Welcome to LookChem.com Sign In|Join Free

CAS

  • or

60507-99-5

Post Buying Request

60507-99-5 Suppliers

Recommended suppliersmore

  • Product
  • FOB Price
  • Min.Order
  • Supply Ability
  • Supplier
  • Contact Supplier

60507-99-5 Usage

Check Digit Verification of cas no

The CAS Registry Mumber 60507-99-5 includes 8 digits separated into 3 groups by hyphens. The first part of the number,starting from the left, has 5 digits, 6,0,5,0 and 7 respectively; the second part has 2 digits, 9 and 9 respectively.
Calculate Digit Verification of CAS Registry Number 60507-99:
(7*6)+(6*0)+(5*5)+(4*0)+(3*7)+(2*9)+(1*9)=115
115 % 10 = 5
So 60507-99-5 is a valid CAS Registry Number.

60507-99-5Downstream Products

60507-99-5Relevant articles and documents

Axial-Ligand Control of the Photophysical Behavior of Ruthenium(II) Tetraphenyl- and Octaethylporphyrin. Contrasting Properties of Metalloporphyrin (?,?*) and (d,?*) Excited States

Levine, Leanna M. A.,Holten, Dewey

, p. 714 - 720 (2007/10/02)

The photophysical behavior of the ruthenium(II) porphyrins depends dramatically on the axial ligands coordinated to the central metal ion.We have measured the picosecond and slower time scale transient absorption spectra and kinetics, emission data, and ground-state absorption spectra for two classes of complexes: RuP(CO)(L) and RuP(L)2.Results are compared for complexes in which the porphyrin macrocycle (P) is tetraphenylporphyrin (TPP) or octaethylporphyrin (OEP) and the axial ligand L is piperidine (pip), pyridine (py), dimethyl sulfoxide (Me2SO), or ethanol (EtOH).We assign the lowest excited state of all the RuP(CO)(L) complexes, including those with L absent, as the lowest excited triplet state 3(?,?*), of the porphyrin ring 3(?,?*) appears to form in high yield from the ring excited singlet, 1(?,?*), in a metal-to-ring (d,?*) charge-transfer (CT) state.We attribute this general switch of the lowest excited state from 3(?,?*) in RuP(CO)(L) to (d,?* in RuP(L)2 to the loss of ?-backbonding between the filled Ru(d?) orbitals and the empty CO(?*) orbitals.The loss of axial ?-backbonding is expected to destabilize the d? orbitals, making them closer in energy to the empty eg(?*) orbitals of the porphyrin ring.This lowers the energy of (d,?*) relative to 3(?,?*) in RuP(L)2 compared to RuP(CO)(L).Although 3(?,?*) appears to be the lowest excited state in all the RuP(CO)(L) complexes investigated, we propose that the deactivation of this state nonetheless proceeds, in part, via a shorter lived (d,?*) state at higher energy.We speculate that the faster decay of (d,?*) compared to 3(?,?*) may be due to a better Franck-Condon factor for radiationless decay to the ground state.The recay route of 3(?.?*) via a thermally accessible (d,?*) in the RuP(CO)(L) complexes also may be the pathway for photodissociation of CO from these molecules, which in the presence of L results in the formation of RuP(L)2.The photodissociation quantum yield is measured to be ca. 1E-4 for two of the complexes.

Post a RFQ

Enter 15 to 2000 letters.Word count: 0 letters

Attach files(File Format: Jpeg, Jpg, Gif, Png, PDF, PPT, Zip, Rar,Word or Excel Maximum File Size: 3MB)

1

What can I do for you?
Get Best Price

Get Best Price for 60507-99-5