In 2012, I wrote a story of the first ever reaction curly arrows, attributed to Robert Robinson in 1924. At the time there was a great rivalry between him and another UK chemist, Christopher Ingold, with the latter also asserting his claim for their use.
The concept of a “ hidden intermediate ” in a reaction pathway has been promoted by Dieter Cremer[cite]10.1021/ar900013p[/cite] and much invoked on this blog. When I used this term in a recent article of ours[cite]10.1021/jo401146k[/cite], a referee tried to object, saying it was not in common use in chemistry. The term clearly has an image problem.
Chemistry gets complex very rapidly. Consider the formula CH 3 NO as the topic for a tutorial in introductory chemistry. I challenge my group (of about 8 students) to draw as many different molecules as they can using exactly those atoms. I imply that perhaps each of them might find a different structure; this normally brings disbelieving expressions to their faces.
Arrow pushing (why never pulling?) is a technique learnt by all students of organic chemistry (inorganic chemistry seems exempt!). The rules are easily learnt (supposedly) and it can be used across a broad spectrum of mechanism. But, as one both becomes more experienced, and in time teaches the techniques oneself as a tutor, its subtle and nuanced character starts to dawn.
