Question about organic spectroscopy (IR)

AI Thread Summary
In IR spectroscopy, molecules exhibit two primary vibrational modes: bending and stretching. For a non-linear molecule like water, which has three atoms, it possesses three degrees of freedom, leading to various vibrational modes. The bending modes include scissoring, rocking, wagging, and twisting, but in the case of water, only the scissoring mode is active in IR spectroscopy due to its molecular symmetry. This specificity arises from the molecule's geometry and the nature of its bonds. Understanding these vibrational modes is crucial for interpreting IR spectra accurately.
Rujano
Messages
17
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Hi. I'm starting to read about IR spectroscopy and I have a question. I know that there are 2 kinds of vibrational modes in molecules: bending and stretching, so in a molecule like water for example, how can I tell which one of the vibrational does it have?

What I mean is that I also know that there different types of modes within the bending category (scissoring, rocking, wagging and twisting), so which one of them is the right one (in the book that I'm reading it says that it can only have scissoring... why?)?

Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think your book is right, but I could be wrong.

A non-linear molecule with three atoms should have 3 degrees of freedom, because 3n-6 = 3(3)-6 = 3, where n = number of atoms involved in the molecule.
 
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