Then there is hydrogen peroxide that should be called dihydrogen dioxide,
We have reasons for calling them what they are. No, it should not be called that
Ah, yes, I am aware that there are reasons for calling them what they are, but are the reasons logical, or are they inconsistent, archaic and somewhat arbitrary. I lean toward the later, especially the inconsistent part.
CO is carbon oxide right? No, it is carbon monoxide.
Iron oxide has one Fe molecule and one O right? No, it has 2 Fe and 3 O's. If it is iron(III) oxide, that is. I could go on and on with this. It seems to me that the naming of binary chemical compounds could be made simpler by using a method that more accurately describes the compound and in a simpler and more consistent way.
I might add that technically speaking water is not water/H20 most of the time Allot of it self ionizes to;
2 H2O ==> H3O+ + OH- and at times H30*(H20). This is what 100% pure water really is
And if there is any hydrolsis the you get stuff like
4 H2O ==> H5O2+ + H3O2-
This is one of my favorite topics. I once gave a speech explaining this to a largely non-scientific audience, I never saw so many blank looks in my life. Even some of the science people looked at me like I just destroyed the one part of chemistry that they thought they understood.
