A Response to the Critical Comments on “One Molecule, Two Atoms, Three Views, Four Bonds?” | Zendy

Danovich David | Zendy; Shaik Sason | Zendy; Rzepa Henry S. | Zendy; Hoffmann Roald | Zendy

AI Assistant Blog Pricing

Home ZAIA Blog

Premium

A Response to the Critical Comments on “One Molecule, Two Atoms, Three Views, Four Bonds?”

Author(s) -

Danovich David,

Shaik Sason,

Rzepa Henry S.,

Hoffmann Roald

Publication year - 2013

Publication title -

angewandte chemie international edition

Language(s) - English

Resource type - Journals

SCImago Journal Rank - 5.831

H-Index - 550

eISSN - 1521-3773

pISSN - 1433-7851

DOI - 10.1002/anie.201302350

Subject(s) - bond , criticism , molecule , chemical bond , gauge (firearms) , computational chemistry , chemistry , theoretical physics , epistemology , philosophy , materials science , physics , law , organic chemistry , political science , economics , finance , metallurgy

The criticism expressed by Frenking and Hermann on the notion of quadruple bonding in C 2 is answered using hard facts. Both experimental and computational data gauge the strength of the fourth bond as 16 kcal mol −1 . The authors agree that chemical research goes profitably beyond “synthetic” chemistry.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here

Accelerating Research