Chemistry Factors that determine acid strength

chemJan2021
Messages
6
Reaction score
3
Homework Statement
In these two compounds, the question is to decide more acidic hydrogen.

In No.1, I think the right hydrogen is more acidic because halogen (Fluorine) connects the oxygen next to the hydrogen, pulls the electron and this inductive effect makes the hydrogen more stable.
But the answer is the left hydrogen.
I can’t understand this answer.

In No.2, I also think right hydrogen is more acidic because there is a methyl group on the left side of carbon which is electron donating group and makes the left hydrogen unstable.
But the answer is the left hydrogen.
I think there are the mesomeric effect on both of the hydrogens.
I can’t understand the answer.
Could anyone explain me the reason?
Relevant Equations
I think to solve this kind of more acidic hydrogen, there are these rules below.
1. Compare the element to which a hydrogen bonds.
2. Check if there is the Resonance effect.
3. Check if there is the Inductive effect.
4. The percentage of the S orbitals. SP>SP2>SP3
0F326969-FE17-4582-8227-C6B0B3D42D6E.jpeg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Both molecules require drawing resonance structures of the conjugate bases to see where the electrons become delocalized.
 
  • Like
Likes chemJan2021
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...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top