Question about the viability of a chemical reaction

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the viability of a chemical reaction involving organic compounds, specifically focusing on the stability of reactants and products in the context of Sn2 reactions and the influence of polar protic solvents. Participants explore the factors that determine whether a reaction will proceed, including thermodynamic and kinetic considerations.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the stability of the end product is crucial for determining if a reaction will proceed, particularly in Sn2 reactions.
  • There is a question about why the stability of neutral species is not compared, as it may influence the reaction's viability.
  • One participant argues that the equilibrium constant and Gibbs energies of formation of all species must be considered, indicating that the stability of neutral species affects the reaction's direction.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the reaction's viability is more related to kinetics than thermodynamics, noting that both F- and OH- are poor leaving groups.
  • It is proposed that the overall stability of all species on the product side determines the spontaneity of the reaction, with charged species being dominant factors.
  • A later reply challenges the logic that increased stability of F- in polar protic solvents would make the reaction viable, suggesting that more stable reactants could actually hinder the reaction's favorability.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the importance of comparing the stability of neutral species versus charged species, and whether the stability of reactants or products is more critical in determining reaction viability. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that assumptions about the stability of neutral species may not always hold true, particularly in organic solvents where ions are less stable. The discussion highlights the complexity of factors influencing reaction viability, including bond energies and solvation effects.

sgstudent
Messages
726
Reaction score
3
For organic chemistry we typically look at the stability of the end product to determine if the reaction will proceed. For instance for an Sn2 reaction we would check if the product anion is more stable or less stable than the nucleophile attacking - if the product anion is more stable than the nucleophile then the reaction would proceed e.g. R3COH+F- --> R3CF+OH- is viable as OH- is more stable than F- so the reaction would occur.

1) however what I don't understand is why we don't compare the stability of the neutral species; in the example they were R3CF and R3COH.

2) this matters because in the case of polar protic solvents F- becomes more stable than OH-. So in this chemical reaction: R3COH+F- --> R3F+OH- in a polar protic solvent, shouldn't this reaction be considered viable since F- is more stable than OH-? However I thought this reaction is still not viable despite the increased stability of F-?
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
The equilibrium constant of any reaction, and therefore the direction the reaction proceeds to, depends on the Gibbs energies of formation of all reactants and products. Therefore the stability of the electrically neutral species also affects the position of the equilibrium. Also note that the solubility of the product ions can be a significant factor: sometimes alkyl halides can be converted to alkyl nitrates with silver nitrate, because the precipitation of insoluble silver halide salts drives the reaction forward.
 
sgstudent said:
2) this matters because in the case of polar protic solvents F- becomes more stable than OH-. So in this chemical reaction: R3COH+F- --> R3F+OH- in a polar protic solvent, shouldn't this reaction be considered viable since F- is more stable than OH-? However I thought this reaction is still not viable despite the increased stability of F-?
The main reason this reaction doesn't work (in either direction) has more to do with kinetics than thermodynamics. Both F- and OH- are terrible leaving groups.
 
It is the overall stability of all species on the product side which will determine the spontaneity of the reaction.Ions or charged particles are always dominating species so their stability factor will matter most.
 
sgstudent said:
For organic chemistry we typically look at the stability of the end product to determine if the reaction will proceed.

First, this is not a good strategy to determine if a reaction is therodynamically favorable. A reaction is thermodynamically favorable if all of the products are more stable than all of the reactants. So in your example, you should compare the stability of R3COH + F-
to that of R3CF + OH-.

Now I'll try to answer your questions.

1) We usually compare the stabilities of anions, why don't we compare the stabilities of neutral species?
Answer: You need to compare the stabilities of both things: neutral species and anions.
You likely first learned this anion comparison strategy when you learned about acids and bases. If you want to compare the acidities of two things, you can just compare the stabilities of the conjugate bases. This is because for an acid base reaction you have HA + H2O ⇌ A- + H3O+. If you have two of these reactions and want to subtract them to determine the difference in their free energies, the H2O's and H3O+'s cancel each other out. It's worth noting that it is perfectly valid to predict relative acidities by comparing the relative stabilities of two neutral HA's. You'll arrive at the same answer either way. It is more common to compare two A-'s because chemists are familiar with the factors that stabilize/destabilize charges, e.g. inductive effects, resonance, solvation, etc.
This strategy falls apart when you try to look at a single reaction. In your example, looking at the stability of OH- vs F- ignores the differences in C-F vs. C-O bond energies. Thus, you need to look at both neutral species and charged ions. That being said, it is common to just look at anions and just assume the neutral species are approximately equal in energy, but this assumption is not always valid. This assumption is often made because ions are quite high in free energy in organic solvents, as their charges are not well screened. Thus the overall change in free energy of the reaction is assumed to be driven by factors that stabilize the charge.

2) "in the case of polar protic solvents F- becomes more stable than OH-. So in this chemical reaction: R3COH + F- --> R3F+OH= in a polar protic solvent, shouldn't this reaction be considered viable since F- is more stable than OH-? However I thought this reaction is still not viable despite the increased stability of F-?"
I think there's a flaw in your logic. If fluoride ion is more stable in protic solvents, this would be a reason that the reaction isn't viable. The more stable the reactants, the less favorable the reaction.

Hope this helps.
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
3K