Research on Chemical Intermediates

, Volume 24, Issue 6, pp 625–642 | Cite as

Controversy and complementarity in mechanistic organic chemistry. The transition state and structural theories reexamined

  • Sosale Chandrasekhar


It is proposed that molecular phenomena may only be described within the framework of the Complementarity Principle (‘CP’), and that scientific controversy may originate in the essential incompatibility of complementary representations. Complementarity based on the temporal Uncertainty Principle leads to new insights into transition state theory, microscopic reversibility and the Curtin-Hammett Principle. An empirical application of the ‘CP’ to the structural theory leads to a revision of present concepts of ‘reaction dynamics’, with the Principle of Least Nuclear Motion (‘PLNM’) emerging as a general alternative to electronic theories of reactivity. In fact, it is argued that the ‘PLNM’ is a better basis for the Woodward-Hoffmann rules than is orbital symmetry. A more flexible approach to organic reaction mechanisms is thus indicated. Also, as the basis of the structural theory is fundamentally uncertain, and the present theory of X-ray diffraction apparently incompatible with the ‘UP’, a reinterpretation of the Bragg equation has been attempted.


Structural Theory Transition State Theory Transition State Structure Thermodynamic Formulation Hexatriene 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    H. Primas, Chimia 36, 293 (1982).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    P.W. Atkins, Molecular Quantum Mechanics, 2nd Ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1983, pp. 18 and 92.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Mehra, The Quantum Principle: Its Interpretation and Epistemology, D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht/Boston, 1974.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    S. Chandrasekhar, Res. Chem. Intermed. 23, 55 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. Chandrasekhar, Res. Chem. Intermed. 23, 137 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    K.J. Laidler, Theories of Chemical Reaction Rates, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1969.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    L.P. Hammett, Physical Organic Chemistry, 2nd Ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1970.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M.L. Sinnott Adv. Phys. Org. Chem. 24, 113 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    S. Chandrasekhar, Res. Chem. Intermed. 17, 173 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    F.R. Jensen and B. Rickborn, Electrophilic Substitution of Organo-mercurials, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968, p. 157; D.S. Matteson, Organometallic Reaction Mechanisms, Academic Press, New York, 1974, pp. 94 and 96; Idem. Organometal. Chem. Rev. 4, 263 (1969).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J.I. Seeman, Chem. Rev. 83, 83 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    R.G. Woolley, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 100, 1073 (1978); Idem., New Sci. 120, 53 (1988); Idem., J. Chem. Educ. 62, 1082 (1985); Idem., Struct. Bonding (Berlin) 52, 1 (1982); S.J. Weininger, J. Chem. Educ. 61, 939 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    A.J. Rocke, Chem. Br. 29, 401 (1993); R.W. Rosner, ibid. 29, 675 (1993).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    P.W. Atkins, Physical Chemistry, 5th Ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1995; (a) chapter 11–14, (b) p. 412.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    H.C. Brown, The Nonclassical Ion Problem, Plenum, New York, 1977.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    C.L. Perrin and J.D. Thoburn, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 115, 3140 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    F.M. Menger, Acc. Chem. Res. 26, 206 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    D.R. Storm and D.E. Koshland Jr., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 94, 5805 (1972); A.D. Mesecar, B.L. Stoddard and D.E. Koshland Jr., Science 277, 202 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    J. Hine, Adv. Phys. Org. Chem. 15, 1 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    R.B. Woodward and R. Hoffmann, Conservation of Orbital Symmetry, Verlag Chemie, Weinheim, 1970; I. Fleming, Frontier Orbitals and Organic Chemical Reactions, Wiley, London, 1976.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    E.N. Marvell, Thermal Electrocyclic Reactions, Academic Press, New York, 1980.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    E.L. Eliel, S.H. Wilen and L.N. Mander, Stereochemistry of Organic Compounds, Wiley, New York, 1994; (a) p. 621, (b) p. 755.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    N.J. Turro, Modern Molecular Photochemistry, Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park (CA), 1978; (a) p. 11, (b) p. 424.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    W.J. Buma, B.E. Kohler and K. Song, J. Chem. Phys. 94, 6367 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    J.P. Glusker and K.N. Trueblood, Crystal Structure Analysis, 2nd Ed., Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford, 1985.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sosale Chandrasekhar
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Organic ChemistryIndian Institute of ScienceBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations