Why is this not considered chiral?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

NameAlreadyTake

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Looking at this picture why is the molecule circled in blue not considered chiral? In the video it's said that the molecule with R+S over it is chiral while the rest aren't. I understand why that molecule is chiral, but why isn't the one circled in blue(with the chiral carbon being the blue one)?

chiral.jpg


At first I was thought it was because it was bonded to 3 other carbons and a hydrogen, however the chiral molecule is bonded to 2 carbons, a hydrogen, and a chlorine. It's still chiral though since the two carbons aren't equivalent. All the carbons in the circled molecule aren't equivalent either, so why isn't it chiral?

Members don't see this ad.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
It should definitely be chiral. It's bonded to 2 Cs, yes, but one is a methyl group and the other is an ethyl group, so that's technically different. However, it looks like under it is R&S versions. What you may be confused about is it being optically active. It may not be optically active because it is created as a racemic mixture.

Scratch that: I think the R&S now that I look at it is for the compound below it.
 
The carbon in blue it looks as if although its bonded to a methyl and an ethyl its bonded to two CH2's so maybe thats why its not chiral. Not really sure?
 
The carbon in blue it looks as if although its bonded to a methyl and an ethyl its bonded to two CH2's so maybe thats why its not chiral. Not really sure?

not sure if you understand the concept of chirality. Having two CH2's bonded immediately to a carbon tells us nothing about chirality.
 
I would just think that because its the same then it wouldn't be chiral. Chiral just means that an atom has 4 different groups bonded to it.
 
Top