Is CH3ClC CCH3Cl chiral?

Yes! The two double bonds are at right angles, and the first chapter of the graduate course "Physical Organic Chemistry" is devoted to this. When naming, CH3CLC=C=CCH3Cl is written as a planar type, looking from right to left, the group on the right is specified to be one level higher than that on the left, and then the left and right are divided into priorities, so that the number 1234, looking from right to left, converts the three-dimensional molecule into Fischer projection, so as to determine chirality.

You can make a molecular model that makes it easier to understand.

Yes! Since there is a double bond between the 2 C's and cannot be rotated, some of the resulting compounds will be chiral.

For example, c-c==c-c and c-c==c-cl (in fact, c==c is connected to each side of 2 atoms or clusters.

The angles of cl cl and cl c are all 120°).

No matter how you rotate the C single bond can not become another compound, so it is chiral.

No chirality! Chirality is different from the group of the four bonds which only one C is connected to!

ch3clc=c=cch3cl does not have such a c, so there is no chirality!

Final Answer: No chirality.

As long as there's a carbon with four different groups on it, it's chiral, and the chiral compounds have their own isomers, just like the left-handed and right-handed ones are exactly the same, but they can't overlap.

Yes! The two double bonds are perpendicular to each other. Because the double bonds on both sides of a c atom cannot rotate freely.

Take a closer look at the hybrid orbital theory for yourself. If you don't have a VEPSE foundation, I can't explain it to you. The accumulation of diolefins you asked about is only half of the paper in the university textbook (Xing Qiyi's basic organic), so you don't have to worry too much about it first.

Yes, the cumulative number of olefin molecules is even singular (surface).

It is not that the positive and negative charge centers in the molecule coincide, and the charge distribution is uniform and symmetrical from the whole molecule, and such a molecule is a non-polar molecule. When all the bonds in the molecule are non-polar, the molecule is non-polar (except O3). When the bonds in a molecule are exactly the same, they are all polar bonds, but the configuration of the molecule is symmetrical, then the molecule is nonpolar.

Non-polar molecule: A molecule in which atoms are covalently bonded to each other, the charges in the molecule are evenly distributed, and the centers of positive and negative charges coincide.

d There are 4 different groups attached to a c, and this c is chiral carbon.

d, a chiral molecule with four different atoms or clusters of atoms attached to a carbon atom.

Please adopt, thank you. If you don't understand, please feel free to ask.

Yes, chiral molecules are directly defined by structure, but they are not necessarily optically active. When there are multiple chiral carbon atoms, there is a possibility that they are not optically active.

The positive charge center of monochloromethane does not coincide with the negative charge center and is determined by its structure.

It's just one of my only mountain circles.

People refer to four carbon atoms in a row that do not refer to the same group in the calendar as chiral carbon atoms (chiral carbon atoms are often marked with *).

It is a chiral carbon atom. Theoretically, as long as the four groups linked to a C are different, that C is chiral carbon

Enantiomers are two molecules that are symmetrical with respect to the mirror, but the two molecules cannot coincide (i.e., are not identical) and are isomers of each other. The concept of optical isomers is different from enantiomers in that they refer to two or more molecules, constituent elements, with the same order of connection, but not the same kind. When there are multiple chiral carbon atoms in an organic molecule, the molecule that is not an enantiomer can also be called an optical isomer.

Systematic nomenclature:

1 bromo-1,2 dichloro-1 propylene.

They are all tetrahedra, not regular tetrahedra. The reason is that although the spatial configuration of each atom after the substitution of H by Cl in methane does not change fundamentally, the forces between the atoms become different and unbalanced, resulting in a change in the bond angle. So it's a deformed tetrahedral structure.

None of them are tetrahedra, because the bond energy of the C-Cl bond is not the same as that of the H-Cl bond, and it will be biased.