Chirality of Naproxen: Explaining With CIP Rules

  • Thread starter Thread starter miniradman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chirality
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on determining the chirality of Naproxen using Cahn–Ingold–Prelog (CIP) rules. The stereocenter is identified at the carbon where the carboxyl group meets the two benzene rings. Participants express confusion regarding the prioritization of substituents, especially when encountering double bonds and branching in the molecule. The importance of recognizing that multiple bonds count as equivalent single bonds is emphasized, as well as the need to consider atomic numbers when assigning priority. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexities of applying CIP rules to determine chirality in organic molecules.
miniradman
Messages
191
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


determine and explain its chirality using the CIP rule
*see attached image*

Homework Equations


CIP rules


The Attempt at a Solution


Hello

I've determined that the stereocenter of this molecule is at the carbon where the carboxyl group meets the two benzene rings.

I've done step one and rotated the stereocenter such that the hydrogen is facing back. However when deciding the priorities of the three constituents on the stereocenter I get a little confused.

When going down the chain, towards the aromatic rings that I'll encounter a double bond. I tried reading how these fit in with the CIP rules but I find them to be quite ambiguous.

And with the carboxyl group, when going down the chain, which direction do I have to go? Down the hydroxyl group on the double bonded oxygen? I

Thanks
- miniradman
 

Attachments

  • naproxen.jpg
    naproxen.jpg
    6.9 KB · Views: 2,450
Physics news on Phys.org
You have identified the correct chiral center. These are the three groups I see.

Methyl
Ring
Carboxylic acid

I do not know what CIP rules are.
 
Last edited:
Cahn–Ingold–Prelog
 
Your chiral carbon is attached to:

1) A hydrogen.
2) A carbon which is attached to 3 or so oxygen atoms (because m.ultiple bonds are counted as equivalent number of single bonds, from memory)
3) a carbon which is attached to 3 carbon atoms (same as above).

Can you do it now?
 
Yanick said:
Your chiral carbon is attached to:

1) A hydrogen.
2) A carbon which is attached to 3 or so oxygen atoms (because m.ultiple bonds are counted as equivalent number of single bonds, from memory)
3) a carbon which is attached to 3 carbon atoms (same as above).

Can you do it now?
Well since oxygen has a higher atomic number than carbon, I assume the carboxyl group has more priority.

However, intuitively, if I were to have another single aromatic ring in place of the carboxyl group, how would I go about going down the branches? Which would then be of highest priority? I get confused on where to go once you start having to decide which branch to take.
 
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