Why would an alcohol group placed on a hydrocarbon be of greater polarity than a carbonyl group on the same position? I thought the polarity of the carbonyl was what made it so susceptible to nucleophilic attacks.
Last edited:
I think you might be misreading the question. They are probably talking about the polarity of the bond that is at the end of the hydrocarbon. In that case, the alcohol would have the terminal hydrocarbon carbon bonded to an oxygen (a quite polar bond) while the carbonyl would have it connected to another carbon (not very polar). So while the actual carbonyl group is polar, they are not asking about the group polarity, but rather of the polarity of the bond *to* the group.
I could be wrong of course. What exactly is the question you are having trouble with?
An old thread, but it ranks highly in search so I'll correct this.The alcohol can H-bond to the silica gel better. It has both a hydrogen bond donor and a hydrogen bond acceptor. The carbonyl has only a hydrogen bond receiver.
You should memorize this order of polarities:
acids > alcohols > carbonyls> amines > ethers > alkanes
That's not key here. It's the greater tendency of the negative charge. Does that make sense?Why would an alcohol group placed on a hydrocarbon be of greater polarity than a carbonyl group on the same position? I thought the polarity of the carbonyl was what made it so susceptible to nucleophilic attacks.