Submitted by Chip Nataro / Lafayette College on Mon, 03/02/2015 - 13:03

Previously in the forums there was a place for 4th Ed typos. The 5th Ed has been out long enough that if there are typos, we have probably discovered them. As with Adam's post of the 4th Ed typos, I like the book. Gary and Paul have certainly been friend's of VIPEr throughout the years. These are just things that we catch that can hopefully make the 6th Ed. Do not include the lack of a bioinorganic chapter in this discussion, that has been covered in another forum topic.

Obviously I am brining this up for a reason. Chapter 7 page 219 list the length of the c side in a hcp lattice as 2.83r. This is the legth of the sides in fcc. The correct value should be 3.27r.

Kyle Grice / DePaul University

If you do get to the secret level chapter 16, the version I got from the publisher was missing the O labels on oxaliplatin.

Wed, 02/24/2016 - 21:51 Permalink
Anne Bentley / Lewis & Clark College

Am I losing my marbles or does this edition not have an Appendix B?  Appendix A is answers to end-of-chapter questions, Appendix C is character tables, and...

Ok, I figured it out.  "Appendix B can be found online..." it says in the Table of Contents.


Fri, 03/11/2016 - 20:46 Permalink
Amanda Reig / Ursinus College

Anne - I did the same thing!  I actually emailed the publisher because I didn't see the note in the TOC.   I thought I got bad book.  Seems like a strange way to save a few pennies, but I'm sure they have their reasons.  :)

Sun, 03/20/2016 - 00:50 Permalink
Gerard Rowe / University of South Carolina Aiken

Not the text, but in the solutions manual available the publisher's site:  The solution to problem 10.5 has numbers incorrectly plugged into the spin-only magnetic moment equation:

mu_s = sqrt(3(3+5)) = 3.9 BM   

the 5 in that equation should be a 2.  The numerical solution is correct, though.

Mon, 05/09/2016 - 11:08 Permalink
Robert Q. Topper / Cooper Union

Thanks for starting this, Chip.

On page 33, the text states (incorrectly) the following: 

"In 1885, Balmer showed that the energies of visible light emitted by the hydrogen atom are given by..."

This is incorrect. Einstein's explanation of the photoelectric effect and his expression for the photon energy came much, much later. Balmer's original formula was a reciprocal wavelength formula. A major rewrite is needed to fix it. Something like

 In 1885, Balmer showed that the wavelengths of visible light emitted by the hydrogen atom are given by the equation

(1/lambda) = R_H (1/2^2 - 1/n_h^2) 

where (three lines of equations follow)

Einstein's explanation of the photoelectric effect in 1905 showed that the emitted light can be thought of as photons, with energies given by the equation

E = h nu = ... discussed in Section 2.2.2). Although quantum numbers had been used by Planck in his explanation of blackbody radiation, the origin of the quantum number for the emission wavelengths  of the hydrogen atom was unclear. The first explanation was provided by Niels Bohr's quantum theory of the atom...

- Robert



Wed, 01/27/2021 - 13:53 Permalink