« first day (755 days earlier)      last day (1774 days later) » 

09:22
@YusufHasan: Hi. If you're free could you please clarify the following doubt from the chapter "Alcohols and ethers"? :
It's from Solomons, Fryhle, Snyder and the answer is given to be (a).
09:40
Is the answer B?
No it's (a).
Do you need the reason they provided?
Ah sorry, messed up looking at the options
It should be the KOH one
Can you please tell your reason for choosing KOH? I didn't like the reason stated in the book.
My reasoning is simply that the conjugate base formed after abstraction of proton from the tert alcohol, (CH3)3O- will form a better complex with Na+ than K+ , as the lattice will keep becoming weaker when O- forms an ionic compound moving down the group.Therefore, due to less counter-ion hindrance in the KOH case
It should give a better yield
I am guessing you would have heard about solvent separated ion pairs, it would kinda be sthgl like that
@YusufHasan Thanks! This sounds reasonable and intuitive.
@YusufHasan Do you want to see their reason?
09:49
Yeah sure, what are they saying?
Please wait. I'm typing.
Anyway your explanation is far better than the above one :)
Ok cool, yeah I just feel that the yield will depend more on the extent of solvent sheath separation between the reactants than what these guys have said, especially since both of these are pretty strong bases themselves
Any competition in basicity will always be won by NaOH/KOH as far as I feel
The problem was, I felt the same reason equally holds true for (a) too.
That's just not how reagents are added or work
if in the first step you added a base, and then you are adding the alkyl halide
then they are mutually exclusive things
You don't expect stuff from step 1 to linger around for step 2
Yeah exactly
like u said, a will be messed up too if what the book says was followed
@YusufHasan Yes. No issues in understanding that. I meant that solvation of the ions in both (a) and (b) are guided by the same reason. If so how can the reason given in the book can take precedence for (b) and not (a).
@YusufHasan Ah. Fine. You understood my point. That's why your reasoning is better.
09:58
Yeah, it's more like a cart before the horse thing these people have done...They had the answer first, then the reason came second ;)
It would be nice if you could write your own version of chemistry after your college. The other day (when it was in HNQ list) I read your explanation of dependence of bond angle on electronegativity using the ring-finger example. It was nice.
@GuruVishnu Thanks for the encouragement, I actually feel like teaching chemistry myself, but I get deterred many times due to doubts regarding the reception of these courses
But if I do see enough support sometime,sure...I might start on this venture as well :)
10:15
:-)
 
3 hours later…
13:29
Yo! How're you all doin??
scrolling reddit
and getting bored
😂
 
1 hour later…
14:55
Hello, I hope this is allowed here. My friends and I recently started using discord and thought it would be an amazing platform to discuss doubts (we were comparing it with telegram which, I think, is a very ugly app anyway). So we created a new server:
Anyone interested in joining a bunch of people discussing doubts and discovering the various features of discord is invited here discord.gg/kYsTe5A
Language of discussion is Hinglish

« first day (755 days earlier)      last day (1774 days later) »