soccergrl5
Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 3
|
|
|
Reply with quote | #1 |
I don't understand how equilibrium is different from resonance? I understand that equilibrium is a shift, but isn't resonance a shift too?
|
| |
JKim
Registered: 10/08/09
Posts: 12
|
|
|
Reply with quote | #2 |
Not quite.
Equilibrium has REAL structures, while resonance does not. This is kind of hard to explain, but for example, if you take a bunch of pictures of a molecule in equilibrium, you will see 2 distinct pictures.
However, if you take the pictures with resonance, you will get 1 photo. The photo will be a mix between the different resonance contributors (some contributor characteristics will be shown more in this picture depending on the importance of the contributor [6 rules]).
To try and clear this up a little, for equilibrium you are at either molecule A or molecule B depending on the time. For resonance, you are somewhere in between A and B depending on the contributors. Think of equilibrium as an average.
|
| |
dhlee624
Registered: 10/08/09
Posts: 19
|
|
|
Reply with quote | #3 |
Quote: Originally Posted by soccergrl5
I don't understand how equilibrium is different from resonance? I understand that equilibrium is a shift, but isn't resonance a shift too?
If you bought the Klein book there is a good explanation of the difference on pg 20, but if you didn't I'll explain what it says. It uses an analogy to a nectarine. If you were to describe a nectarine you could say it's a mix of a peach in terms of taste and a plum in terms of texture. But even though it's a mix of those two things it doesn't switch back and forth between them. Similarly the different resonance contributors do not adequately describe the true nature of the electron density of the molecule but when you put them together in your mind i.e. the resonance hybrid you get the actual structure. Hopefully this helps you understand the difference.
|
| |
