hey thankyou so much for the video! btw just wondering does it matter which viewpoint you take? In the textbook they always sight along 2-3, 5-6 bond for newman projection, but i like your viewpoint better because i can actually see how the bonds are connected. it just makes more sense. Please reply!
+cans day So, honestly, to me, it doesn't matter at all. :) I pick whichever bonds make my life easier. I'm glad it helped you. :) I can't speak to if your professor has a preference at all, but if it makes sense, then that's great.
how do you determine whether to use axial or equatorial positions when drawing the chair conformation? Is it axial, eq, axial, eq, etc. all around the cyclohexane?
+Wan Jiang This is the HARDEST part of chair cyclohexane and the best answer I can give is to build a model. In the flat representation, it is really hard to see, but as you've written it: ax, eq, ax, eq, etc all around the ring would be all substituents UP in one particular flip of the chair, but all DOWN in the other ring flip. Try this video: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-kiuBEJRRiQQ.html or other youtube videos for more help on this topic.
+TheKing24game In the nomenclature? Halogens don't have any particular priority over alkyl substituents when naming them, so we just need to get the locant numbers to be the lowest they can possibly be. If the bromide took priority and was at position 1, then the locants would be 1, 3, 5. As it is now, the locant numbers are 1, 2, 4. You have to keep the numbers low when there aren't high priority groups on there.
+Rebecca Chen I'm not sure exactly what you are asking. At 1:00 in the video, I explain that the way I have drawn it (methyls both axial, bromo equatorial) that it is NOT the most stable chair conformer. The most stable chair conformer would undergo a ring flip from the chair I've drawn to one in which both methyls are equatorial and the bromo is axial. Hope that helps!
