into a lower energy state (bond). If I walk up a hill to a cliff, am I then in a more energetic state? No, because it takes energy to push me off the cliff, the ground is a more stable position than the top of the ledge and the appparent energy released by me turning a windmill I hit on the way down is because more energy is released by freefalling off a cliff than by sitting down on top of the ledge? or Yes, for exactly the same reason?