SN1 Rxn: is hyrdride shift major product or the LG position?

AI Thread Summary
In the discussion about the SN1 reaction involving a hydride shift, the key focus is on determining which product is major: the original secondary leaving group position or the product formed after the hydride shift to the tertiary position. It is established that while a hydride shift requires additional activation energy, the resulting tertiary carbocation is more thermodynamically stable than the secondary one. Therefore, if sufficient activation energy is available, the reaction will favor the more stable tertiary product under thermodynamic control. Conversely, if conditions favor kinetic control, the product formation may prioritize the faster pathway, potentially leading to the secondary product being major. Ultimately, the outcome depends on the specific reaction conditions and the balance between activation energy and thermodynamic stability.
AMan24
Messages
58
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


So LG is on 2° position, and you have a hydride shift. So you form one product on 2° and one product on 3°.

Which product will be major which will be minor?

XwrrTZ5.jpg


Homework Equations


none.

The Attempt at a Solution


I know hydride shift will be more major than a methide shift, because it's not as energetically costly. But for hydride shift vs original LG position (2°), I'm not really sure. I know it does take extra energy to have the hydride shift, so that's making me think original LG position (2°) will be more major than the hydride shift. But i also know that 3° is better than 2°, so I'm really not sure
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The extra energy required for the hydride shift to occur is merely the activation energy for the hydride shift, which does not change the fact that the tertiary carbocation will be more thermodynamically stable than the secondary carbocation. As long as enough activation energy is available for the hydride shift to occur, the more thermodynamically stable intermediate will be favored (under these conditions the reaction is said to occur under thermodynamic control). Sometimes, chemists will set up reactions to minimize the thermal energy available to promote rearrangements of intermediates to more stable intermediates such that the reaction to form product occurs much more quickly than the rearragement (not sure if that is possible in this case, howerver). Under those conditions, the reaction is said to occur under kinetic control as the major product will be dictated by the relative kinetics or rearrangement or reaction of the intermediate and not the thermodynamic stability of the two intermediates.
 
  • Like
Likes BergsmaRN and AMan24
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

Back
Top