Double checking organic chem mechanisms

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on clarifying organic chemistry mechanisms involving various reactions. Key points include the conversion of CH2OHCH3 in H+ to CH2=CH2, with the understanding that H+ interacts with OH to form H2O as a leaving group. The addition of H and OH in reactions involving RCH=CH2 and H3O+ is confirmed to originate from H3O+, with OH preferentially adding to the more substituted carbon. The mechanisms for reactions using Hg(OAc)2/H2O and BH3/THF are also discussed, emphasizing the role of substitution patterns in product formation. Overall, understanding these mechanisms enhances retention of organic reactions beyond mere memorization.
future_vet
Messages
169
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I need to make sure I understand some of the reactions correctly... For example:

CH2OHCH3 in H+ will give us CH2=CH2. I would think that here the H+ bonded with the OH resulting in H2O (a leaving group), but I am not sure what happens to the other leaving H.

In RC≡CR' in Na/NH3, we get RCH=CHR' in an anti addition. Where did the 2 H come from? The NH3?

RCH=CH2 in H3O+ gives RCHOHCH3. Did the OH and H come from the H3O+? Do we then have one last H that does not bond with the molecule? And did the OH add to the C bonded with the R because it is the most substituted carbon?

In RCH=CH2 in (1) Hg(OAc)2/H2O and (2) NaBH4, NaOH, we get RCHOHCH3. Where did the OH and H come from? Did the OH add to the C bonded with the R because it is the most substituted carbon?

In RCH=CH2 in (1) BH3/THF and (2) H2O2/OH- we get RCH2CH2OH. Did the OH add to the C because it was the least substituted? Also, is the mechanism the following: first, Br (from BH3) bonds with the least subst. carbon, and H also from BH3 adds to the other C, thus breaking the double bond. Then in step (2) Br is replaced by OH, from OH-.

And finally:
a) ROH + SOCl2 -> RCl
and
b) ROH + TsCl ---(base)--> ROTs

These 2 reactions confuse me. I thought that in a) the H would bond with a Cl giving HCl + RSOCl. Why does it give RCl?
However in b) what I thought would happen in a) does take place. H and Cl bond, resulting in ROTs. Why?

Thank you so much for your help, I hope I was clear enough!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
future_vet said:
CH2OHCH3 in H+ will give us CH2=CH2. I would think that here the H+ bonded with the OH resulting in H2O (a leaving group), but I am not sure what happens to the other leaving H.
The acid is H+A-. The other H atom (through a carbocation mechanism) goes away with the conjugate base, A-
 
Thanks!
 
future_vet said:
In RC≡CR' in Na/NH3, we get RCH=CHR' in an anti addition. Where did the 2 H come from? The NH3?
Yes, one H-atom from each NH3.

RCH=CH2 in H3O+ gives RCHOHCH3. Did the OH and H come from the H3O+? Do we then have one last H that does not bond with the molecule? And did the OH add to the C bonded with the R because it is the most substituted carbon?
Yes, yes and yes. Look up the mechanism for electrophilic addition to alkenes through carbocation formation on the most substituted carbon.
 
Thank you so much, you're so helpful!
We rarely get the mechanisms in class, as we are told we have to do a lot of memorization. But I found that understanding the mechanism allows me to remember the reactions for the rest of the semester, instead of relying on memorization.
 
future_vet said:
In RCH=CH2 in (1) Hg(OAc)2/H2O and (2) NaBH4, NaOH, we get RCHOHCH3. Where did the OH and H come from? Did the OH add to the C bonded with the R because it is the most substituted carbon?

In RCH=CH2 in (1) BH3/THF and (2) H2O2/OH- we get RCH2CH2OH. Did the OH add to the C because it was the least substituted? Also, is the mechanism the following: first, Br (from BH3) bonds with the least subst. carbon, and H also from BH3 adds to the other C, thus breaking the double bond. Then in step (2) Br is replaced by OH, from OH-.
You will find these mechanisms in any standard O Chem text. In Morrisson & Boyd (6th Ed.), this is in Ch 9: Reactions of Alkenes.
 
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