Energy Barrier to Rotation in 1-Iodopropane

AI Thread Summary
An energy barrier to rotation refers to the energy required to transition between different conformations of a molecule, such as 1-iodopropane. The discussion highlights that the energy difference between anti and gauche conformations can be calculated by subtracting the energy values at these points on a graph. Transitioning from gauche to anti involves a positive energy change, while moving from anti to gauche results in a negative energy change due to steric and torsional strain differences. The energy barrier for transitioning between two gauche conformations is zero since their energies are equivalent. Overall, while the net energy change from anti to anti is zero, the process still requires energy to navigate through the gauche conformation.
jnimagine
Messages
176
Reaction score
0
What's an energy barrir to rotation?
I have data on the enrgy at anti and gauche conformations of 1-iodopropane.
I have also graphed the data (steric energy vs dihedral angle)
from the graph, do I just subtract the trough at anti from the trough at gauche?
so from anti to gauche, it'd be a positive number whereas from gauche to anti would be a negative number??
What about for gauche to gauche? since the energies are the same at the two gauche conformations, would it be 0??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I've never had to do graphs, but that sounds right. Anti usually has less steric and torsional strain than anti; therefore rotating from gauche leads to a decrease in energy (negative) while pushing an anti conformation into the gauche position is energetically unfavorable (which requires energy, and change will be positive). From gauche to gauche, let's say the energy barrier is 10kcal/mol. Gauche1 to anti1 is -10kcal/mol, and then anti1 to gauche2 is +10kcal/mol. Therefore the net energy change is zero. Keep in mind, though, that anti to anti, although the net change is zero, still requires the energy needed to reach the first gauche 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...
Back
Top