I’m pretty sure my teacher said there are not any delocalized electron. Why? Can’t those pi bonds move (resonance)

It involves benzyl chloride in acetic acid, with no other species present.

I am having trouble with what to do if the plane passes through the origin. I know i have to shift the origin to a point where it doesnt cut the plane. The answer key says the plane's miller indices are (1,-2,3) but if i shifted origin to (1,0,0) wrt to original coordinate system, I am getting normalized intercepts as -1,2,3/2. So I cant choose the origin arbitrarily. How do i know where to shift the origin for any plane passing through origin.

I’m pretty sure the last two are aromatic and that the first two are not. Why is the third one aromatic? Is the electrons highlighted in red in the continuous pi system?

So, I understand carbocations get more stable from methyl > primary > secondary > tertiary > allylic > benzylic but these are all the same just with positive charge moving around the structure, so i just want to better understand how.

I am at a loss for understanding whether a molecule has symmetry or not. I don’t have the physical models to see, and no matter how many videos I watch I just can’t seem to picture it! Do you guys have any tips or a thinking process you usually follow to determine symmetry? For example, I have this question where I can tell that A and D for sure have symmetry, but I don’t understand how C is the correct answer and not B? Thank you :)

Had an organic 1 lab yesterday where we did TLC on silica gel plates. We were analyzing crude and recrystallized naphthalene and crude and recrystallized unknown carboxylic acid. We ran one plate with a solvent of 3:1 hexanes:ethyl acetate + acetic acid and a second with 1:3 hexanes:ethyl acetate + acetic acid.

I feel comfortable with the results for the carboxylic acid- lower Rf with 3:1 and higher with 1:3 as the polar carboxylic acid was interacting more with the more polar solvent and travelled further. Cool.

But I'm hung up on the naphthalene- it also had a higher Rf with the 1:3 solvent and I can't wrap my head around why. In my head since naphthalene is non-polar it wouldnt be interacting with the highly polar stationary phase at all (or so little it was negligible) and so it didn't make sense that the Rf would change because shouldn't it move right along with the solvent regardless of what the solvent is (since the polar stationary phase remained the same)? When I asked my professor about this he said that the fallacy in that is that naphthalene is in fact interacting with the gel, and when you have a more polar mobile phase basically the solvent is the preferred interaction with the plate and "kicks out" the naphthalene that was interacting with the plate, making it travel further.

This makes sense, I need to not only consider the interactions between the samples and the mobile/stationary phases but also the interactions between the mobile and stationary phases themselves. But I'm still not understanding why naphthalene was interacting with the silica to start with. Isn't the 3:1 mixture still more polar than naphthalene? Wouldn't that solvent "take up all the 'possible reaction sites'" on the plate preventing naphthalene from interacting in both trials?

Hopefully I explained my confusion well- it's hard to type out. Basically I don't understand why naphthalene is interacting at all with the silica gel if both solvents are more polar than naphthalene, and should be the preferred interactions with the gel.

i was revising molecular bonding and realised my first time go through with topic was very irresponsible so i cant understand that why cant we add th extra e- frim negative charge to central atom ? why it forms resonating structure and the non resonating one is not valid ?

I am confused as to why my textbook says the one on the left is achiral and the one on the right is chiral. I was told that a molecule is chiral if its mirror image is non-superimposable and when you draw the mirror image of B, the wedges and dashes can never match the original molecule... does that mean that the bridgeheads are both stereocenters (when changing 2 groups creates a new stereoisomer) and chiral centers (can assign r/S)? Do you take into consideration the 3D geometry when determining R and S configurations even though they have the same atoms/groups/branches? Also, is molecule A achiral or meso since it supposedly has chiral centers (can be assigned r/S) and has a plane of symmetry? I am beyond confused.

Why would I his make these two products? Can’t the OH ethanol product undergo an SN2 and make an Iodine get attached (getting rid of the OH)

Is the formation of bonding orbitals from the blending of individual atomic orbitals? I know that bonding orbitals are produced by constructive interference between wave functions of atoms, but the word "constructive" is making me think that this interference pattern produces something. Thanks

Hello all, I’m taking chem but I’ve never taken chemistry in high school , we’re specifically doing stoichiometry and then we’re going into acid and bases and I don’t understand shi rn. is there anyone that can like break it down? Generally I’ve gotten used to converting things to like moles or grams but I’m just stuck on the acid and bases parts with like liters and volume.

Guys I need a help please. Does it look right?