Thank you :DTeethWhitener said:Your book is wrong:
https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/98930
However, IUPAC also says that a chemical name is acceptable as long as it's unambiguous, so either one would work in practice.
IUPAC nomenclature is the system of rules and guidelines used to name chemical compounds. It is developed and maintained by the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) to ensure consistency and accuracy in the naming of chemicals.
IUPAC nomenclature is important because it allows scientists and researchers from different countries and disciplines to communicate effectively about chemical compounds. It also ensures that compounds have unique and unambiguous names, which is crucial for accurate reporting and understanding of scientific information.
IUPAC nomenclature follows a set of rules and guidelines that consider the structure and functional groups of a compound. The name is typically made up of different prefixes, suffixes, and infixes that indicate the type and number of atoms and bonds present in the compound.
Some common mistakes when using IUPAC nomenclature include incorrect placement of prefixes, not including all functional groups in the name, and using incorrect suffixes for the type of compound. It is important to carefully follow the rules and double-check the name to avoid these mistakes.
Yes, there are some exceptions to IUPAC nomenclature rules, especially for complex or naturally occurring compounds. In these cases, the name may be based on historical or common usage rather than following the strict IUPAC guidelines. It is important to be aware of these exceptions and understand the reasoning behind them.