Post Reopened by Jan, Tyberius, paracetamol, ron, andselisk
    Post Closed as "primarily opinion-based" by Mithoron, Todd Minehardt, Jon Custer, pentavalentcarbon, Nilay Ghosh
    Tweeted twitter.com/StackChemistry/status/932510492287033344
2 edited tags
| link
1
source | link

The pyridine/benzene stability 'paradox'?

So, apparently pyridine is more stable than benzene. My lecture notes are saying that pyridine will undergo electrophilic aromatic substitution much more slowly than benzene will, which got me thinking - slower means the compound is more stable (higher activation energy). But isn't benzene more aromatic than pyridine?

I checked the heats of hydrogenation and it checks out - pyridine is indeed more stable than benzene. I'm a little bit lost though, because I don't get where this unexpected stability is coming from. Surely benzene is an ultra-stable compound because of the superb resonance it has (higher resonance energy than pyridine), electron density is (AFAIK) equally distributed around the ring, whereas this isn't the case in pyridine.

Also, the reason I call this a 'paradox' (in my head, at least) is because I've been learning about how benzene is a really stubborn compound when it comes to getting it to react - it doesn't undergo normal alkene addition reactions and all that - yet pyridine is quite a bit more stable than benzene and it has a million different weird reactions going on (acid/base, nucleophilic, EAS, N-oxide formation, metal complexes, etc. etc.)

Apparently pyridine is more stable, yet more reactive due to the lone pair electrons on the nitrogen (which allow lots of crazy stuff). In general, is it true that more stable = less reactive? That's the basic assumption I've been using until now - based on thermodynamics (?) - but I've seen a couple of things that make me think it's not as simple as that. Sorry for the rambling, just blurting my questions out!