Abstract
Accordingly, describing our proposed methodology as a ‘‘two-dimensional’’ NICS scan he has criticized this approach basedon the following question: ‘‘if a two dimensional description ofaromaticity (and antiaromaticity) is wished, the r at and abovethe (Ring Critical Point) RCP (which is the parameter that FSR(Foroutan-Nejad, Shahbazian, Rashidi-Ranjbar) chose) shouldalso show a different behaviour for aromatic vs. antiaromaticsystems. Is this really the case (in the r vs. NICS approach)?’’(Italics are added by the present authors.)Throughouthiscomment, based on this hypothesis, the author tries to demon-strate that electron density cannot be used as a measure ofaromaticity.Furthermore,hehas tried toshowthat the amountof electron density in a point of space is mainly influenced bythe distance from nuclei and is not directly related to thenumber of p-electrons. Though Stanger rightly insists on somepoints regarding the relation of electron density and aromati-city, they are irrelevant to our proposed methodology andparticularly his primary question clearly reveals that he deeplymisinterpreted our motivations for introducing NICS
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
