I think it should be yes, but my book says no. I think the two geometrical isomers are





  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Which book? Please state the source properly. $\endgroup$ – epsilon-emperor Dec 16 '17 at 10:10
  • $\begingroup$ The book is wrong unless one of the two does not exist. For the (hypothetical? ) structures you are right. $\endgroup$ – Alchimista Dec 16 '17 at 13:19
  • $\begingroup$ Well, there would be sever sterical clash for Z, so it's practically non-existant. $\endgroup$ – Mithoron Dec 16 '17 at 16:45

The two isomers are distinct substances, differing only in the orientation of a double bond, so they must be geometrical isomers. However, as a practical matter, they may interconvert under mild conditions and/or one may be much less stable than the other.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.