Page 185 - Mechanism and Theory in Organic Chemistry
P. 185

dence has been found that suggests that this is indeed a good description  of the
                 pathway  of  a  class of  displacement  reactions.  We  shall examine  the  evidence
                 below,  but  first, since  this  is  the  first  chapter  on  reaction  mechanisms,  let  us
                 emphasize that a mechanism is  "good"  only insofar as it explains the experimental data,
                 and  that,  therefore, although  the experimental  results  that follow  can  be  thought  of  as  the
                 "characteristics"  of the SN2 mechanism, they are in fact  the observable data on  whose basis
                 it has been conjectured. The data are facts;  the mechanism is a theory deduced from those facts.

                 4.2  STEREOCHEMISTRY OF  THE  SN2 REACTION
                 In the  1890s, many years before the mechanism  of direct substitution was pro-
                 posed  by  Hughes  and  Ingold,  Walden  had  observed  that  some  reactions  of
                 optically  active  compounds  give  products  of  opposite  absolute  configuration
                 from the starting  material^.^  Walden,  however, was  not  able  to discover what
                 conditions brought  about this inversion of configuration. His task  was  compli-
                 cated  by  the fact  that  two  compounds of  the same absolute configuration may
                 nevertheless have opposite signs of optical rotation.  In the following 40 years a
                 great deal ofwork and thought was given to the problem of the relation of Walden
                 inversion,  as  it is  still called,  to me~hanism.~ Then, in  1935, Hughes  and co-
                 workers in ingenious experiments clearly showed that Walden inversion occurs in
                 direct nucleophilic substitution.1°
                     These  workers  studied  the  exchange  reaction  of  optically  active  s-octyl
                 iodide with radioactive iodide ion in acetone (Equation 4.8) and found that: (1)
                 the kinetics are second-order, first-order each in octyl  iodide and in iodide ion,
                                                         I-
                            *I-  + CH3(CH2),CHCH3 + + CH3(CH2),CHCH3
                                            I                           I            (4.8)
                                            I                         *I
                 and  thus  the  mechanism  is  bimolecular;  and  (2)  the  rate  of  racemization  is
                 twice the rate of incorporation of labeled  iodide ion into the organic molecule.
                 The rate  of  racemization must be twice the  rate  of  inversion.  (If an optically
                 active compound begins to racemize,  each molecule that undergoes inversion is
                 one  of  a  racemic  pair  of  molecules;  for  example,  pure  levorotatory  starting
                 material is  100 percent racemized when only 50 percent of it has been converted
                 to the dextrorotatory isomer.) So, if the rate of racemization is twice the rate of
                 incorporation of radioactive iodide, then each attacking iodide ion inverts the molecule
                 it enters.
                     This one-to-one correlation of inversion with displacement must mean that
                 the incoming  iodide  enters the molecule  from  the  side of  the  substitution  site
                 opposite to the departing iodide every single time.  It initially attacks the back
                 lobe of the sp3 orbital used for bonding with the iodide. The transition state pro-
                 posed by Hughes and co-workers is shown in 1. Carbon has rehybridized and is


                 a  P. Walden, Chem. Ber., 26,2 10 (1893) ; 29, 133 (1896) ; 32, 1855 (1899).
                  For a comprehensive summary of this work see Ingold, Structure  and  Mechanism in  Organic Chemisty,
                 pp.  509ff.
                 lo (a) E.  D.  Hughes,  F. Juliusburger,  S. Masterman,  B.  Topley, and J. Weiss, J. Chem. Soc.,  1525
                 (1935); (b) E. D. Hughes, F. Juliusburger,  A.  D. Scott, B.  Topley, and J. Weiss, J. Chem. Soc.,  1173
                 (1936)  ; (c) W. A. Cowdrey, E. D. Hughes, T. P. Nevell, and C. L. Wilson, J. Chem. Soc., 209 ( 1938).
   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190