Hyperfine Interactions

, Volume 87, Issue 1, pp 877–882 | Cite as

Competition between benzene and styrene in forming radicals under different solvent conditions observed by muon level crossing resonance

  • John M. Stadlbauer
  • Krishnan Venkateswaran
  • Gerald B. Porter
  • David C. Walker
Session 7. Redicals

Abstract

The muon level-crossing-resonance technique has been used to resolve major discrepancies that exist in muon-spin-resonance studies (both free-radical formation and muonium decay rates) in the competition between benzene and styrene. The results, obtained for ∼30 mM solutions in ethanol and for 2.5 mM aqueous micelles solutions, show that muonium atoms (Mu) react 8 (±2) times faster with styrene than with benzene. In the above cases thermalized Mu is unquestionably the reactive species, which is known to show nucleophilic intra-molecular selectivity in the case of styrene. But a similar value, 9 (±2), was also obtained for undiluted mixtures of liquid benzene and styrene (neat mixture) — where the precursor might have been ‘hot Mu’ (which should display weaker selectivity than Mu) or cations derived fromμ+ (which should show higher selectivity). These results support the view that thermalized Mu is the predominant reactive species in liquid benzene and styrene.

Keywords

Thin Film Benzene Styrene Decay Rate High Selectivity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    S. F. J. Cox, A. Hill and R. De Renzi, J. Chem. Soc. Faraday Trans.I 78 (1982) 2975.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    B. W. Ng, J. M. Stadlbauer, Y. Ito, Y. Miyake, and D. C. Walker, Hyperfine Interactions17–19 (1984) 821.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    P. W. F. Louwrier, G. A. Brinkman and E. Roduner, Hyperfine Interactions32 (1986) 831.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    J. M. Stadlbauer, B. W. Ng, D. C. Walker, Y. C. Jean and Y. Ito, Can. J. Chem.59 (1981) 3261.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    E. Roduner, Hyperfine Interactions17–19 (1984) 785.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    K. Venkateswaran, M. V. Barnabas and D. C. Walker, Can. J. Phys.68 (1990) 952.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. Stadlbauer, K. Venakteswaran, G. Porter and D. Walker, this conference.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    R. F. Kiefl, S. R. Kreitzman, M. Celio, R. Keitel, J. H. Brewer, G. M. Luke, D. R. Noakes, P. W. Percival, T. Matsuzaki and K. Nishiyama, Phys. Rev A34 (1986) 681.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    K. Venkateswaran, M. V. Barnabas, R. F. Kiefl, J. M. Stadibauer and D. C. Walker, J. Phys. Chem.93 (1989) 388.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    K. Venkateswaran, M. Barnabas, Z. Wu, J. M. Stadlbauer, B. W. Ng and D. C. Walker, Chem. Phys.137 (1989) 239.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    K. Venkateswaran, M. V. Barnabas and D. C. Walker, J. Phys. Chem.94 (1990) 178.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    E. Roduner,The Positive Muon as a Probe in Free Radical Chemistry, Springer Series in Chemical Physics No.49 (1988) 58.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© J.C. Baltzer AG, Science PublishersJ.C. Baltzer AG, Science Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • John M. Stadlbauer
    • 1
    • 2
  • Krishnan Venkateswaran
    • 1
    • 3
  • Gerald B. Porter
    • 1
  • David C. Walker
    • 1
  1. 1.Chemistry Department and TRIUMFUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Hood CollegeFrederickUSA
  3. 3.Hindustan Lever Research CenterBombayIndia

Personalised recommendations