Talk:Ggr07Module1:version1

1.2.1 Cp dimers: Your energies for the endo and exo isomers are too similar (the exo one should be lower)! I can't see your structures, but suspect hat the "exo" one isn't exo! Why is the endo isomer kinetically preferred? Your energies for 3 and 4 are also a bit strange. You should have tried to relate their energy terms to specific structural features.

1.2.2 NAD: How does the conformation of 5 explain the addition stereochemistry? (The Grignard adds on the SAME face as the C=O, not the opposite as you state).

1.2.3 Taxol: these structures are hard for me to analyse - rotatable JMol ones would have been much better! You should have been able to find a chair for both "up" and "down" C=O isomers. What about comments on the alkene reactivity?

1.3.1 Carbene: Orbitals look good. Analysis of alkene frequencies OK. Not sure about your BH2 alkene - you say the C-Cl is stronger, but the frequency is lower...

Mini-project: This wasn't really a good choice because the Evans alkylation product is conformationally flexible. This may well explain the large discrepancy between the observed and calculated C=O 13C shift. The aldol products are even less suitable (more flexible). You should have presented thoughts/discussion as to what the best way would be to tell the alkylation diastereomers apart. In fact, I think it would be quite hard to do by NMR.... Also, you should have studied the other diastereomer for comparison; even if its data were not available in the lit, it would tell you whether the NMRs might be different enough to distinguish them. Note that diastereomers do NOT have to have the same sign of rotation!

Overall - there are some strange energies, and you could have put more "chemical" thought into this