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: 113
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! :(
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Is it possible to arrange six pencils such that each one touches the other five? If so, how? This is an adaption of a Martin Gardner puzzle only I changed it from cigarettes to pencils and left out the clues because PF folks don’t need clues. From the book “My Best Mathematical and Logic Puzzles”. Dover, 1994.
Back
Top