4.8 Article

Matrix Isolation Studies of Carbonic Acid-The Vapor Phase above the β-Polymorph

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 135, 期 20, 页码 7732-7737

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ja4020925

关键词

-

资金

  1. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P18187, P23027]
  2. European Research Council (ERC Starting Grant SULIWA)
  3. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P 23027] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P23027] Funding Source: Austrian Science Fund (FWF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Twenty years ago two different polymorphs of carbonic acid, alpha- and beta-H2CO3, were isolated as thin, crystalline films. They were characterized by infrared and, of late, by Raman spectroscopy. Determination of the crystal structure of these two polymorphs, using cryopowder and thin film X-ray diffraction techniques, has failed so far. Recently, we succeeded in sublimating alpha-H2CO3 and trapping the vapor phase in a noble gas matrix, which was analyzed by infrared spectroscopy. In the same way we have now investigated the beta-polymorph. Unlike alpha-H2CO3, beta-H2CO3 was regarded to decompose upon sublimation. Still, we have succeeded in isolation of undecomposed carbonic acid in the matrix and recondensation after removal of the matrix here. This possibility of sublimation and recondensation cycles of beta-H2CO3 adds a new aspect to the chemistry of carbonic acid in astrophysical environments, especially because there is a direct way of beta-H2CO3 formation in space, but none for alpha-H2CO3. Assignments of the FTIR spectra of the isolated molecules unambiguously reveal two different carbonic acid monomer conformers (C-2v and C-s). In contrast to the earlier study on alpha-H2CO3, we do not find evidence for centrosymmetric (C-2h) carbonic acid dimers here. This suggests that two monomers are entropically favored at the sublimation temperature of 250 K for beta-H2CO3, whereas they are not at the sublimation temperature of 210 K for alpha-H2CO3.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据