Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

Jump to content

Talk:Cycloaddition

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 12 years ago by V8rik in topic as a non-chemist...

IUPAC recommends: [x+y] for the involved electrons and (x+y) for the involved atoms.

So: Diels Alder is [2+4] and (2+4) 1,3-dipolar cycloaddition is [2+4] and (2+3).

Actually, many people still use [2+3] for the 1,3-dipolar cycloaddition, but I think, the difference or the existence of both variants should be part of the text.

I think that the [n#s + n#s] notation is better, where n is pi or sigma depending on what bonds are involved, # is the number of electrons, and s is either s or a for suprafacial or antarofacial..--Shniken1 (talk) 03:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
[edit]

There's a page for this sort of stuff -- it's the pericyclic reactions page. No need to call attention to 2+2+2 (this is so far, exclusively metal-catalyzed) or ene (why is that special over, say, claisen)?

Two notations

[edit]

I clarified the two different notations. It all links to the IUPAC Gold Book but that should be sufficient. I also divided the photochemical and thermal reactions into different sections.

The Simple English article for this is actually quite good and may be worth porting to here.

Roches (talk) 00:55, 26 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

as a non-chemist...

[edit]

This page really incomprehensible. I admit to being terrible at chemistry but the use of "cyclic adduct" (undoubtedly a very basic concept), makes the definition appear circular to me. I realize that this is cited as "standard definition". As I understand it, it means a molecule/adduct is attached to a bond. Then it can either break that bond to replace it with two new sigma-bonds to the adduct or leaving the original sigma-bond intact but forming two new ones from the pi-bonds (forming something like a triangle). Would it be possible to simplify this by putting the formal definition later in the text, starting with an explanation in more layman's terms? --Jaapkroe (talk) 14:01, 2 July 2014 (UTC)Reply