MHB Why Aren't Splitting Patterns & Integrations for Red & Blue Protons Different?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the confusion regarding the splitting patterns and integrations of red and blue protons in a specific compound. The red protons, being chemically equivalent and adjacent to two other protons, exhibit a triplet splitting pattern, while the blue protons, also equivalent but influenced by different adjacent carbons, show a quintet pattern. The n + 1 rule is applied to determine these patterns, with n representing the number of adjacent protons. The explanation clarifies the reasoning behind the observed splitting patterns and peak integrations. Understanding these concepts is crucial for interpreting NMR spectroscopy results in organic chemistry.
MermaidWonders
Messages
112
Reaction score
0
View attachment 8839

For the colourfully-annotated compound above, why aren't the splitting patterns and integrations for the red and blue set of protons "pentet, 6 H" and "octet, 4 H", respectively?
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2019-03-03 at 16.25.08.png
    Screen Shot 2019-03-03 at 16.25.08.png
    26.1 KB · Views: 110
Mathematics news on Phys.org
MermaidWonders said:
For the colourfully-annotated compound above, why aren't the splitting patterns and integrations for the red and blue set of protons "pentet, 6 H" and "octet, 4 H", respectively?

Never mind. I see why.
 
MermaidWonders said:
Never mind. I see why.
I'm curious. Would you be willing to share your solution?

-Dan
 
topsquark said:
I'm curious. Would you be willing to share your solution?

-Dan

Hi,

Sorry for the super late reply. Just saw this.

When I first came across that question, I was very confused as to why my professor had put "6 H, t" and "4 H, quintet" for the splitting patterns and peak integrations for the red and blue set of protons, respectively (as in the screenshot), so I tried to look at that question in a "different" way. If we start by looking at the red protons branching out from either of the 2 carbons, we see that there are 2 protons coming off of the adjacent carbon (whether you are looking at the top or bottom adjacent carbon). Because all 6 of the red protons are chemically-equivalent, it makes sense for the splitting pattern to be a triplet according to the n + 1 rule, where n = 2 for the adjacent C. Next, if we look at the blue set of protons, we are in a similar situation. All 4 of the blue protons are chemically-equivalent, and a quintet splitting pattern comes from the fact that the "top" OR "bottom" adjacent C (the C's with red protons branching off of it) gives n = 3 AND the other adjacent C (the one with a green proton branching off of it) gives n = 1, so together, n + 1 = 4 + 1 = 5 --> quintet.

Hope what I said sort of makes sense. I'm really no expert in organic chemistry myself, but at least this is the process I had to go through to understand that solution! :(
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Back
Top