MHB Thioester Isomer Count: ${C}_{4}{H}_{8}OS$ - 4 Possibilities

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the number of thioester isomers for the formula C4H8OS, with initial confusion about the structures drawn. Two isomers were identified, but the answer key indicated there are four. Clarification was provided that thioesters can have hydrogen as a valid R group, which allows for additional isomers. This understanding resolves the confusion regarding the structures that include hydrogen. Ultimately, it is confirmed that hydrogen can indeed count as an R group in thioester formation.
MermaidWonders
Messages
112
Reaction score
0
How many isomers are there with the following description?
- Thioesters with the formula ${C}_{4}{H}_{8}OS$?

I was able to draw 2 of them, but apparently, the answer key showed and stated that there are 4. I am confused about why the following two are possibliities:

View attachment 8117

I thought that thioesters are the functional groups where a C double-bonded to O is attached to both an R group and S, with S itself being attached to an R group. So, I was wondering how the 2 structures in the above attachment could be thioesters when the C that is double-bonded to O isn't attached to an R group but is instead to an H?
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-05-19 at 20.25.17.png
    Screen Shot 2018-05-19 at 20.25.17.png
    4.3 KB · Views: 127
Mathematics news on Phys.org
MermaidWonders said:
How many isomers are there with the following description?
- Thioesters with the formula ${C}_{4}{H}_{8}OS$?

I was able to draw 2 of them, but apparently, the answer key showed and stated that there are 4. I am confused about why the following two are possibliities:
I thought that thioesters are the functional groups where a C double-bonded to O is attached to both an R group and S, with S itself being attached to an R group. So, I was wondering how the 2 structures in the above attachment could be thioesters when the C that is double-bonded to O isn't attached to an R group but is instead to an H?

Hi MermaidWonders!

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thioester:

In chemistry thioesters are compounds with the functional group R–S–CO–R'.
View attachment 8118


So we can have both an R-group at the double-bonded C, and we can have another R'-group at the S.
 

Attachments

  • 150px-Thioester-2D-A.svg.png
    150px-Thioester-2D-A.svg.png
    816 bytes · Views: 123
I like Serena said:
Hi MermaidWonders!

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thioester:

In chemistry thioesters are compounds with the functional group R–S–CO–R'.


So we can have both an R-group at the double-bonded C, and we can have another R'-group a the S.


Right. So doesn't it mean that there must be an R group attached to the double-bonded C, which means that the above isomers in the attached image are not valid structures since C is attached to H in both?
 
Wait... does H count as an R group?
 
Yep. H counts as an R-group. (Nod)
 
I like Serena said:
Yep. H counts as an R-group. (Nod)

Makes sense now. Thanks! :)
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
42
Views
10K
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
3K
2
Replies
93
Views
11K
Replies
9
Views
19K
Back
Top