aeacfm
Hazard to Others
Posts: 129
Registered: 24-7-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: chem
|
|
kinetically inhibited reaction
what is meant by kinetically inhibited reaction ?
|
|
|
DJF90
International Hazard
Posts: 2266
Registered: 15-12-2007
Location: At the bench
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
It means that, although a reaction might be thermodynamically favourable, it will not occur/will be very slow because of the kinetic stability of one
of the species. Off the top of my head, perchlorate is a good example, because although its redox potential is so high (and hence is a very strong
oxidiser), in solution it is not so good because of its kinetic stability, i.e. the reaction is very thermodynamically favourable, but kinetically
inhibited. Peroxodisulfate is the same, and often a trace of Ag (I) salt is added to make the oxidation of other species occur at a much more
reasonable rate, i.e. the silver species acts as a catalyst to overcome the kinetic stability of the (S2O8)2- ion.
[Edited on 9-10-2010 by DJF90]
|
|
|
chemoleo
|
Thread Moved
9-10-2010 at 14:25 |
DDTea
National Hazard
Posts: 940
Registered: 25-2-2003
Location: Freedomland
Member Is Offline
Mood: Degenerate
|
|
To generalize a bit and continue with DJF90's explanation:
Thermodynamics is very deterministic. It tells you whether something will happen or whether it will not happen.
However, thermodynamics does not say anything (unless you want to talk about transition state theory, which you probably don't) about the time it
takes for the reaction to occur--that is described by the reaction kinetics.
A good example would be the transformation of diamond into graphite. If you've heard the saying, "diamonds are forever," it's not quite true--because
thermodynamically, they'll convert to graphite. However, the process is *very* slow, so diamonds are essentially forever.
"In the end the proud scientist or philosopher who cannot be bothered to make his thought accessible has no choice but to retire to the heights in
which dwell the Great Misunderstood and the Great Ignored, there to rail in Olympic superiority at the folly of mankind." - Reginald Kapp.
|
|
|
not_important
International Hazard
Posts: 3873
Registered: 21-7-2006
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Even a mixture of H2 and O2 exhibit this, they'll remain as H2 and O2 for a very long time until initiated by a spark or something hot enough. OTOH
mixing solution of AfNO3 and NaCl gives instant reaction.
|
|
|
aeacfm
Hazard to Others
Posts: 129
Registered: 24-7-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: chem
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by not_important  | Even a mixture of H2 and O2 exhibit this, they'll remain as H2 and O2 for a very long time until initiated by a spark or something hot enough. OTOH
mixing solution of AfNO3 and NaCl gives instant reaction.
|
aha , but this dependent on reaction type , conditions or there are general rules control it ?
[Edited on 10-10-2010 by aeacfm]
|
|
|
woelen
Super Administrator
Posts: 8027
Registered: 20-8-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline
Mood: interested
|
|
There are no general rules. Thermodynamics only tells something about the amount of energy released (or consumed) in a certain reaction, it does not
tell anything about the mechanistic pathway for the reaction.
An analogon may make this more clear.
Suppose you have a ball with mass M and it is at height h above sea level. The potential energy stored in the ball is M*g*h (where g is the
gravitational acceleration). A ball, very high in the sky has more potential energy than a ball just above sea level. If both balls are released and
allow to plunge into the sea, then the ball from the greater height will have a much more violent impact than the ball which only is a little above
sea level.
Now imagine that both balls are on the top of a mountain. One ball is on a mountain, which has a hole on its top, the other ball is on a mountain
without a hole, the mountain is just flat near the top and has a slope downwards around the top.
Now you can see that the ball which is on the mountain with the hole on the top never will roll down and plunge into the sea, regardless of the height
of that mountain. The other ball easily rolls down, a little wind, a slight push, etc. can move it from the top and once it goes it will continue its
path downwards. The ball in the hole may have considerable potential energy, but it is not made manifest if it just is allowed to lay in its hole.
Someone needs to give it a push, such that it is pushed over the rim around the hole.
In this analogon, the shape of the mountain from which the ball must roll can be compared with the mechanism of the reaction, the initial height of
the ball above sealevel can be compared with the thermodynamic properties of the compound (i.e. an energetic compound can be compared with a ball at
very great height). But if the mountain is covered with all kinds of obstacles, then even though the ball has high potential energy, it will not roll
off the mountain and release that energy. This is the same with an oxidizer like perchlorate. It contains a lot of energy, but one needs to push it
quite strongly (e.g. by heating) before it can release that energy (look at it as a ball in a deep hole on a very high mountain).
|
|
|
psychokinetic
National Hazard
Posts: 558
Registered: 30-8-2009
Location: Nouveau Sheepelande.
Member Is Offline
Mood: Constantly missing equilibrium
|
|
I guess physical ability to form intermediates and other reaction pre-reqs has nothing to do with this then?
I'm thinking like how tert-butyl has a habit of getting in the way.
“If Edison had a needle to find in a haystack, he would proceed at once with the diligence of the bee to examine straw after straw until he found
the object of his search.
I was a sorry witness of such doings, knowing that a little theory and calculation would have saved him ninety per cent of his labor.”
-Tesla
|
|
|
DDTea
National Hazard
Posts: 940
Registered: 25-2-2003
Location: Freedomland
Member Is Offline
Mood: Degenerate
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by psychokinetic | I guess physical ability to form intermediates and other reaction pre-reqs has nothing to do with this then?
I'm thinking like how tert-butyl has a habit of getting in the way. |
Transition states have everything to do with kinetics. If a reactant molecule requires a huge change in potential energy to reach a certain
transition state, then that reaction will proceed slowly. On the other hand, if only a slight change in potential energy is required to reach a
transition state, that particular pathway will proceed readily.
Formally, this is explained through the Hammond postulate.
[Edited on 10-11-10 by DDTea]
"In the end the proud scientist or philosopher who cannot be bothered to make his thought accessible has no choice but to retire to the heights in
which dwell the Great Misunderstood and the Great Ignored, there to rail in Olympic superiority at the folly of mankind." - Reginald Kapp.
|
|
|
psychokinetic
National Hazard
Posts: 558
Registered: 30-8-2009
Location: Nouveau Sheepelande.
Member Is Offline
Mood: Constantly missing equilibrium
|
|
I see. I got a little confused at the introduction of thermodynamics. I'm still learning about applying TD to everything.
“If Edison had a needle to find in a haystack, he would proceed at once with the diligence of the bee to examine straw after straw until he found
the object of his search.
I was a sorry witness of such doings, knowing that a little theory and calculation would have saved him ninety per cent of his labor.”
-Tesla
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
