Am I being daft? but there are three tertiary carbons circled on the image.
ahaha. It's not an image from my notebook. I found it somewhere. Anyway, how do we consider a carbon bonded to two carbons and one oxygen as a tertiary carbon? I only see two tertiary carbons here.
ahaha. It's not an image from my notebook. I found it somewhere. Anyway, how do we consider a carbon bonded to two carbons and one oxygen as a tertiary carbon? I only see two tertiary carbons here.
The number of hydrogens is more important in determining reactivity. They are essentially tertiary even if the definition says it has to be 3 carbons. Check the IUPAC definition out
The number of hydrogens is more important in determining reactivity. They are essentially tertiary even if the definition says it has to be 3 carbons. Check the IUPAC definition out
This is a bit confusing now. So how many tertiary carbons are there in the picture? Will I have to consider a carbon attached to two carbons and one nitrogen as 3o also? and what about a carbon with a triple bond to one carbon, and a single bond to other carbon?
I've looked online and most definitions went on, a tertiary carbon is one attached to three other carbons, and I believe this is flaw. How can I then locate which is which? :/
The consensus in the office is that we don't think that it is defined, but we think it is secondary.
If it were an OH group rather than the ether link, there would be no argument that it were a secondary alcohol. So why treat it differently?
I see.
Yes. I do agree with you. It should be treated in a similar way. But do I have to stick to the most common definition for 2/3o carbons? I heard there's a more accurate one.
I just don't think it's used for sp2 centres. Primary/secondary/tertiary is useful for looking at reactivity of SN1 vs SN2, or stability of carbocations/carbanions but there isn't really as much of an effect in reactivity at sp/sp2 centres so the labelling isn't that useful.
To go to the source though, IUPAC only seem to define primary/secondary/tertiary for alkyl groups (and amines, amides…)
I just don't think it's used for sp2 centres. Primary/secondary/tertiary is useful for looking at reactivity of SN1 vs SN2, or stability of carbocations/carbanions but there isn't really as much of an effect in reactivity at sp/sp2 centres so the labelling isn't that useful.
To go to the source though, IUPAC only seem to define primary/secondary/tertiary for alkyl groups (and amines, amides…)
Sorry for appearing a bit late.
I utterly agree. So carbons do need some labeling, so that chemists can communicate as to which carbon is going to have the action or whatsoever. But we do label the sp2 centres also, don't we? Like the vinyl thingy. Is this right? Please clarify my misunderstanding.