Sciencemadness Discussion Board
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
Author: Subject: Cyclic Ozone
AngelEyes
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 187
Registered: 24-1-2003
Location: South of England
Member Is Offline

Mood: Better than it used to be.

[*] posted on 4-2-2005 at 04:38
Cyclic Ozone


Spotted this the other day:

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/rocketscience-05e.html

Might tickle someones fancy...
View user's profile View All Posts By User
JohnWW
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 2849
Registered: 27-7-2004
Location: New Zealand
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 4-2-2005 at 08:16


Cyclic O3 would be a very strained molecule. There is no N3 equivalent, and cyclopropane and its derivatives tend to be rather reactive with respect to ring-opening. O3 is usually a bent molecule, with the central O being tetravalent and positively charged, and with the negative charge resonating between being on either of he two outer Os.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
runlabrun
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 172
Registered: 4-12-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 4-2-2005 at 15:51


ahh but dont you see.... he is using laser beams.... that will make it work.....
I really have no idea, but it does sound impressive.... and if he does pull it off and get it to work, the applications would be very interesting.

I say, pretty cool.... provided it works.
-rlr
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Quibbler
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 65
Registered: 15-7-2005
Location: Trinidad and Tobago
Member Is Offline

Mood: Deflagrated

[*] posted on 15-7-2005 at 08:48
calculated energy


Well this thread nearly diappeared forever. My problem is that quantum mechanical calculations (I use GAMESS) make cyclic O3 much more stable than bent. Of course QM does not care about all this valence bond shit - strain? what strain?So either the QM programs are wrong (there are some weasely excuses out there why this is so) or there is a large energy barrier to form cyclic O3. Anyway good luck to the guy that got (presumably BIG) funds to do this extremely speculative piece of work. Forget the lasers just blast some oxygen and try to separate out the 0.00001% cyclic O3 that may or may not be formed
View user's profile View All Posts By User
12AX7
Post Harlot
*****




Posts: 4803
Registered: 8-3-2005
Location: oscillating
Member Is Offline

Mood: informative

[*] posted on 15-7-2005 at 13:10


Interesting.

Can you make polyperoxides? -O<sub>n</SUB>-, cyclic or linear? Why not?

Tim




Seven Transistor Labs LLC http://seventransistorlabs.com/
Electronic Design, from Concept to Layout.
Need engineering assistance? Drop me a message!
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User This user has MSN Messenger
chemoleo
Biochemicus Energeticus
*****




Posts: 3005
Registered: 23-7-2003
Location: England Germany
Member Is Offline

Mood: crystalline

[*] posted on 15-7-2005 at 13:35


For the reason that the normal peroxide bond is already quite unstable? How do you expect O-O-O to be stable as a result, except at -196 deg C or soemthing?
Similarly, the N-N bond is more stable than the O-O bond, and this is topped once again by the C-C bond of course.
It's to do with the electro-negativity of the molecule; and presumably the denser electron shell that constrains and disfavours the bonding, including the angles.

Quibbler- the strain is that the oxygen bonding is tetrahedral, i.e. 109 (?) deg. While in a triangular form (in case of cyclic O3), it is 60 deg. Quite a difference eh?
That's obviously your energy barrier. Plus steric crowding and all that, already cyclopropane is quite constrained, and has a large energy barrier to formation. Clearly this is much more a problem in cO3.

Personally I reckon these guys at DaRPA are wasting money.
They can't even use normal O3 in rockets, how do they expect to use cO3?

[Edited on 15-7-2005 by chemoleo]




Never Stop to Begin, and Never Begin to Stop...
Tolerance is good. But not with the intolerant! (Wilhelm Busch)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
12AX7
Post Harlot
*****




Posts: 4803
Registered: 8-3-2005
Location: oscillating
Member Is Offline

Mood: informative

[*] posted on 15-7-2005 at 14:58


So electronegativity is as much a measure (of sorts) of bonding to other things as itself? But that doesn't really make sense since boranes and silanes are less stable than carbanes (er.. alkanes) despite the lower electronegativity.

But yes N-N is more stable, they made poly-N at high pressures, and of course poly-C (of several forms) is made in the earth, and now the lab as well.

Tim




Seven Transistor Labs LLC http://seventransistorlabs.com/
Electronic Design, from Concept to Layout.
Need engineering assistance? Drop me a message!
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User This user has MSN Messenger
chemoleo
Biochemicus Energeticus
*****




Posts: 3005
Registered: 23-7-2003
Location: England Germany
Member Is Offline

Mood: crystalline

[*] posted on 15-7-2005 at 15:13


Uhmm. It doesn't make sense because you don't understand/know enough :P

It's electronegativity, steric and electronic crowding, bond angles, and type of orbitals etc. And of course whether an atom has a tendency to gain or lose electrons, which is in part determined by the above. I am sure there are other additional factors I am not aware of.
You need to read a book to understand these things - I think there is a thread on the silicone man or something... where people argued (as usual) that the silicone man should be possible... until someone pointed out, breathing SiO2 is hardly possible :D

So. Diboran. Not stable, because it cannot really achieve the old octett, while in carbon can, by sharing electrons. Even less for Be, or Mg, or Ca. They are ionic, and tend to give away electrons, rather than accepting them (while Be and B are special cases anyhow). That's why metalloorganics are very reactive.

Anyway. This is waaaaay off topic.

Really, read a book, on orbital theory, inorganic physical chemistry and such, it will explain this much better than I ever can, and probably much more accurately, too.




Never Stop to Begin, and Never Begin to Stop...
Tolerance is good. But not with the intolerant! (Wilhelm Busch)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
mykhal
Harmless
*




Posts: 23
Registered: 4-4-2003
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 16-7-2005 at 03:11


Quote:
Originally posted by JohnWW
O3 is usually a bent molecule, with the central O being tetravalent and positively charged, and with the negative charge resonating between being on either of he two outer Os.


In fact, oxygen cannot be teravalent. In each of two resonance structures, the middle oxygen is trivalent. And resonance is old concept, now we shuld talk about conjugation, so we can say, that the middle oxygen has 1+ and each of the other oxygens have &frac12;&minus; charge.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
mykhal
Harmless
*




Posts: 23
Registered: 4-4-2003
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 16-7-2005 at 03:24


Quote:
My problem is that quantum mechanical calculations (I use GAMESS) make cyclic O3 much more stable than bent. Of course QM does not care about all this valence bond shit - strain? what strain?So either the QM programs are wrong (there are some weasely excuses out there why this is so) or there is a large energy barrier to form cyclic O3.


What method and basis set did you use ? In J. Chem. Phys. 1977, 67, 2377 (Ab initio theoretical results on the stability of cyclic ozone), people who probably knew what they were doing, report, that the cyclic state of ozone lays approx. about 28&nbsp;kcal above the linear state.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Lambda
National Hazard
****




Posts: 566
Registered: 15-4-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline

Mood: Euforic Online

[*] posted on 17-7-2005 at 01:06


Quote:
Originally posted by Quibbler
Forget the lasers just blast some oxygen and try to separate out the 0.00001% cyclic O3 that may or may not be formed


The guy you are referring to, may be using a very powerfull UV LASER. Maybe cyclic O3 is short lived, which may allso be detected by LASER.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
unionised
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 5104
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: UK
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 17-7-2005 at 01:51


Lasers aren't magic. Anyway, as has been pointed out, if the stuff is short lived (and I suspect it will be) then it's bugger-all use as a rocket fuel. This looks like someone getting research money to play games (My laser's bigger than yours!) rather than to achieve any real benefit.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Quibbler
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 65
Registered: 15-7-2005
Location: Trinidad and Tobago
Member Is Offline

Mood: Deflagrated

[*] posted on 18-7-2005 at 04:30
Theoretical Chemists


The thing about theoretical chemists is they get good values when the answer is known. Cyclic O3 is (as far as I am aware) an unknown quantity. So the current senario is whoa my program predicts that this molecule is stable yet nobody has made it. I know let's made some adjustments to the calculation. Look at Can. J. Chem 51(1),139,(1973) there's probably some even predating this. So my problem is if the QM program has trouble with O3 what of somthing more complex? Oh btw GAMESS can be downloaded for free and works on windows.
As for "Silicon Man" though Si is in the same group as C it can do many more things than form 4 bonds as it has access to d-orbitals, and for you octet people just how does bent O3 make octets (oh I know dative bonds).
View user's profile View All Posts By User

  Go To Top