Qvault OC Question

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

DogeDDS

Wow
7+ Year Member
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Can someone explain why this is the correct answer to the question? The answer I would've chosen isn't even offered on the list.

Wouldn't this mechanism (electrophilic addition) allow a hydride shift to occur, allowing 1 chlorine to attach to the tertiary carbon that's part of the ring, and only one would be on the secondary carbon that was part of the triple bond?
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2014-03-16 at 8.11.24 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2014-03-16 at 8.11.24 PM.png
    56.3 KB · Views: 175
In a reaction like that (H-X with alkene/alkyne), the H and X add at the same time, avoiding any carbocations, thus, avoiding any methyl/hydride shifts. It is markovnikov, so the Cl will bond with the most substituted carbon, producing a gem-dihalide.
 
In a reaction like that (H-X with alkene/alkyne), the H and X add at the same time, avoiding any carbocations, thus, avoiding any methyl/hydride shifts. It is markovnikov, so the Cl will bond with the most substituted carbon, producing a gem-dihalide.

Thanks, I believe I found the answer. However, I think the mechanism of HX + alkene still allows for the carbocation intermediate. The main reason this isn't true (I believe) with an alkyne is because a vinyl carbocation (which only has 1 alkyl group to stabilize the developing negative charge) is highly unstable, thus, the proton and halide add at the same time
 
If the original molecule was cyclohexylethylene (double CC bond instead of triple), the Cl- would then add to the tertiary carbon, correct? In other words, would a hydride shift occur.