<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What is the range of values for a (sp3)C-C(sp3) single bond length?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?feed=rss2&#038;p=7643" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643</link>
	<description>Chemistry with a twist</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 12:37:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Henry Rzepa</title>
		<link>http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643&#038;cpage=1#comment-11091</link>
		<dc:creator>Henry Rzepa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2012 17:37:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643#comment-11091</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for point out this fascinating study Paul.  I had been aware that one can &lt;i&gt;tune&lt;/i&gt;  an  S-S bond, but not that the effect also applied to e.g. C-C.  The examples you cite are carboranes, or electron deficient systems,  and so I guess when there is a deficit of electrons, there must be several alternatives  (indeed a continuum) for where they may end up.

Indeed, upon reflection, it may be quite a general phenomenon. I recollect &lt;a href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ct100470g&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;noting&lt;/a&gt; that a  C-S bond can be tuned across about two bond orders depending on the attached substituents (and this is not even an electron deficient system).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for point out this fascinating study Paul.  I had been aware that one can <i>tune</i>  an  S-S bond, but not that the effect also applied to e.g. C-C.  The examples you cite are carboranes, or electron deficient systems,  and so I guess when there is a deficit of electrons, there must be several alternatives  (indeed a continuum) for where they may end up.</p>
<p>Indeed, upon reflection, it may be quite a general phenomenon. I recollect <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ct100470g" rel="nofollow">noting</a><img src="http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/wp-content/plugins/zlinks/imgs/mini_rdf.gif" border="0" style="cursor: pointer; padding:0px 0px 0px 1px; margin:0px;" onmouseover="assignPopup(this, 'http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ct100470g', 'http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/wp-content/plugins/zlinks/');" alt="" /> that a  C-S bond can be tuned across about two bond orders depending on the attached substituents (and this is not even an electron deficient system).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Schleyer</title>
		<link>http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643&#038;cpage=1#comment-11088</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Schleyer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2012 14:27:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643#comment-11088</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Oliva, Annan, Schleyer, Vinas, and Teixidor, &lt;a href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ja052091b&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;JACS, 2005, 127, 13538&lt;/a&gt; report &quot;tunable&quot; carborane systems whereby C-C distances can be varied from 1.626 to 2,638Å, simply by changing substituents. &quot;There is no abrupt discontinuity over the entire range of CC lengths.&quot;   In short,one can get any CC distance one wishes in this ~1 Å range! Deciding when a &quot;CC bond &quot; stops being a &quot;CC bond&quot; along this range is a matter of definition and semantics. Obviously, a &quot;CC single bond&quot; has an increasingly smaller &quot;bond order&quot; upon being stretched continuously. There is no &quot;breaking point&quot; definable by distance or energy. I have computed such &quot;CC bond-breaking&quot; (energy vs. CC distance) plots for ethane dissociation into two CH3 radicals and the for the similar disruption of  hexamethyl ethane into two t-butyl radicals and was surprised  by the still appreciable &quot;CC bond enegy&quot; remaining at large (e.g., 2.5 Å)  CC separations.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oliva, Annan, Schleyer, Vinas, and Teixidor, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ja052091b" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">JACS, 2005, 127, 13538</a><img src="http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/wp-content/plugins/zlinks/imgs/mini_rdf.gif" border="0" style="cursor: pointer; padding:0px 0px 0px 1px; margin:0px;" onmouseover="assignPopup(this, 'http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ja052091b', 'http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/wp-content/plugins/zlinks/');" alt="" /> report &#8220;tunable&#8221; carborane systems whereby C-C distances can be varied from 1.626 to 2,638Å, simply by changing substituents. &#8220;There is no abrupt discontinuity over the entire range of CC lengths.&#8221;   In short,one can get any CC distance one wishes in this ~1 Å range! Deciding when a &#8220;CC bond &#8221; stops being a &#8220;CC bond&#8221; along this range is a matter of definition and semantics. Obviously, a &#8220;CC single bond&#8221; has an increasingly smaller &#8220;bond order&#8221; upon being stretched continuously. There is no &#8220;breaking point&#8221; definable by distance or energy. I have computed such &#8220;CC bond-breaking&#8221; (energy vs. CC distance) plots for ethane dissociation into two CH3 radicals and the for the similar disruption of  hexamethyl ethane into two t-butyl radicals and was surprised  by the still appreciable &#8220;CC bond enegy&#8221; remaining at large (e.g., 2.5 Å)  CC separations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frozen Semibullvalene: a holy grail (and a bis-homoaromatic molecule). &#171; Henry Rzepa</title>
		<link>http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643&#038;cpage=1#comment-11027</link>
		<dc:creator>Frozen Semibullvalene: a holy grail (and a bis-homoaromatic molecule). &#171; Henry Rzepa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Sep 2012 18:12:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643#comment-11027</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Henry Rzepa Chemistry with a twist      &#171; What is the range of values for a (sp3)C-C(sp3) single bond length? [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Henry Rzepa Chemistry with a twist      &laquo; What is the range of values for a (sp3)C-C(sp3) single bond length? [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Henry Rzepa</title>
		<link>http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643&#038;cpage=1#comment-10843</link>
		<dc:creator>Henry Rzepa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2012 07:01:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643#comment-10843</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[With the caveats above noted by Paul, I have found another structure (MAXKIG and possibly  MAXKUS (DOI: &lt;a href=&quot;http:/dx.doi.org/10.1021/cg050064r&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;10.1021/cg050064r&lt;/a&gt;) that appears to extend the upper range of the length of a C-C single bond to 1.77-1.79&#197; (this observation was actually noted in DOI: &lt;a href=&quot;http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed800058c&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;10.1021/ed800058c&lt;/a&gt;). These are a set of hexaphenylethane derivatives, and the authors note how very conformationally dependent the precise length is.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With the caveats above noted by Paul, I have found another structure (MAXKIG and possibly  MAXKUS (DOI: <a href="http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/http:/dx.doi.org/10.1021/cg050064r" rel="nofollow">10.1021/cg050064r</a><img src="http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/wp-content/plugins/zlinks/imgs/mini_rdf.gif" border="0" style="cursor: pointer; padding:0px 0px 0px 1px; margin:0px;" onmouseover="assignPopup(this, 'http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/http:/dx.doi.org/10.1021/cg050064r', 'http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/wp-content/plugins/zlinks/');" alt="" />) that appears to extend the upper range of the length of a C-C single bond to 1.77-1.79&Aring; (this observation was actually noted in DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed800058c" rel="nofollow">10.1021/ed800058c</a><img src="http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/wp-content/plugins/zlinks/imgs/mini_rdf.gif" border="0" style="cursor: pointer; padding:0px 0px 0px 1px; margin:0px;" onmouseover="assignPopup(this, 'http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed800058c', 'http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/wp-content/plugins/zlinks/');" alt="" />). These are a set of hexaphenylethane derivatives, and the authors note how very conformationally dependent the precise length is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Henry Rzepa</title>
		<link>http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643&#038;cpage=1#comment-10794</link>
		<dc:creator>Henry Rzepa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2012 19:00:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643#comment-10794</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Replying to  Steve, I recollect seeing a talk once about  Na2, in which the two sodium atoms were said to interact at a distance of several hundred &#197;, and were described as a  Rydberg bond. 

So the range of bonds defined by a bond dissociation  energy of  ~20 kcal/mol can range from F-F (~1.45 &#197;)  to  4&#197;! I guess the answer is that these two extremes are described by very different quantum mechanics. F-F is a classical example of a charge-shift bond, where the covalent component is actually repulsive, and of course the 4 &#197; one is presumably a strongly interacting biradical  (but perhaps not through space but through other bonds?). 

We might have thought we understood even the classical two-centre two-electron Lewis bond, but apparently not!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Replying to  Steve, I recollect seeing a talk once about  Na2, in which the two sodium atoms were said to interact at a distance of several hundred &Aring;, and were described as a  Rydberg bond. </p>
<p>So the range of bonds defined by a bond dissociation  energy of  ~20 kcal/mol can range from F-F (~1.45 &Aring;)  to  4&Aring;! I guess the answer is that these two extremes are described by very different quantum mechanics. F-F is a classical example of a charge-shift bond, where the covalent component is actually repulsive, and of course the 4 &Aring; one is presumably a strongly interacting biradical  (but perhaps not through space but through other bonds?). </p>
<p>We might have thought we understood even the classical two-centre two-electron Lewis bond, but apparently not!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Henry Rzepa</title>
		<link>http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643&#038;cpage=1#comment-10793</link>
		<dc:creator>Henry Rzepa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2012 18:53:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643#comment-10793</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By single bond, I meant a two-electron Lewis bond between two four-coordinate carbon atoms. The term sp3 in this sense was indeed too loose. Four coordinate is better (I agree that carbon in three-membered rings is often described as sp5+sp hybridised!). It is also interesting to speculate at what elongated distance a C-C two electron bond stops being such, and becomes a loosely interacting biradical. I would think not yet at 1.73&#197;, but quite possibly at say 2&#197;. I would also note that the Cambridge database is formally searched only for integer bond orders (this is how one specifies a search), and even that depends on how the deposited data is described by the curators. I have noted previously that some types of compound containing eg S...S interactions are sometimes recovered from the database by a search specifying a S-S single bond, and sometimes by specifying no S-S bond (to find all the entries, one has to do a boolean combination of two separate searches, with an OR). If one did not apply such a search mask, searches would take many times longer (i.e. based purely on interactomic distances). So this really is a practical expedient, rather than one based on a deeper definition of what a bond really is! 

Compound WUDKAH was deliberately ambiguous. Written as a reactant for a [3,3] sigmatropic shift, the terminal carbons are sp2, becoming sp3 only in the product. So at the half-way stage, they must be intermediate (or indeed biradical, and hence forming two 1-electron bonds instead of one 2-electron bond). The same ambiguity applies to e.g. two-electron-3-centre carbocations such as the norbornyl cation. There one has C-C distances of around 2&#197;, and again hybridisation that does not fall nicely into the classical sp2, sp3 categories.

One does tend to assume that bonds have to be &lt;i&gt;quantised&lt;/i&gt; into single, double triple, with perhaps half-values corresponding to 0.5, 1.5, 2.5. But the Cambridge data base (lets face it, there are more than 600,000 molecules and many more bonds described there by experimental data, a far wider spread than other spectroscopic techniques) does teach us that even the apparently straightforward two-electron single bond may be a fuzzier concept than Lewis would have imagined, spanning lengths ~1.43-1.73&#197;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By single bond, I meant a two-electron Lewis bond between two four-coordinate carbon atoms. The term sp3 in this sense was indeed too loose. Four coordinate is better (I agree that carbon in three-membered rings is often described as sp5+sp hybridised!). It is also interesting to speculate at what elongated distance a C-C two electron bond stops being such, and becomes a loosely interacting biradical. I would think not yet at 1.73&Aring;, but quite possibly at say 2&Aring;. I would also note that the Cambridge database is formally searched only for integer bond orders (this is how one specifies a search), and even that depends on how the deposited data is described by the curators. I have noted previously that some types of compound containing eg S&#8230;S interactions are sometimes recovered from the database by a search specifying a S-S single bond, and sometimes by specifying no S-S bond (to find all the entries, one has to do a boolean combination of two separate searches, with an OR). If one did not apply such a search mask, searches would take many times longer (i.e. based purely on interactomic distances). So this really is a practical expedient, rather than one based on a deeper definition of what a bond really is! </p>
<p>Compound WUDKAH was deliberately ambiguous. Written as a reactant for a [3,3] sigmatropic shift, the terminal carbons are sp2, becoming sp3 only in the product. So at the half-way stage, they must be intermediate (or indeed biradical, and hence forming two 1-electron bonds instead of one 2-electron bond). The same ambiguity applies to e.g. two-electron-3-centre carbocations such as the norbornyl cation. There one has C-C distances of around 2&Aring;, and again hybridisation that does not fall nicely into the classical sp2, sp3 categories.</p>
<p>One does tend to assume that bonds have to be <i>quantised</i> into single, double triple, with perhaps half-values corresponding to 0.5, 1.5, 2.5. But the Cambridge data base (lets face it, there are more than 600,000 molecules and many more bonds described there by experimental data, a far wider spread than other spectroscopic techniques) does teach us that even the apparently straightforward two-electron single bond may be a fuzzier concept than Lewis would have imagined, spanning lengths ~1.43-1.73&Aring;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven Bachrach</title>
		<link>http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643&#038;cpage=1#comment-10788</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Bachrach</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2012 17:00:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643#comment-10788</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I will have a post soon on another paper by Schreiner where he reports the dimer of two radicals formed from an extended diamond-like structure that has the &quot;bond length&quot; over 4 &#197; - yet the two halves are held together by over 20 or so kcal/mol]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I will have a post soon on another paper by Schreiner where he reports the dimer of two radicals formed from an extended diamond-like structure that has the &#8220;bond length&#8221; over 4 &Aring; &#8211; yet the two halves are held together by over 20 or so kcal/mol</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Schleyer</title>
		<link>http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643&#038;cpage=1#comment-10786</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Schleyer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2012 16:40:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ch.imperial.ac.uk/rzepa/blog/?p=7643#comment-10786</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Henry, I don&#039;t think your title asks the question meaningfully. What is a bond?
The 1,3-CC separation is 2,5Å between the ca. sp3 methyl carbons in e.g., propane. Is this a bond?  The C&#039;s in the &quot;CC bonds&quot;  you illustrate surely are not &quot;sp3 hybridized (especially in KAVKUO and WUDKAH, where they are ca. &quot;sp&quot;).  The CC bond length is about 2Å in the ethane radical cation, and I&#039;ve computed similar &quot;one electron&quot; C-C  bond lengths up to 2.5 Å even in neutral molecules (containing B&#039;s instead of C+&#039;s). These don&#039;t have &quot;sp3&quot; hybridized C&#039;s, but neither do the C&#039;s comprising  any &quot;stretched&quot; C-C  bond, since they must have partial singlet diradical character.  And why restrict the search to X-ray data, interesting as it may be? Thats not specified by your title question.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Henry, I don&#8217;t think your title asks the question meaningfully. What is a bond?<br />
The 1,3-CC separation is 2,5Å between the ca. sp3 methyl carbons in e.g., propane. Is this a bond?  The C&#8217;s in the &#8220;CC bonds&#8221;  you illustrate surely are not &#8220;sp3 hybridized (especially in KAVKUO and WUDKAH, where they are ca. &#8220;sp&#8221;).  The CC bond length is about 2Å in the ethane radical cation, and I&#8217;ve computed similar &#8220;one electron&#8221; C-C  bond lengths up to 2.5 Å even in neutral molecules (containing B&#8217;s instead of C+&#8217;s). These don&#8217;t have &#8220;sp3&#8243; hybridized C&#8217;s, but neither do the C&#8217;s comprising  any &#8220;stretched&#8221; C-C  bond, since they must have partial singlet diradical character.  And why restrict the search to X-ray data, interesting as it may be? Thats not specified by your title question.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

 Served from: www.ch.imperial.ac.uk @ 2013-05-25 03:48:47 by W3 Total Cache -->