Interaction between solvent and

Equation (8.49) accounts only for endothermic mixing. It is not too surprising that we are thus led to associate exothermic values with more specifically chemical interactions between solvent and solute as opposed to the purely physical interactions we have been describing in this approximation. 

It is only the contribution of AH to AG that we are discussing here, but we see the effect of this contribution-in the systems for which the approximation is valid-is that a solvent becomes less suitable to dissolve a polymer the greater the difference is between their 6 values. At best, when 61 = 62, the solvent effect is neutral. Cases for which a favorable specific interaction between solvent and polymer actually promotes solution are characterized by negative values of AH and are therefore beyond the capabilities of this model. 

In the case of nonionic but polar compounds such as sugars, the excellent solvent properties of water stem from its ability to readily form hydrogen bonds with the polar functional groups on these compounds, such as hydroxyls, amines, and carbonyls. These polar interactions between solvent and solute are stronger than the intermolecular attractions between solute molecules caused by van der Waals forces and weaker hydrogen bonding. Thus, the solute molecules readily dissolve in water. 

Experimental reactivity patterns are based on solution behavior which are influenced by interactions between solvent and reacting molecules (especially ions). Compare electrostatic potential maps of 2-methyl-2-propyl cation and dimethylhydroxy cation. Identify sites that might form strong hydrogen bonds with water. Which ion will be better stabilized by its interaction with water ... 

By a statistical model of a solution we mean a model which does not attempt to describe explicitly the nature of the interaction between solvent and solute species, but simply assumes some general characteristic for the interaction, and presents expressions for the thermodynamic functions of the solution in terms of an assumed interaction parameter. The quasi-chemical theory is of this type, and we have noted that a serious deficiency is its failure to consider the vibrational effects in the solution. It is of interest, therefore, to consider briefly the average-potential model which does include the effect of vibrations. 

The simplest discrete approach is the solvaton method 65) which calculates above all the electrostatic interaction between the molecule and the solvent. The solvent is represented by a Active molecule built up from so-called solvatones. The most sophisticated discrete model is the supermolecule approach 661 in which the solvent molecules are included in the quantum chemical calculation as individual molecules. Here, information about the structure of the solvent cage and about the specific interactions between solvent and solute can be obtained. But this approach is connected with a great effort, because a lot of optimizations of geometry with ab initio calculations should be completed 67). A very simple supermolecule (CH3+ + 2 solvent molecules) was calculated with a semiempirical method in Ref.15). 

The calculations were subsequently extended to moderate surface charges and electrolyte concentrations.8 The compact-layer capacitance, in this approach, clearly depends on the nature of the solvent, the nature of the metal electrode, and the interaction between solvent and metal. The work8,109 describing the electrodesolvent system with the use of nonlocal dielectric functions e(x, x ) is reviewed and discussed by Vorotyntsev, Kornyshev, and coworkers.6,77 With several assumptions for e(x,x ), related to the Thomas-Fermi model, an explicit expression6 for the compact-layer capacitance could be derived ... 

It was found that a better representation of non-specific interactions between solvents and the monosubstituted dipolar trimethylammonium ions is gained from the product of tt and the solvent dipole moment (/x). The obtained results were compared with the gas-phase basicity and the solvent attenuation factors (SAF) were calculated". 

The interactions between solvent and polymer depend not only on the nature of the polymer and type of solvent but also on the temperature. Increasing temperature usually favors solvation of the macromolecule by the solvent (the coil expands further and a becomes larger), while with decreasing temperature the association of like species, i.e., between segments of the polymer chains and between solvent molecules, is preferred. In principle, for a given polymer there is a temperature for every solvent at which the two sets of forces (solvation and association) are equally strong this is designated the theta temperature. At this temperature the dissolved polymer exists in solution in the form of a nonexpanded coil, i.e., the exponent a has the value 0.5. This situation is found for numerous polymers e.g., the theta temperature is 34 °C for polystyrene in cyclohexane, and 14 °C for polyisobutylene in benzene. 

The second term (E trostatic accounts for electrostatic interactions between solvent and solute (once the solute is placed in the cavity). 

There is an ongoing controversy about whether there is any stabilization of the transition state for nucleophilic substitution at tertiary aliphatic carbon from interaction with nucleophilic solvent." ° This controversy has developed with the increasing sophistication of experiments to characterize solvent effects on the rate constants for solvolysis reactions. Grunwald and Winstein determined rate constants for solvolysis of tert-butyl chloride in a wide variety of solvents and used these data to define the solvent ionizing parameter T (Eq. 3). They next found that rate constants for solvolysis of primary and secondary aliphatic carbon show a smaller sensitivity (m) to changes in Y than those for the parent solvolysis reaction of tert-butyl chloride (for which m = 1 by definition). A second term was added ( N) to account for the effect of changes in solvent nucleophilicity on obsd that result from transition state stabilization by a nucleophilic interaction between solvent and substrate. It was first assumed that there is no significant stabilization of the transition state for solvolysis of tert-butyl chloride from such a nucleophilic interaction. However, a close examination of extensive rate data revealed, in some cases, a correlation between rate constants for solvolysis of fert-butyl derivatives and solvent nucleophicity. " ... 

Physical properties of the solvent are used to describe polarity scales. These include both bulk properties, such as dielectric constant (relative permittivity), refractive index, latent heat of fusion, and vaporization, and molecular properties, such as dipole moment. A second set of polarity assessments has used measures of the chemical interactions between solvents and convenient reference solutes (see table 3.2). Polarity is a subjective phenomenon. (To a synthetic organic chemist, dichloromethane may be a polar solvent, whereas to an inorganic chemist, who is used to water, liquid ammonia, and concentrated sulfuric acid, dichloromethane has low polarity.)... 

There have been many attempts to assess solvent polarity in a more chemical way. The most important ways are described below. Chemical interactions between solvent and solute can lead to polarity. 

The characterization of a solvent by means of its polarity is an unsolved problem since the polarity itself has, until now, not been precisely defined. Polarity can be understood to mean (a) the permanent dipole moment of a compound, (b) its dielectric constant, or (c) the sum of all those molecular properties responsible for all the interaction forces between solvent and solute molecules (e.g., Coulombic, directional, inductive, dispersion, hydrogen bonding, and EPD/EPA interaction forces) (Kovats, 1968). The important thing concerning the so-called polarity of a solvent is its overall solvation ability. This in turn depends on the sum of all-specific as well as nonspecific interactions between solvent and solute. 

Very low wa- Reduction of water-dependent unwanted side reactions Interactions between solvents and enzymes... 

Ever since it was discovered that enzymes can be catalytically active in neat organic solvents, the question of how to select the correct solvent for a specified enzymatic conversion has been of crucial importance. The solvent can influence an enzymatic reaction both by direct interaction with the enzyme and by influencing the solvation of the substrates and products in the reaction medium. An example of direct interaction between solvent and enzyme is when the solvent acts as an inhibitor of the enzyme. In other cases the solvent causes conformational changes in the enzyme, thereby changing its catalytic properties. The solvent can also influence the amount of water bound to the enzyme, but this effect can largely be avoided by the use of fixed water activity as described above. Direct interaction between solvent and enzyme can influence enzyme stability as well as activity. 

The dissociation into cation and anion accounts for the electrolytic conductivity. The solution contains a very large number of unpaired electrons, hence the paramagnetism, and the g value indicates that the interaction between solvent and electrons is rather weak. It is common to talk of the electron existing in a cavity in the ammonia, loosely solvated by the surrounding molecules. The blue color is a result of a broad absorption peak that has a maximum at about 1500 rim. This peak results from an absorption of photons by the electron as it is excited to a higher energy level, but not all workers are in agreement as to die nature of the excited state. 

Their system consists of a dilute crystal such that solute-solute interactions are negligible. Interactions between solvent and solute are important only insofar as the lattice vibrations are coupled with the zero-order nonstationary levels of the final state. The initial state is considered to be an equilibrated vibronic state, which implies v = 0 state for temperatures around 77°K. 

An approach to quantifying the interaction between solute and solvent and hence to solvent effects on redox potentials is that developed by Gutmann.41 Interactions between solvent and solute are treated as donor-acceptor interactions, with each solvent being characterized by two independent parameters which attempt to quantify the electron pair donor properties (donor number)... 

In general, continuum models perform very well wherever interactions between solvent and solute are only moderately strong, including for many nonpolar solvents as are frequently used in organometallic chemistry. They also work quite well for water, as a lot of effort has been invested in obtaining accurate solvent models for this important solvent. This allows the calculation of acid and base pA values with reasonable accuracy. 

First, one can truncate the system and ignore most of the atoms or treat them as a continuum. This method is applied most frequently, since in one sense it is used whenever reactions in solution are studied. As discussed in Section 10.2.3, this is a reasonable thing to do where the interactions between solvent and solute are relatively weak or can be treated in an average way. Likewise, reactions in big molecules or other large systems typically only involve directly a fairly small number of the atoms making up the system, so ignoring the rest of the atoms should not be too big an approximation. 

The assumption of forces of interaction between solvent and solute led to the century old principle that like dissolves like . In many cases the presence of similar functional groups in the molecules suffices. This rule of thumb has only limited validity since there are many examples of solutions of chemically dissimilar compounds. For example, for small molecules methanol and benzene, water and N,N-dimethylformamide, aniline and diethyl ether, and for macromolecules, polystyrene and chloroform, are completely miscible at room temperature. On the other hand, insolubility can occur in spite of similarity of the two partners. Thus, polyvinylal-cohol does not dissolve in ethanol, acetyl cellulose is insoluble in ethyl acetate, and polyacrylonitrile in acrylonitrile [12], Between these two extremes there is a whole range of possibilities where the two materials dissolve each other to a limited extent. 

Rather than the like dissolves like rule, it is the intermolecular interaction, between solvent and solute molecules, which determines the mutual solubility. A compound A dissolves in a solvent B only when the intermolecular forces of attraction Kaa and Kbb for the pure compounds can be overcome by the forces KAb in solution [13],... 

---