Can These Hydrocarbons Be Properly Named According to IUPAC Rules?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kelvin macks
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hydrocarbon
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the proper IUPAC naming of two compounds. The first compound can be correctly named as 1-amino-4-methylcyclohexane, while the second can be named as 1-amino-2-methylcyclohexane. Both names adhere to IUPAC rules, despite minor typographical errors. The alternative names referenced in the discussion do not conform to these rules and may instead reflect common naming conventions used by professionals familiar with methylcyclohexane and its derivatives. The importance of following IUPAC guidelines for clarity and standardization in chemical nomenclature is emphasized.
kelvin macks
Messages
60
Reaction score
0
can I name the first compund as 1-amino-4-methylcyclohaeaxne?
can i name the second compound as 1-amino-2-methyl-cyclohexane? why and why not?
 

Attachments

  • DSC_0021.jpg
    DSC_0021.jpg
    17.2 KB · Views: 531
Chemistry news on Phys.org
Apart from a few typos(*), your names follow the IUPAC rules, while the ones in the picture do not. They might be common names for people working with methylcyclohexane and their derivatives.

(*) 1-amino-4-methylcyclohexane and 1-amino-2-methylcyclohexane
 

Thread 'Solubility of MgSO47H2O in water'

It seems like a simple enough question: what is the solubility of epsom salt in water at 20°C? A graph or table showing how it varies with temperature would be a bonus. But upon searching the internet I have been unable to determine this with confidence. Wikipedia gives the value of 113g/100ml. But other sources disagree and I can't find a definitive source for the information. I even asked chatgpt but it couldn't be sure either. I thought, naively, that this would be easy to look up without...
View full post »

Thread 'Why does having 8 valence electrons make an element inert?'

I was introduced to the Octet Rule recently and make me wonder, why does 8 valence electrons or a full p orbital always make an element inert? What is so special with a full p orbital? Like take Calcium for an example, its outer orbital is filled but its only the s orbital thats filled so its still reactive not so much as the Alkaline metals but still pretty reactive. Can someone explain it to me? Thanks!!
View full post »

Similar threads

IUPAC Name of EDTA: 2,2′,2″,2′″-(ethane-1,2-diyldinitrilo-)κ^2N
Replies
1
Views
4K
IUPAC Naming Questions-Substituents and Bonds
Replies
1
Views
3K
IUPAC naming - choosing the main branch doubts
Replies
2
Views
2K
Iupac Nomenclature
Replies
2
Views
2K
Naming a Compound: Understanding C(CH3)3 and Its Naming Conventions
Replies
2
Views
3K
IUPAC Names for Chlorinated Methylbenzenes: Analysis & Solutions
Replies
19
Views
3K
Chemistry IUPAC Naming of 3-Bromo Phenyl Chloro Ketone
Replies
2
Views
2K
Name C6H5-O-C(CH3)3: IUPAC Nomenclature
Replies
5
Views
4K
Nomenclature questions -- Naming structures when given compounds
Replies
2
Views
1K
IUPAC NAME for CH3CH2C(CH3)2CH(CH2CH3)CH3
Replies
1
Views
14K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top