Pages: 1

Author Topic: Probably a stupid functional group question  (Read 95 times)

reDEEMed

  • Subordinate Wasp
  • ***
  • Posts: 202
Probably a stupid functional group question
« on: June 09, 2011, 01:29:32 AM »
I'm reading about functional groups and I get to ethers, and now I'm scratching my head. According to what I just read, here's my problem. This group starts off with a carbon that grabs three hydrogens, then an oxygen, the carbon is happy now. The oxygen, jonesin' for another electron fix, grabs another carbon. Now, why isn't that carbon on the end jonesin' for 3 more electrons, or is it?

I wouldn't bore you all with such mundane questions, but I have no idea what I would google to find the answer to that lol. I'm sure at some point I will come across my answer but I'm curious about it now and to be honest it's driving me crazy lol.
"Ego is a structure that is erected by a neurotic individual who is a member of a neurotic culture against the facts of the matter. And culture, which we put on like an overcoat, is the collectivized consensus about what sort of neurotic behaviors are acceptable."
— Terence McKenna

reDEEMed

  • Subordinate Wasp
  • ***
  • Posts: 202
Re: Probably a stupid functional group question
« Reply #1 on: June 09, 2011, 01:42:48 AM »
Is that where it attaches to whatever molecule it's attached to? That kinda makes sense, but I'm not sure. This is where a real classroom would help. Being able to distract the class with dumb questions.
"Ego is a structure that is erected by a neurotic individual who is a member of a neurotic culture against the facts of the matter. And culture, which we put on like an overcoat, is the collectivized consensus about what sort of neurotic behaviors are acceptable."
— Terence McKenna

Sedit

  • Global Moderator
  • Foundress Queen
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,099
Re: Probably a stupid functional group question
« Reply #2 on: June 09, 2011, 01:57:17 AM »
Yes in the case of ethers the formula is R1-O-R2 where on either R the electron deficiency is filled with normally carbon and hydrogen groups.

Look at simple cases such as Diethylethers structure or Methyl Ethyl ethers structure to get a general idea.
There once were some bees and you took all there stuff!
You pissed off the wasp now enough is enough!!!

reDEEMed

  • Subordinate Wasp
  • ***
  • Posts: 202
Re: Probably a stupid functional group question
« Reply #3 on: June 09, 2011, 11:59:45 AM »
Thanks for the reply, sedit. I looked at those models on wikipedia and stared at them for a while, now I'm really confused lol. What I thought I may have understood I did not. I won't bore you all by continuing this thread at this time. I will find and read other literature and maybe then it will make sense. I'm not interested in rote memirization, I have to understand it or I don't really feel I've learned anything.

I'll do more reading and if I need help understanding I'll ask here. Or, if someone could direct me to a forum better suited for these type of questions I would ask there. The last thing I want is the reputation of someone who won't motivate and learn themselves. I'm sure at some point I'll have questions worth asking. I'm just not so sure this is one of them.

Thanks again.
"Ego is a structure that is erected by a neurotic individual who is a member of a neurotic culture against the facts of the matter. And culture, which we put on like an overcoat, is the collectivized consensus about what sort of neurotic behaviors are acceptable."
— Terence McKenna

Shake

  • Dominant Queen
  • ****
  • Posts: 276
Re: Probably a stupid functional group question
« Reply #4 on: June 09, 2011, 11:35:34 PM »
an oxygen doesnt necesarrily just grab another carbon, it might during a reaction that leaves a carbon electronegative.. most of the time if the O is not doublebonded it grabs a Hydrogen.. thats why you never see single bonded O on the end of a molecule, it is always OH. everything grabs a H, that carbon on the end you mentioned, with 1 bond to the oxygen will grab 3 hydrogens to fill its electron imbalance.. That is called a methyl group Aka alkyl

Its not boring, if people dont understand things its good to speak up rather that just pretend they do so its a good thing

Also it is good to see someone with the motivation to learn for themselves, but sometimes the slightest point in the right direction can save people alot of time and confusion, so also a good thing. we should have a general chemistry questions section for sure

save all your favourite molecules and maybe even print them out. go over reactions you know then look how that reaction changed the molecule, then set out to find out why.. common sense and a periodic table will get you along way just doing this..
« Last Edit: June 09, 2011, 11:48:29 PM by Shake »

Sedit

  • Global Moderator
  • Foundress Queen
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,099
Re: Probably a stupid functional group question
« Reply #5 on: June 10, 2011, 01:10:05 AM »
Its better to not think in terms of the oxygen grabing Carbon, or hydrogen as this will lead so serious confusion down the line. What its grabbing is electrons that just so happen so be supplied by the Carbon or hydrogen. Understanding it this way will help down the line when you start to get into REDOX chemistry and mechanisms. If you are just looking at the Elements instead of the electrons then when you start to see them arrows it will get confusing to understand.
There once were some bees and you took all there stuff!
You pissed off the wasp now enough is enough!!!

reDEEMed

  • Subordinate Wasp
  • ***
  • Posts: 202
Re: Probably a stupid functional group question
« Reply #6 on: June 10, 2011, 12:08:18 PM »
I didn't have time last night to read more about functional groups, but it's Friday and time for the weekend! I'll be reading all weekend, no doubt about that. I think I did figure one thing out. I started thinking about so of the simpler groups I had read about, like OH that you mentioned, shake. And I was like hold on, if all these atoms have their fill of electrons why in the hell would it bound to anything else? That's when I realized I was considering that first carbon as it's own starting point and not considering that it is what is attached to whatever. Atleast that's the only way I'm able to make it work in my mind. Like I said though, I haven't had a chance to read more yet.

Sedit, I do understand that it's electron deficiency that promotes these bonds, why some bonds are preferred over others is something I haven't gotten to yet. But, breaking the habit of referring to things the way I did, is probably a good thing and I appreciate the advice.

Shake; you say the horny carbon on the end of the ether group I talked about will bond with 3 H's because H is attractive and easy. So are you saying that an ether group is really just an unsatisfied methyl group? Or am I missing something?

Sorry to use anaologies of horny atoms and slutty easy atoms whoring themselves, that's just how it looks in my twisted mind at this point lol.
"Ego is a structure that is erected by a neurotic individual who is a member of a neurotic culture against the facts of the matter. And culture, which we put on like an overcoat, is the collectivized consensus about what sort of neurotic behaviors are acceptable."
— Terence McKenna

Shake

  • Dominant Queen
  • ****
  • Posts: 276
Re: Probably a stupid functional group question
« Reply #7 on: June 12, 2011, 06:41:45 AM »
a methyl group is a way of describing 1 carbon on the end of a chain, its electron shells will try to balance themselfs by stealing/sharing electrons with a hydrogen. A hydrogen only has like 1 shell and so to make the carbon electron shells balanced it needs to use the electrons from more hydrogens  R-CH3 so the R can be anything like aryl or alkyl and the line is the electrons and the C is the carbon and the H3 hydrogens it is attached to

Now you know what 'R' means, google ether group and you understand it a bit better. anywhere you see it in a structure youll know
« Last Edit: June 12, 2011, 06:47:14 AM by Shake »

reDEEMed

  • Subordinate Wasp
  • ***
  • Posts: 202
Re: Probably a stupid functional group question
« Reply #8 on: June 12, 2011, 01:05:07 PM »
I got side tracked this weekend. Spent ALL day yesterday balancing equations and doing shit like figuring out how many grams of carbon are in 4.5 moles of glucose and all that fun shit. My head is still hurting lol. Soon as I get enough vicodin in me this morning I'll do it again.

It seems to me that functional groups are gonna be one of those things that you learn by doing. Hopefully I'll be moved soon and I can start doing. So, for the next month I'm gonna do this damn math so I can get it down and get comfortable. Btw, I don't know how you are at balancing formulae, but  if you want or need practice like I do I found a great website that has a java app that gives you shit to balance. I like it because it throws in some that are already balanced and tries to trick you. In case you're interested;

hxxp://education.jlab.org/elementbalancing/index.html

Thanks for your input, guys.
"Ego is a structure that is erected by a neurotic individual who is a member of a neurotic culture against the facts of the matter. And culture, which we put on like an overcoat, is the collectivized consensus about what sort of neurotic behaviors are acceptable."
— Terence McKenna
Pages: 1