Organic: MacMillan Organocatalyast Mechanism

  • Thread starter Thread starter uchicago2012
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mechanism Organic
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the mechanism of reactions catalyzed by MacMillan Generation 1 and 2 organocatalysts. The original poster struggles to grasp the role of the organocatalyst, particularly how it facilitates the reaction and contributes to enantioselectivity. They mention reading a paper that suggests the formation of an iminium ion but find the content challenging to comprehend. Attempts to illustrate the reaction without the catalyst were deemed incorrect by their professor, highlighting the catalyst's essential role. Clarification on the mechanism and the specific actions of the catalysts is sought to enhance understanding.
uchicago2012
Messages
74
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I'm trying to figure out the mechanism for a reaction catalyzed by MacMillan Generation 1 and 2 organocatalysts. Not going so well. I don't understand what role the organocatalyst plays in the reaction. I read a paper about MacMillan and I think it was saying that the catalysts worked by forming an imminium ion, but the entire thing was way over my head, so I'm not so sure about that. I drew the reaction without even using the catalyst but my prof said that reaction wouldn't go. I don't really understand how the mechanism works, what the catalyst does to make the reaction 'go,' and how the catalyst makes the reaction enantioselective. Apparently it's a magical substance, I don't know. Can anyone help me with the mechanism? I would feel a great deal better if I knew what these catalysts were running around doing in the reaction.

The Attempt at a Solution


Gen1Genral: General Reaction with Generation One organocatalyst
Gen2General: General reaction with Generation Two organocatalyst
WrongMech: the first mechanism I tried that doesn't have the catalysts and is wrong
NewMech: the newest one I tried that is also probably wrong, seeing as I am stuck (on post under this one)
aldrichchemica: MacMillan paper, in case anyone else can actually understand it (on post under this one)
 

Attachments

  • Gen1Genral.jpg
    Gen1Genral.jpg
    9.2 KB · Views: 454
  • Gen2General.png
    Gen2General.png
    4.3 KB · Views: 423
  • WrongMech.jpg
    WrongMech.jpg
    12 KB · Views: 446
Physics news on Phys.org
NewMech: the newest one I tried that is also probably wrong, seeing as I am stuck
aldrichchemica: MacMillan paper, in case anyone else can actually understand it
 

Attachments

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...
Back
Top