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

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: 108
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! :(
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top