http://pastpapers.papacambridge.com/view.php?id=Cambridge%20International%20Examinations%20%28CIE%29/AS%20and%20A%20Level/Chemistry%20%289701%29/2016%20Jun/9701_s16_qp_42.pdf
For Q.4(a)(iii) the complex given does not show cis-trans. The marking scheme says that its mirror images are superimposable. But how ? I think the mirror images are non-superimposable. when we say non-superimposable we say with reespect to 3 -dimensional arrangement. In 3-dimensional they would be different.
Originally posted by hoay:http://pastpapers.papacambridge.com/view.php?id=Cambridge%20International%20Examinations%20%28CIE%29/AS%20and%20A%20Level/Chemistry%20%289701%29/2016%20Jun/9701_s16_qp_42.pdf
For Q.4(a)(iii) the complex given does not show cis-trans. The marking scheme says that its mirror images are superimposable. But how ? I think the mirror images are non-superimposable. when we say non-superimposable we say with reespect to 3 -dimensional arrangement. In 3-dimensional they would be different.
and if on rotating 180 it doe not match the original moleucle its non-superimposable?
If we replace one of the bidentate ligands with two different monodentate then there would be optical isomers and not cis-trans isomers? Is'nt ?
Originally posted by hoay:and if on rotating 180 it doe not match the original moleucle its non-superimposable?
If we replace one of the bidentate ligands with two different monodentate then there would be optical isomers and not cis-trans isomers? Is'nt ?
If sulfato SO42- is bidentate ligand along with ethylenediamine then it has no isomers as the case with Pt complex above?
Originally posted by hoay:If sulfato SO42- is bidentate ligand along with ethylenediamine then it has no isomers as the case with Pt complex above?
There was an article at https://chemicalstatistician.wordpress.com/tag/non-superimposable-mirror-image/ on when mirror images are non-superimposable or take a look at http://domyhomeworkonline.net/ for a help.