08.04.2014 Views

1,2,3-Dithiazolyl and 1,2,35-Dithiadiazolyl Radicals as Spin-Bearing ...

1,2,3-Dithiazolyl and 1,2,35-Dithiadiazolyl Radicals as Spin-Bearing ...

1,2,3-Dithiazolyl and 1,2,35-Dithiadiazolyl Radicals as Spin-Bearing ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

e enough to overcome the energetically favourable propensity for dimerization. Radical<br />

I-16c w<strong>as</strong> isolated in 1995 <strong>and</strong> exhibited a room temperature magnetic moment<br />

consistent with one unpaired electron. As the sample w<strong>as</strong> cooled, the susceptibility<br />

showed a broad maximum at 275 K which implied the onset of short-range<br />

antiferromagnetic ordering.<br />

Upon further cooling, the susceptibility continued to<br />

decre<strong>as</strong>e slowly until the compound underwent an abrupt transition to a diamagnetic state<br />

at 15 K, which h<strong>as</strong> been attributed to a ph<strong>as</strong>e transition to diamagnetic dimers. 78<br />

A<br />

similar radical cation, I-16d w<strong>as</strong> found to exist <strong>as</strong> dimers in the solid state giving rise to a<br />

very strong antiferromagnetic interaction. 79 However an incre<strong>as</strong>e in the susceptibility<br />

above 300 K indicated that the antiferromagnetic interactions were not <strong>as</strong> strong <strong>as</strong> that<br />

which had been observed in the neutral diradical I-16e 80 . The 1,3,2,4-DTDA moiety does<br />

not isomerize to its 1,2,3,5-DTDA counterpart due to the fact that the dimers that are<br />

formed have the 1,2,3,5 ring above the 1,3,2,4 ring <strong>and</strong> vice versa such that the<br />

mechanism outlined in Figure 1-7 is not possible.<br />

I-16c<br />

I-16d<br />

25

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!