1-chloro-3-methylcyclobutane - IUPAC name

  • Thread starter Thread starter Qube
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Iupac
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the correct IUPAC naming of the molecule 1-chloro-3-methylcyclobutane. The initial confusion arises from the application of naming rules for cycloalkanes, particularly regarding the priority of functional groups and substituents. It is clarified that halide substituents, like chlorides, are treated similarly to functional groups, which affects their carbon numbering. The correct name, as confirmed by the key, is indeed 1-chloro-3-methylcyclobutane. Understanding the hierarchy in naming is crucial for accurate IUPAC nomenclature.
Qube
Gold Member
Messages
461
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Name this molecule

noname09.gif

Homework Equations



Naming cycloalkanes:

1) The functional groups should receive the lowest carbon number.
2) Any substituents are then assigned carbon numbers.

The Attempt at a Solution



Following the above two rules, shouldn't the molecule therefore be named 1-methyl-3-chlorocyclobutane?

The key however says 1-chloro-3-methylcyclobutane. Please advise.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Oops. Realized that halide substituents are treated the same as functional groups.
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'

Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'

TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
View full post »

Thread 'Prove that evolution is constant (Provide at least two arguments to support your position)'

I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
View full post »

Similar threads

Chemistry IUPAC Naming of 3-Bromo Phenyl Chloro Ketone
Replies
2
Views
2K
IUPAC Names for Chlorinated Methylbenzenes: Analysis & Solutions
Replies
19
Views
3K
IUPAC NAME for CH3CH2C(CH3)2CH(CH2CH3)CH3
Replies
1
Views
14K
IUPAC Names of Organic compounds (2)
Replies
3
Views
2K
IUPAC Names of Organic compounds (3)
Replies
1
Views
3K
How Do You Name Bicyclic Compounds Using IUPAC Nomenclature?
Replies
8
Views
2K
Nomenclature - IUPAC and Common Names
Replies
1
Views
3K
How Do You Name This Compound According to IUPAC Rules?
Replies
6
Views
3K
Isn't the Correct Name 4-(1-Chloroethyl)-4-Methylheptane?
Replies
2
Views
3K
Naming Benzene Compounds: 1-Chloro-2-Nitrobenzene and 1-Chloro-3-Nitrobenzene
Replies
4
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top