@DHMO your target is an ester.. how do you make esters? acid + alcohol. your starting material has one of the two functional groups, introduce the second, and then intramolecular esterification.
@Jan well I don't know much about where to find jobs listings, but if you are interested in Nagoya uni, i know some post docs here, I can put you in touch with them..(if they are okay with it, that is..they should be they are nice people)..you can ask about the group etc.
In transition state theory, the kinetics and thermodynamics of most reactions are controlled by the height of the transition state barrier and the difference in energy level between the reactants and the products.
Some reactions have very high energy barriers such that extreme conditions are nee...
Not sure how to fix it, but the major motive of asking this question is to find some high pressure formed compounds that can remain stable when you depressurise back to 1atm, given how the pressure route seemed to produce a lot of crazy looking compounds
To overcome an activation energy only by increasing pressure is nonsense. At high pressure, the activation energy can however be smaller, the kinetics can be different, etc. But why do complicated, dangerous pressure experiments, when very often a rather small temperature increase does the trick? — KarlJan 30 at 10:15
I guess a better way to phrase my question is I am trying to find a pressure analogy of the following: You know when you stretch a rubber band too far, it will get fatigue and cannot snap back any more
So I want some starting materials, which after compress them they form some crazy looking compound, but said compound is actually more thermodynamicaly stable, thus you can depressurise it back to 1 atm and it still survive
To sum up, recall that there are many examples of chemical reactions that produces more thermodynamically stable products after heating. I want a pressure analogue of this so that the stuff that forms will stay there after the extreme conditions are removed.
However Karl's statement suggest that is impossible, because it seems pressure only affect the barrier height
Well, I think I am still missing some details on how pressure works in chemical reactions, thus I think I need to search harder before I can find the relevant details to fix the question
High pressure chemistry tend to return compounds with very interesting and unusual bonding structures, such as $\ce{NaCl7}$ and $\ce{Na2He}$
However, for most of these, the resulting product is only at best metastable (e.g. diamond) when returning to ambient conditions, and does not survive when...
To overcome an activation energy only by increasing pressure is nonsense. At high pressure, the activation energy can however be smaller, the kinetics can be different, etc. But why do complicated, dangerous pressure experiments, when very often a rather small temperature increase does the trick? — KarlJan 30 at 10:15
Well Karl's account suggest it does somehow change the potential energy surface by lowering the barrier
Well, for starters, you literally squeeze some atoms so they are spatially close together, thus the orbitals will distort or overlap in ways previously impossible
But I really don't understand further details beyond that. Like I said, nearly nothing has been taught about solid state high pressure chemsitry in my undergrad
There. And there. Almost a year ago, a group of scientists claimed to have reached compounds of $\ce{Na}$ and $\ce{Cl}$ with weird stochiometries ($\ce{NaCl3, Na3Cl, NaCl7, Na3Cl2}$ and $\ce{Na2Cl}$).
What one of the articles says:
These compounds are thermodynamically stable and, once made,...
Not sure, I need to check the kinetics of this reaction at ambient conditions. I recall it is quite quick due to it being essentially a combustion reaction
For all nomenclature purposes, one should refer to the official IUPAC recommendations, which in this case are laid down in Nomenclature of Inorganic Chemistry — IUPAC Recommendations 2005, the ‘Red Book’. The relevant section for this question is section IR-5: Compositional Nomenclature, and Over...
> Multiplicative prefixes need not be used in binary names if there is no ambiguity about the stoichiometry of the compound […]. The prefix ‘mono’ is, strictly speaking, superfluous and is only needed for emphasizing stoichiometry when discussing compositionally related substances […].
@Ramanujan there are no other sodium peroxide, so "di-" is superfluous
@DHMO O wow, it seems metallic hydrogen (if it does survive the decompression, even if it theoretically should) is actually precisely the thing I want for my question
@DHMO I actually watched the video, this comment is noticed afterwards
the guy in the vid said similar things in regard to "theroetically it should, but it is unsure". He also mentioned how the report has a lot of controversay and the team plan to get more measurements and make more sample afterwards to test to ensure it is really metallic hydrogen
It is not a homework question. It is for research but I am not a chemist, if you you do not know the answer to the question leave it for someone who does. — user410467 mins ago