- Joined
- May 9, 2008
- Messages
- 113
- Reaction score
- 0
number 174.... not an acetal cause an acteal would have a H on carbon at it shows one bonded to two -OR groups and 2 -R groups.. so a mistake
mistake with destroyer
- Thread starter theedaddy77
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2007
- Messages
- 191
- Reaction score
- 0
Actually it's not wrong.
The generic form of an Acetal used to be considered as you mentioned or as displayed below:
But many have interpreted today that an Acetal can be considered a Carbon bonded with 2-OR groups and 2-R groups. Which in fact is a Ketal as shown below:
But todays terminology in Organic Chemistry all ketals are classified under a subset of Acetals. So in fact the answer is correct. It's a trick question but nothing wrong with it.
The generic form of an Acetal used to be considered as you mentioned or as displayed below:
But many have interpreted today that an Acetal can be considered a Carbon bonded with 2-OR groups and 2-R groups. Which in fact is a Ketal as shown below:
But todays terminology in Organic Chemistry all ketals are classified under a subset of Acetals. So in fact the answer is correct. It's a trick question but nothing wrong with it.
