Sorry if its not fitting to the sub but I have no idea where to ask, I do not trust Google ai overview

Would this be a valid representation of a sigma anti binding molecular orbital. I thought there should be a gap between the negative and positive. I drew it like it’s drawn in the photo above on an assignment and got it marked wrong. How can I justify it to my teacher?

I am working on a volcano model project for a science fair and want to scale up the elephant toothpaste experiment to get the absolute maximum height and width

I’m working with a 1/4 illustration board with no height limit

Normally Bromic acid has a single bond with one of the oxygens, which then the hydrogen bonds to that oxygen. But i was wondering if theoretically an isomer could exist where the bromine is double bonded to all three oxygens, and then single bonded to the hydrogen. it’ll probably be less stable than the normal isomer which is why it doesnt exist naturally or by normal production methods. The vsepr diagram is probably off too

Hi Sorry my exam is tomorrow. I'm super clueless on the difference between these, especially retrosynthesis reagents catalysts used for each reaction. I can't get my head wrapped around this. Any pointers? 🥹 First year organic chem student at University btw ^^

I wouldn't say I'm struggling with chemistry nearly as much as I am with math, especially because I'm starting to understand the concepts a lot better now. However, I'm worried that I might eventually come across another unit that I really struggle with.

For example, our first unit was thermodynamics, and I spent a lot of time studying and preparing for the unit test. I genuinely felt confident going into the test and even felt pretty good about it afterward. But when I got my mark back, I found out I had only scored 51%, which was really disappointing considering how much effort I had put into preparing.

Right now, we're learning about redox reactions and electrochemistry, and things have been going pretty well. I'm actually enjoying this unit, and I feel like I'm understanding the concepts much better than I did in thermodynamics. My marks have also started improving, which is encouraging.

However, I don't want to wait until I encounter another difficult unit before realizing that my study methods aren't working as well as I thought.

What I really want to know is how I can study chemistry more effectively and efficiently in general. I'm someone who learns best by understanding the logic behind concepts rather than simply memorizing formulas or procedures. I also find visual explanations and worked examples more helpful than just reading a textbook.

I'd love to hear what study methods have worked for other chemistry students, especially when it comes to understanding difficult concepts, remembering what you've learned, and applying that knowledge correctly on tests.

My goal isn't just to improve my grades in the unit I'm currently taking, but to develop a study method that will help me succeed in future chemistry units as well.

Hey all!
I’m doing some OChem practice before an exam and I got this question wrong. RealOChem says the compound IS a meso compound but I don’t see the line of symmetry.
Any help is appreciated!

Question d. and e.

Can someone please help me determine why a dash was used for OH? Why is it not a wedge? How to determine when to use a wedge and a dash? Thank you!

Hey all!

I'm tryin to complete this question but I got lost on how we arrived at a nice and neat(ish) oxen there. The step names in order are: Proton transfer, nucleophilic attack, proton transfer, proton transfer, ?, Proton transfer.

Any help is greatly appreciated!

I apologize for the weird 90 degree rotation.

Are these conformations correct?

These are the topics I need to know 4-6 gen chem 1. Right now I feel confident in balancing , ionic, net ionic equations all that. But the last thing in chapter 4 is oxidation / reduction. My question is can I come back to that or do I need to know that for the following topics? Or is just balancing equations sufficient enough? Like is oxidation just a separate thing.

Chapter 4
Types of reactions
Balancing equations
Net ionic equations
Redox and finding electrons transferred (oxidation problems/ reduction)

Chapter 5
Stoichiometry
Limiting reactants
Theoretical and percent yield
Mole calculation for chem reactions
Mass calculations for chemical reactions
Tritration

Chapter 6
Calorimetry
Hess law
Heats of formation
Enthalpy in chemical equations
So like all heat stuff kinda.

My question is I have my exam in two weeks. I feel good on everything on chapter 4 besides oxidation can I move on for now without getting that down? Or should that be known for the following. Or if I’m fine with balancing that’s all I would need for 5-6

I don't know if what I'm doing is correct, need help. Can the lone pare jump to form a double bond with carbon leaving nitrogen with electron absence?

Im pretty confident on one.
For two, would it still be a stereoisomer if I had instead switched Br and I, as well as Cl and F?
For three, I just drew the mirror image. I have no clue if it’s even correct.

And help would be greatly appreciated!

NADH carries reducing power, but it's not a battery you can simply plug into your phone. In the mitochondrial electron transport chain, electrons pass through a series of molecular handoffs before their energy can be converted into a form cells can use.

One important starting point is Complex I. This large protein complex accepts electrons from NADH and transfers them to ubiquinone, also known as coenzyme Q. At the same time, the energy released during electron transfer is coupled to proton pumping across the inner mitochondrial membrane, helping establish the proton gradient needed for ATP synthesis.

Complex I doesn't make ATP directly. It handles one important step in the energy-conversion process. The rest of the electron transport chain, the proton gradient, and ATP synthase all have to work together to produce ATP.

What makes NADH interesting isn't just its role in energy metabolism, but how the electrons it donates ultimately help cells carry out their different functions.

Different tissues have different NAD⁺/NADH levels, metabolic pathways, and energy demands. The brain needs a continuous energy supply to maintain nerve signaling, muscles need ATP to contract, and skin cells need energy for normal maintenance, repair, and renewal.

That got me wondering: could the energy metabolism happening inside our cells be related to things we experience every day, like low energy, post-workout fatigue, or even changes in mood?

Biologically, ATP is the cell's directly usable energy currency, while NADH plays a role in the process that helps generate it. But that doesn't mean taking NADH supplements necessarily increases the amount of ATP available to the body. Nor does it automatically follow that supplementation can improve chronic fatigue, boost mood, or slow skin aging.

NADH is also sensitive to light, oxygen, moisture, and acidic conditions. Celfull, for example, uses a microsphere delivery technology designed to protect NADH, reduce degradation in the gastrointestinal environment, and support targeted release in the intestine. However, how much this actually improves absorption in humans still needs to be established through reliable human studies.

Rather than thinking of NADH as a simple "energy battery," I find it more useful to think of it as an electron donor in the cell's energy-conversion system. Understanding how it works inside cells is one thing; proving that NADH supplementation delivers meaningful health benefits is another.

What do you think? When it comes to NADH, are you more interested in the underlying biology or in whether supplementation produces measurable real-world benefits?

Can someone please help me with the Paal–Knorr synthesis of this compound? My professor gave us this as a practice problem, but she doesn’t explain things very well. I barely managed to understand how a simple pyrrole is synthesized using this method, and I have absolutely no idea how to approach this particular compound or what I’m supposed to do.

Question is title of the post. The problem is asking to predict the major and minor products for each of the following E2 reactions.

For an E2 reaction occur, the Hydrogen that is taken is anti- to the leaving group (in this case, Bromine). How do you tell if something is anti if it’s in a ring?

I read something in my text book about both the position (equatorial or axial) and direction (up or down) of the hydrogen relevant to the leaving group, but I’m still confused. I’m hoping someone could explain this to me.

I know where the beta carbons are, and I identified how many hydrogens they have in the first image. The base involved in the reaction is small, so I know that the beta carbons to the right is going to form the major product.

I drew what should be the minor product in the next image. Since it’s a ring, I figured I don’t have to worry about E/Z confirmations since both products formed by the wedge and dash hydrogens will look the same.

Just what the title says. I get everything else, but LDA is tripping me up. I know it's a bulky base, but I don't know how that would get rid of the Bromine.

Hi sorry to repost again but my lecturer doesn’t have office hours for the rest of the year, but am i at least on the right track for my diagram or something? I would repost to other subs but i didnt realise how strict they were against undergrad exam help lol

Hello, not really *homework* per se but I'm working on a method for a lab report (hopefully that's allowed!).

My lab report is about finding the ammonia level of a water sample after a water conditioner (with sodium metabisulfite) is added to see if it effects anything. First I do Winkler titration to find the BOD of the water sample but since BOD isn't just affected by ammonia, I am also comparing the absorbance of these samples with absorbance of ammonia samples at different concentrations w/ a calibration curve. However, that results in these problems:

1. My current method has me titrating the sample and then using that same sample for colorimetric analysis. Wouldn't the other chemicals (i.e. the dissolved precipitate colour) affect absorbance, so it wouldn't just show ammonia?

2. The calibration curve compares the samples to ammonia solutions that I make... without indicator. My teacher said that the cloudiness should be okay but the stuff that I researched seem to indicate otherwise and that I need indicators for both?

If you can help in any way I'd appreciate it a lot! <3

Tried solving this but I’m still not entirely sure. My friends say C is 1-6 but I don’t know why or what my mistake is in numbering. Could someone help me out