Largest alkane having a given alkane as its base name
$begingroup$
What is the largest (most carbon atoms) alkane having heptane as its base name?
For example, 2,2,3,3-tetramethylbutane is the largest (most carbon atoms) alkane retaining butane as its base name.
organic-chemistry nomenclature
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
What is the largest (most carbon atoms) alkane having heptane as its base name?
For example, 2,2,3,3-tetramethylbutane is the largest (most carbon atoms) alkane retaining butane as its base name.
organic-chemistry nomenclature
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
You put as many side chains on it as possible without creating a new longest chain. Then you do the same with each of the side chains, and then you hope that the final molecule's center hasn't become so dense that it snaps in two.
$endgroup$
– Karl
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is a subset of a very interesting theoretical question about how many isomers are possible for simple hydrocarbons discussed in this question: chemistry.stackexchange.com/q/16135/81 . Answers there also address questions about whether potential molecules are physically possible.
$endgroup$
– matt_black
5 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
What is the largest (most carbon atoms) alkane having heptane as its base name?
For example, 2,2,3,3-tetramethylbutane is the largest (most carbon atoms) alkane retaining butane as its base name.
organic-chemistry nomenclature
$endgroup$
What is the largest (most carbon atoms) alkane having heptane as its base name?
For example, 2,2,3,3-tetramethylbutane is the largest (most carbon atoms) alkane retaining butane as its base name.
organic-chemistry nomenclature
organic-chemistry nomenclature
edited 2 hours ago
Karl
5,5751329
5,5751329
asked 7 hours ago
Nandakumar U KNandakumar U K
227
227
1
$begingroup$
You put as many side chains on it as possible without creating a new longest chain. Then you do the same with each of the side chains, and then you hope that the final molecule's center hasn't become so dense that it snaps in two.
$endgroup$
– Karl
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is a subset of a very interesting theoretical question about how many isomers are possible for simple hydrocarbons discussed in this question: chemistry.stackexchange.com/q/16135/81 . Answers there also address questions about whether potential molecules are physically possible.
$endgroup$
– matt_black
5 hours ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
You put as many side chains on it as possible without creating a new longest chain. Then you do the same with each of the side chains, and then you hope that the final molecule's center hasn't become so dense that it snaps in two.
$endgroup$
– Karl
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is a subset of a very interesting theoretical question about how many isomers are possible for simple hydrocarbons discussed in this question: chemistry.stackexchange.com/q/16135/81 . Answers there also address questions about whether potential molecules are physically possible.
$endgroup$
– matt_black
5 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
You put as many side chains on it as possible without creating a new longest chain. Then you do the same with each of the side chains, and then you hope that the final molecule's center hasn't become so dense that it snaps in two.
$endgroup$
– Karl
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
You put as many side chains on it as possible without creating a new longest chain. Then you do the same with each of the side chains, and then you hope that the final molecule's center hasn't become so dense that it snaps in two.
$endgroup$
– Karl
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is a subset of a very interesting theoretical question about how many isomers are possible for simple hydrocarbons discussed in this question: chemistry.stackexchange.com/q/16135/81 . Answers there also address questions about whether potential molecules are physically possible.
$endgroup$
– matt_black
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is a subset of a very interesting theoretical question about how many isomers are possible for simple hydrocarbons discussed in this question: chemistry.stackexchange.com/q/16135/81 . Answers there also address questions about whether potential molecules are physically possible.
$endgroup$
– matt_black
5 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Any alkyl substituent of butane in position 2 or 3 cannot be longer than $ce{CH3}$ since that would lead to a longer parent chain. And obviously, there cannot be any alkyl substituent at all in the first or the last position of the butane chain. Therefore, the largest structure based on a butane parent chain is 2,2,3,3-tetramethylbutane.
This principle can be expanded to a heptane parent chain. The maximum length for alkyl substituent chains are 0 for position 1 and 7, 1 for position 2 and 6, 2 for position 3 and 5, and 3 for position 4. Therefore, the largest theoretical structure based on a heptane parent chain is 3,3,5,5-tetra-tert-butyl-4,4-bis[3-(tert-butyl)-2,2,4,4-tetramethylpentan-3-yl]-2,2,6,6-tetramethylheptane ($ce{C53H108}$).
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I believe this thing is much too crowded to survive, but then again, that's not what the question was about. Other than that, you are right.
$endgroup$
– Ivan Neretin
6 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@IvanNeretin Agreed, the inner C–C bonds would probably be stretched to more than 2 Å. That’s why I wrote “largest theoretical structure”.
$endgroup$
– Loong♦
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Loong make that definitely. ;-)
$endgroup$
– Karl
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
My head hurts trying to parse that name. Could you draw it and give its simple overall formula? Then I can look it up on the list given in answers to chemistry.stackexchange.com/q/16135/81
$endgroup$
– matt_black
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Preferred IUPAC names is a good concept, but “tetrakis(tri-tert-butylmethyl)methane” is somewhat shorter and clearer ;)
$endgroup$
– mykhal
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
That's hard to tell, because already tetra-tert-butylmethane (3,3-di-tert-butyl-2,2,4,4-tetramethylpentane) is so unstable it cannot exist. You want a parent chain that is even two atoms longer.
Actually it seems also removing one methyl group from $ce{tBu_4}$methane doesn't make it sufficiently stable, so one has to be a bit more generous in weeding out branches for larger hyperbranched alkanes.
I believe that any permethylated (or per-n-alkylated) linear chain is principally possible, but adding more side-side chains to adjacent side chains will make the molecule snap in two.
So the biggest possible sum formula would be something based on
3,5-di-tert-butyl-2,2,3,4,4,5,6,6-octaamethylheptane = $ce{C23H48}$
. You can surely make the inner methyl substituents longer,
3,5-di-tert-butyl-3,5-diethyl-4,4-di-n-propyl-2,2,6,6-tetraamethylheptane = $ce{C29H60}$
, and then you can probably add 4 methly to the nPr and Et to give iBu and i-Pr that's $ce{C33H68}$. Any more and I'll bet it breaks, quite a way from the theoretical $ce{C53H108}$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "431"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f108219%2flargest-alkane-having-a-given-alkane-as-its-base-name%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Any alkyl substituent of butane in position 2 or 3 cannot be longer than $ce{CH3}$ since that would lead to a longer parent chain. And obviously, there cannot be any alkyl substituent at all in the first or the last position of the butane chain. Therefore, the largest structure based on a butane parent chain is 2,2,3,3-tetramethylbutane.
This principle can be expanded to a heptane parent chain. The maximum length for alkyl substituent chains are 0 for position 1 and 7, 1 for position 2 and 6, 2 for position 3 and 5, and 3 for position 4. Therefore, the largest theoretical structure based on a heptane parent chain is 3,3,5,5-tetra-tert-butyl-4,4-bis[3-(tert-butyl)-2,2,4,4-tetramethylpentan-3-yl]-2,2,6,6-tetramethylheptane ($ce{C53H108}$).
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I believe this thing is much too crowded to survive, but then again, that's not what the question was about. Other than that, you are right.
$endgroup$
– Ivan Neretin
6 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@IvanNeretin Agreed, the inner C–C bonds would probably be stretched to more than 2 Å. That’s why I wrote “largest theoretical structure”.
$endgroup$
– Loong♦
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Loong make that definitely. ;-)
$endgroup$
– Karl
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
My head hurts trying to parse that name. Could you draw it and give its simple overall formula? Then I can look it up on the list given in answers to chemistry.stackexchange.com/q/16135/81
$endgroup$
– matt_black
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Preferred IUPAC names is a good concept, but “tetrakis(tri-tert-butylmethyl)methane” is somewhat shorter and clearer ;)
$endgroup$
– mykhal
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Any alkyl substituent of butane in position 2 or 3 cannot be longer than $ce{CH3}$ since that would lead to a longer parent chain. And obviously, there cannot be any alkyl substituent at all in the first or the last position of the butane chain. Therefore, the largest structure based on a butane parent chain is 2,2,3,3-tetramethylbutane.
This principle can be expanded to a heptane parent chain. The maximum length for alkyl substituent chains are 0 for position 1 and 7, 1 for position 2 and 6, 2 for position 3 and 5, and 3 for position 4. Therefore, the largest theoretical structure based on a heptane parent chain is 3,3,5,5-tetra-tert-butyl-4,4-bis[3-(tert-butyl)-2,2,4,4-tetramethylpentan-3-yl]-2,2,6,6-tetramethylheptane ($ce{C53H108}$).
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I believe this thing is much too crowded to survive, but then again, that's not what the question was about. Other than that, you are right.
$endgroup$
– Ivan Neretin
6 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@IvanNeretin Agreed, the inner C–C bonds would probably be stretched to more than 2 Å. That’s why I wrote “largest theoretical structure”.
$endgroup$
– Loong♦
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Loong make that definitely. ;-)
$endgroup$
– Karl
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
My head hurts trying to parse that name. Could you draw it and give its simple overall formula? Then I can look it up on the list given in answers to chemistry.stackexchange.com/q/16135/81
$endgroup$
– matt_black
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Preferred IUPAC names is a good concept, but “tetrakis(tri-tert-butylmethyl)methane” is somewhat shorter and clearer ;)
$endgroup$
– mykhal
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Any alkyl substituent of butane in position 2 or 3 cannot be longer than $ce{CH3}$ since that would lead to a longer parent chain. And obviously, there cannot be any alkyl substituent at all in the first or the last position of the butane chain. Therefore, the largest structure based on a butane parent chain is 2,2,3,3-tetramethylbutane.
This principle can be expanded to a heptane parent chain. The maximum length for alkyl substituent chains are 0 for position 1 and 7, 1 for position 2 and 6, 2 for position 3 and 5, and 3 for position 4. Therefore, the largest theoretical structure based on a heptane parent chain is 3,3,5,5-tetra-tert-butyl-4,4-bis[3-(tert-butyl)-2,2,4,4-tetramethylpentan-3-yl]-2,2,6,6-tetramethylheptane ($ce{C53H108}$).
$endgroup$
Any alkyl substituent of butane in position 2 or 3 cannot be longer than $ce{CH3}$ since that would lead to a longer parent chain. And obviously, there cannot be any alkyl substituent at all in the first or the last position of the butane chain. Therefore, the largest structure based on a butane parent chain is 2,2,3,3-tetramethylbutane.
This principle can be expanded to a heptane parent chain. The maximum length for alkyl substituent chains are 0 for position 1 and 7, 1 for position 2 and 6, 2 for position 3 and 5, and 3 for position 4. Therefore, the largest theoretical structure based on a heptane parent chain is 3,3,5,5-tetra-tert-butyl-4,4-bis[3-(tert-butyl)-2,2,4,4-tetramethylpentan-3-yl]-2,2,6,6-tetramethylheptane ($ce{C53H108}$).
edited 4 hours ago
answered 6 hours ago
Loong♦Loong
32.9k881168
32.9k881168
1
$begingroup$
I believe this thing is much too crowded to survive, but then again, that's not what the question was about. Other than that, you are right.
$endgroup$
– Ivan Neretin
6 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@IvanNeretin Agreed, the inner C–C bonds would probably be stretched to more than 2 Å. That’s why I wrote “largest theoretical structure”.
$endgroup$
– Loong♦
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Loong make that definitely. ;-)
$endgroup$
– Karl
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
My head hurts trying to parse that name. Could you draw it and give its simple overall formula? Then I can look it up on the list given in answers to chemistry.stackexchange.com/q/16135/81
$endgroup$
– matt_black
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Preferred IUPAC names is a good concept, but “tetrakis(tri-tert-butylmethyl)methane” is somewhat shorter and clearer ;)
$endgroup$
– mykhal
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
1
$begingroup$
I believe this thing is much too crowded to survive, but then again, that's not what the question was about. Other than that, you are right.
$endgroup$
– Ivan Neretin
6 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@IvanNeretin Agreed, the inner C–C bonds would probably be stretched to more than 2 Å. That’s why I wrote “largest theoretical structure”.
$endgroup$
– Loong♦
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Loong make that definitely. ;-)
$endgroup$
– Karl
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
My head hurts trying to parse that name. Could you draw it and give its simple overall formula? Then I can look it up on the list given in answers to chemistry.stackexchange.com/q/16135/81
$endgroup$
– matt_black
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Preferred IUPAC names is a good concept, but “tetrakis(tri-tert-butylmethyl)methane” is somewhat shorter and clearer ;)
$endgroup$
– mykhal
2 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
I believe this thing is much too crowded to survive, but then again, that's not what the question was about. Other than that, you are right.
$endgroup$
– Ivan Neretin
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
I believe this thing is much too crowded to survive, but then again, that's not what the question was about. Other than that, you are right.
$endgroup$
– Ivan Neretin
6 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@IvanNeretin Agreed, the inner C–C bonds would probably be stretched to more than 2 Å. That’s why I wrote “largest theoretical structure”.
$endgroup$
– Loong♦
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
@IvanNeretin Agreed, the inner C–C bonds would probably be stretched to more than 2 Å. That’s why I wrote “largest theoretical structure”.
$endgroup$
– Loong♦
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Loong make that definitely. ;-)
$endgroup$
– Karl
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Loong make that definitely. ;-)
$endgroup$
– Karl
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
My head hurts trying to parse that name. Could you draw it and give its simple overall formula? Then I can look it up on the list given in answers to chemistry.stackexchange.com/q/16135/81
$endgroup$
– matt_black
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
My head hurts trying to parse that name. Could you draw it and give its simple overall formula? Then I can look it up on the list given in answers to chemistry.stackexchange.com/q/16135/81
$endgroup$
– matt_black
5 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Preferred IUPAC names is a good concept, but “tetrakis(tri-tert-butylmethyl)methane” is somewhat shorter and clearer ;)
$endgroup$
– mykhal
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Preferred IUPAC names is a good concept, but “tetrakis(tri-tert-butylmethyl)methane” is somewhat shorter and clearer ;)
$endgroup$
– mykhal
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
That's hard to tell, because already tetra-tert-butylmethane (3,3-di-tert-butyl-2,2,4,4-tetramethylpentane) is so unstable it cannot exist. You want a parent chain that is even two atoms longer.
Actually it seems also removing one methyl group from $ce{tBu_4}$methane doesn't make it sufficiently stable, so one has to be a bit more generous in weeding out branches for larger hyperbranched alkanes.
I believe that any permethylated (or per-n-alkylated) linear chain is principally possible, but adding more side-side chains to adjacent side chains will make the molecule snap in two.
So the biggest possible sum formula would be something based on
3,5-di-tert-butyl-2,2,3,4,4,5,6,6-octaamethylheptane = $ce{C23H48}$
. You can surely make the inner methyl substituents longer,
3,5-di-tert-butyl-3,5-diethyl-4,4-di-n-propyl-2,2,6,6-tetraamethylheptane = $ce{C29H60}$
, and then you can probably add 4 methly to the nPr and Et to give iBu and i-Pr that's $ce{C33H68}$. Any more and I'll bet it breaks, quite a way from the theoretical $ce{C53H108}$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
That's hard to tell, because already tetra-tert-butylmethane (3,3-di-tert-butyl-2,2,4,4-tetramethylpentane) is so unstable it cannot exist. You want a parent chain that is even two atoms longer.
Actually it seems also removing one methyl group from $ce{tBu_4}$methane doesn't make it sufficiently stable, so one has to be a bit more generous in weeding out branches for larger hyperbranched alkanes.
I believe that any permethylated (or per-n-alkylated) linear chain is principally possible, but adding more side-side chains to adjacent side chains will make the molecule snap in two.
So the biggest possible sum formula would be something based on
3,5-di-tert-butyl-2,2,3,4,4,5,6,6-octaamethylheptane = $ce{C23H48}$
. You can surely make the inner methyl substituents longer,
3,5-di-tert-butyl-3,5-diethyl-4,4-di-n-propyl-2,2,6,6-tetraamethylheptane = $ce{C29H60}$
, and then you can probably add 4 methly to the nPr and Et to give iBu and i-Pr that's $ce{C33H68}$. Any more and I'll bet it breaks, quite a way from the theoretical $ce{C53H108}$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
That's hard to tell, because already tetra-tert-butylmethane (3,3-di-tert-butyl-2,2,4,4-tetramethylpentane) is so unstable it cannot exist. You want a parent chain that is even two atoms longer.
Actually it seems also removing one methyl group from $ce{tBu_4}$methane doesn't make it sufficiently stable, so one has to be a bit more generous in weeding out branches for larger hyperbranched alkanes.
I believe that any permethylated (or per-n-alkylated) linear chain is principally possible, but adding more side-side chains to adjacent side chains will make the molecule snap in two.
So the biggest possible sum formula would be something based on
3,5-di-tert-butyl-2,2,3,4,4,5,6,6-octaamethylheptane = $ce{C23H48}$
. You can surely make the inner methyl substituents longer,
3,5-di-tert-butyl-3,5-diethyl-4,4-di-n-propyl-2,2,6,6-tetraamethylheptane = $ce{C29H60}$
, and then you can probably add 4 methly to the nPr and Et to give iBu and i-Pr that's $ce{C33H68}$. Any more and I'll bet it breaks, quite a way from the theoretical $ce{C53H108}$.
$endgroup$
That's hard to tell, because already tetra-tert-butylmethane (3,3-di-tert-butyl-2,2,4,4-tetramethylpentane) is so unstable it cannot exist. You want a parent chain that is even two atoms longer.
Actually it seems also removing one methyl group from $ce{tBu_4}$methane doesn't make it sufficiently stable, so one has to be a bit more generous in weeding out branches for larger hyperbranched alkanes.
I believe that any permethylated (or per-n-alkylated) linear chain is principally possible, but adding more side-side chains to adjacent side chains will make the molecule snap in two.
So the biggest possible sum formula would be something based on
3,5-di-tert-butyl-2,2,3,4,4,5,6,6-octaamethylheptane = $ce{C23H48}$
. You can surely make the inner methyl substituents longer,
3,5-di-tert-butyl-3,5-diethyl-4,4-di-n-propyl-2,2,6,6-tetraamethylheptane = $ce{C29H60}$
, and then you can probably add 4 methly to the nPr and Et to give iBu and i-Pr that's $ce{C33H68}$. Any more and I'll bet it breaks, quite a way from the theoretical $ce{C53H108}$.
edited 2 hours ago
answered 6 hours ago
KarlKarl
5,5751329
5,5751329
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Chemistry Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f108219%2flargest-alkane-having-a-given-alkane-as-its-base-name%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
You put as many side chains on it as possible without creating a new longest chain. Then you do the same with each of the side chains, and then you hope that the final molecule's center hasn't become so dense that it snaps in two.
$endgroup$
– Karl
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
This is a subset of a very interesting theoretical question about how many isomers are possible for simple hydrocarbons discussed in this question: chemistry.stackexchange.com/q/16135/81 . Answers there also address questions about whether potential molecules are physically possible.
$endgroup$
– matt_black
5 hours ago