Are these reaction mechanisms drawn correctly?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sgstudent
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Reaction
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the correctness of two reaction mechanisms, with the first mechanism confirmed as accurate due to the electron-rich nature of X and the electron-poor carbon. The second mechanism raises uncertainty regarding the charge distribution between X, N, and oxygen, leading to confusion about whether N acts as a nucleophile or electrophile. Participants question whether the reaction has two established mechanisms and seek clarification on the solvent used and the desired final products. The conversation highlights the complexities of electron interactions in reaction mechanisms. Understanding these nuances is crucial for accurate chemical modeling.
sgstudent
Messages
726
Reaction score
3
http://imgur.com/cIprKmy

To re explain here, I know that (1) is correct as the X is electron rich while the carbon is electron poor so the reaction is correct.

But for (2) I'm not entirely sure if it is correct. if we just consider the electronegativity of X and N Then as drawn N should be partially positive and so it is electron deficient and so it can accept the electron pair from the oxygen atom. But Then again, X has a negative charge so that would affect the charge on N so I'm not sure whether N is electron rich (nucleophile) which means the mechanism drawn is wrong or electron poor (electrophile) which means the mechanism drawn is correct.


Thanks in advance :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Does this reaction have two known mechanisms? (i.e. is it given that there are two mechanisms)

What is the solution (water or X-N)? And what are you "hoping" to be the final product(s)?
 
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...
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...
Back
Top