Hi, I am trying to generate the structure of octa-1,3E,5E-triene using OPSIN. However, unless, I give the stereo-chemistry first like (3E,5E)-octa-1,3,5-triene I am unable to get the structure. Although technically this name is correct, my question to you is, why we have to mention those numbers twice. For alkadienes, for example, let's say octa-3E,5E-diene, OPSIN does generate the structure without any trouble. However, why the same logic is not applicable for alkatrienes. Even if I try a structure like, 1-bromoocta-1E,3E,5E-triene, I am able to get the structure. In that case, I don't have to specify the stereo-chemistry first in parenthesis. Is the absence of stereo-chemistry at one of the positions means that we need to specify the stereo-chemistry (E/Z) in parenthesis first for alkatrienes? That may not be the case for alkadienes, however. Because, OPSIN could generate a structure like hex-1,4E-diene without any trouble. In this case too, no cis/trans isomerism is possible at position 1. Thus, naturally, my question is why we are having this trouble for alkatrienes. Or, am I missing something here.
Hi, I am trying to generate the structure of octa-1,3E,5E-triene using OPSIN. However, unless, I give the stereo-chemistry first like (3E,5E)-octa-1,3,5-triene I am unable to get the structure. Although technically this name is correct, my question to you is, why we have to mention those numbers twice. For alkadienes, for example, let's say octa-3E,5E-diene, OPSIN does generate the structure without any trouble. However, why the same logic is not applicable for alkatrienes. Even if I try a structure like, 1-bromoocta-1E,3E,5E-triene, I am able to get the structure. In that case, I don't have to specify the stereo-chemistry first in parenthesis. Is the absence of stereo-chemistry at one of the positions means that we need to specify the stereo-chemistry (E/Z) in parenthesis first for alkatrienes? That may not be the case for alkadienes, however. Because, OPSIN could generate a structure like hex-1,4E-diene without any trouble. In this case too, no cis/trans isomerism is possible at position 1. Thus, naturally, my question is why we are having this trouble for alkatrienes. Or, am I missing something here.
Thanks,