3 posts • Page 1 of 1
Doesn't the double bond in amide already indicate that it has a stronger boiling point than N-H? (Amide has an N single bonded to a C, and then an H single bonded to the N and an O double bonded to the C) I thought that if the molecule has stronger bonds in it like a double or triple bond, it would have a higher boiling point than something that had only single bonds because it is harder to break a part? Why is this reasoning wrong?
When thinking about boiling points, the focus should be on intermolecular forces and not actual bonds. Boiling means breaking apart the molecules from each other, as in lowering their concentration into a gaseous phase. What you're referring to is the breaking apart of the molecule itself, which involves bond dissociation energies and chemical reactions.
When determining boiling points, one needs to consider IMFs, which are interactions that occur between different molecules of a substance, not within the molecules. These interactions include hydrogen bonding, London dispersion forces, and dipole-dipole interactions. The boiling point depends on how strong a molecule's IMFs are and how many can form. The stronger the IMFs, the higher the boiling point.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest