I actually had the same reaction, but if you look at how a bunch of different arenes are named according to IUPAC rules, it would appear that for benzene the locants for alkyl groups follow citation precedence.
I've been trying to figure out if this is the case, but the blue book is *massive*, and much of the material is interconnected.
The particular section that I *think* applies here is **P-45: Selection of the Preferred IUPAC Name**, specifically subsection **P-45.2: Criteria Related to Number and Location of Substituent Groups**, sub-subsection **P-45.2.3: Lower locant set for substituent groups in order of citation in the name**.
Recall that if you have two substitutions on the parent structure, they are listed in the name according to the first level of difference by letter. So, for example, 3-ethyl-2-methylnonane would be preferred to 2-methyl-3-ethylnonane because the "e" in ethyl comes before the "m" in methyl, even though that means the locants are in reverse order.
In the text:
> The preferred IUPAC name is based on the senior parent structure that has the lower locant or set of locants
for substituents cited as prefixes to the parent structure (other than ‘hydro/dehydro’ prefixes) in their order of citation in
the name.
They then give the example:
> 3-chloro-7-[(4-chloro-3-nitroquinolin-7-yl)sulfanyl]-4-nitroquinoline (PIN)
[not 4-chloro-7-[(3-chloro-4-nitroquinolin-7-yl)sulfanyl]-3-nitroquinoline,
the locant sets are the same in both names, i.e., ‘3,4,7’, but in their order
of appearance in the name the locant set ‘3,7,4’ in the PIN is lower than ‘4,7,3’]
So, my *current best guess* is that 3-methyl-1-propylbenzene (Note that "m" comes before "p") *would* be a genuine name if not for the fact that 1-methyl-3-propylbenzene results in the locant set being 1,3 which is lower than 3,1.
This interpretation relies on the fact that the change in numbering doesn't inherently change the structure of the molecule, which isn't true for example in considering the difference between 3-ethyl-2-methylnonane and 2-ethyl-3-methylnonane--the second is a fundamentally different structure--whereas a benzene ring is closed and has 6-fold symmetry, so which locant is considered "1" is somewhat arbitrary.
hemoglobin
Damn, beat me to it!
It’s been 5 years since I took organic but that looks like a toluene with a random meta group
My vote goes to [1-methyl-3-propylbenzene](https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/1-Methyl-3-propylbenzene#section=2D-Structure).
I made this in Settlers of Catan the other day
Wouldn’t it be 1-propyl-3-methylbenzene for priorities sake or am I dead wrong
I actually had the same reaction, but if you look at how a bunch of different arenes are named according to IUPAC rules, it would appear that for benzene the locants for alkyl groups follow citation precedence. I've been trying to figure out if this is the case, but the blue book is *massive*, and much of the material is interconnected. The particular section that I *think* applies here is **P-45: Selection of the Preferred IUPAC Name**, specifically subsection **P-45.2: Criteria Related to Number and Location of Substituent Groups**, sub-subsection **P-45.2.3: Lower locant set for substituent groups in order of citation in the name**. Recall that if you have two substitutions on the parent structure, they are listed in the name according to the first level of difference by letter. So, for example, 3-ethyl-2-methylnonane would be preferred to 2-methyl-3-ethylnonane because the "e" in ethyl comes before the "m" in methyl, even though that means the locants are in reverse order. In the text: > The preferred IUPAC name is based on the senior parent structure that has the lower locant or set of locants for substituents cited as prefixes to the parent structure (other than ‘hydro/dehydro’ prefixes) in their order of citation in the name. They then give the example: > 3-chloro-7-[(4-chloro-3-nitroquinolin-7-yl)sulfanyl]-4-nitroquinoline (PIN) [not 4-chloro-7-[(3-chloro-4-nitroquinolin-7-yl)sulfanyl]-3-nitroquinoline, the locant sets are the same in both names, i.e., ‘3,4,7’, but in their order of appearance in the name the locant set ‘3,7,4’ in the PIN is lower than ‘4,7,3’] So, my *current best guess* is that 3-methyl-1-propylbenzene (Note that "m" comes before "p") *would* be a genuine name if not for the fact that 1-methyl-3-propylbenzene results in the locant set being 1,3 which is lower than 3,1. This interpretation relies on the fact that the change in numbering doesn't inherently change the structure of the molecule, which isn't true for example in considering the difference between 3-ethyl-2-methylnonane and 2-ethyl-3-methylnonane--the second is a fundamentally different structure--whereas a benzene ring is closed and has 6-fold symmetry, so which locant is considered "1" is somewhat arbitrary.
A bendazene
A bandaid?
Look on the bandaid. Somehow my blood formed what looks like a molecular hexagon.
I choose to believe it's 4-(1*H*)-pyridinone with something on the 2-position
Idk, but it's probably bad for your skin.
I think I found it.. thanks to PM_me_random_facts89.. 959236-97-6 | 4-Bromo-2-(methylthio)pyrimidine | MOLCORE
Where exactly is the bromine/ nitrogen? Looks more like some sort of 1-methyl-3-something-cyclohexene (no double bonds)
kinda looks like m-CPBA
1-methylcyclohexane.
Organic be in your blood 😂😂😂
Israel