What are the systematic names of ATP?

  • Thread starter Thread starter melissajohn
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Systematic
AI Thread Summary
The systematic names of ATP include 5-(6-aminopurin-9-yl)-3,4-dihydroxy-oxolan-2-yl methoxy-hydroxy-phosphoryl oxy-hydroxy-phosphoryl oxyphosphonic acid. These names are not IUPAC names but rather a detailed description of its structure. For information on ATP synthesis reactions in nature, users are encouraged to explore scientific databases and educational websites, as general searches may yield insufficient results. ATP primarily goes by its abbreviation and lacks other common names. The discussion highlights the complexity of ATP's nomenclature and the need for reliable sources on its synthesis.
melissajohn
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
I have a few questions about ATP.


what are the systematic names of ATP? are they the IUPAC NAMES?
answer:
5-(6-aminopurin-9-yl)
-3,4-dihydroxy-oxolan-2-yl
methoxy-hydroxy-phosphoryl
oxy-hydroxy-phosphoryl oxyphosphonic acid


where can I find some information about reaction of ATP synthesis in nature? i did a search on google but i couldn't find anything thorough enough. are there any other websites to check out?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Those are not IUPAC NameS, that whole thing is the name.
 


do you know any other names for atp?
 


Besides the IUPAC name and ATP I don't think it has another common name.
 
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