Alkenes: Structure and Isomerism

Look at ethane and ethene side by side and one difference decides everything that follows: ethane's C–C bond lets the two halves of the molecule spin freely against each other, but ethene's C=C bond does not. That single restriction — no free rotation about the double bond — is why alkenes can exist as two distinct, isolable compounds sharing the same formula and the same atom-to-atom connections, differing only in how the pieces sit in space. This article builds that idea from the ground up: how sp2sp^2 hybridisation and a sideways overlap of unhybridised pp orbitals create the sigma-plus-pi structure of C=C, why that pi bond locks the geometry in place, and the precise structural rule that tells you whether a given alkene shows cis-trans isomerism at all.

The core insight

A C=C double bond is one sigma bond plus one pi bond formed by sideways overlap of unhybridised pp orbitals on two sp2sp^2 carbons, and because that overlap needs the pp orbitals to stay parallel, rotation about the bond is restricted, so cis and trans isomers exist whenever each doubly-bonded carbon carries two different substituents.

The core idea

General formula and shape. Alkenes follow the general formula

CnH2n,n≥2.\text{C}_n\text{H}_{2n}, \qquad n \geq 2.

where: nn is the number of carbon atoms in the chain, so an alkene with nn carbons carries exactly 2n2n hydrogen atoms — two fewer H atoms per molecule than the corresponding alkane, the "missing" pair used up in forming the extra bond of the double bond. Each doubly-bonded carbon is sp2sp^2 hybridised: three sp2sp^2 orbitals lie in one plane at 120∘120^\circ to each other, each forming a sigma bond (two to substituents, one to the other alkene carbon), while a leftover, unhybridised 2p2p orbital on each carbon sits perpendicular to that plane.

Sigma plus pi. Those two perpendicular pp orbitals overlap sideways, above and below the sigma-bond plane, to form one pi bond. So C=C is not "two of the same kind of bond" — it is a strong sigma bond along the internuclear axis plus a weaker pi bond straddling it. The figure below shows both the electronic picture and its geometric consequence.

Figure
Sideways p orbital overlap forming the pi bond above and below the sp2 plane, next to cis and trans arrangements of substituents across the double bond
Why the C=C bond cannot rotate freely sigma + pi bond (side view) C1 C2 sp2 plane, bond angles 120 degrees unhybridised p orbitals overlap sideways to form the pi bond cis and trans across C=C R R R here means same side cis R R on opposite side trans

Why rotation is restricted. Because the pi bond's sideways overlap needs the two pp orbitals to stay parallel, twisting one carbon's substituents relative to the other around the C=C axis would pull the pp orbitals out of alignment and break that overlap. A C–C single bond in an alkane has no such pi bond, so its groups rotate freely; a C=C double bond does not.

The cis-trans rule. For a disubstituted alkene R–CH=CH–R\text{R–CH=CH–R}, the cis isomer has the two R groups on the same side of the double bond and the trans isomer has them on opposite sides. This is a form of stereoisomerism — same connectivity, different arrangement in space — and it is only possible when each doubly-bonded carbon bears two different groups. It is also a separate phenomenon from structural isomerism (chain, position or functional-group isomerism, which alkenes can show too — for example but-1-ene and but-2-ene differ in where the double bond sits along the same four-carbon chain).

Why it works

The goal here is to reason from the electronic structure of the C=C double bond all the way to the exact structural test for geometrical isomerism, using nothing beyond the sigma-pi picture already built above and simple counting of substituents on each doubly-bonded carbon, so that the structure of any alkene alone tells you whether cis and trans forms exist for it.

Step 1. Fix the electronic picture. Each alkene carbon holds three sp2sp^2 sigma bonds in a plane plus one pp orbital standing perpendicular to that plane; the two perpendicular pp orbitals on the two double-bond carbons overlap sideways to make the pi bond, which lies above and below the sigma-bond plane.

Step 2. Ask what a rotation about the C=C axis would do to that overlap. Twisting one CH end relative to the other tilts its pp orbital out of parallel with the other carbon's pp orbital, shrinking and eventually destroying the sideways overlap that constitutes the pi bond — so a full rotation effectively requires breaking the pi bond rather than merely bending a single bond, and this does not happen under ordinary conditions.

Step 3. Because the molecule cannot freely rotate about C=C, whatever spatial arrangement the substituents are built in stays fixed — the two ends of the double bond are "frozen" relative to each other, unlike free rotation about a single bond.

Step 4. Turn that frozen geometry into a counting rule. If a doubly-bonded carbon carries two identical groups, swapping them produces the same molecule again — no new arrangement — so no cis or trans distinction arises at that carbon. Only when both doubly-bonded carbons carry two different groups does swapping produce a genuinely different, non-superimposable arrangement, giving distinct cis and trans isomers. This is exactly the rule applied in the worked examples below.

Worked example

Q. But-2-ene, CH3-CH=CH-CH3\text{CH}_3\text{-CH=CH-CH}_3, exists as two geometrical isomers. Identify them and explain, from the structure, why interconversion does not happen under ordinary conditions.

Step 1. Locate the doubly-bonded carbons: C2 and C3, each bearing one CH3\text{CH}_3 group and one H atom.

Step 2. Apply the rule: each of C2 and C3 carries two different substituents (H and CH3\text{CH}_3), so cis-trans isomerism is possible.

Step 3. Name the two arrangements. In cis-but-2-ene both CH3\text{CH}_3 groups lie on the same side of the C=C bond (and both H atoms on the other, shared side). In trans-but-2-ene the two CH3\text{CH}_3 groups lie on opposite sides, with the H atoms likewise opposite.

Step 4. Explain the stability. Converting cis to trans would require rotating one CH3\text{CH}_3-CH= end by 180∘180^\circ about the C2–C3 axis, which pulls the two 2p2p orbitals out of parallel alignment and breaks the sideways overlap forming the pi bond. Cis-but-2-ene and trans-but-2-ene are therefore distinct, isolable compounds, not interconverting conformations of one molecule.

Competitive stretch

Q. Does 1,2-dichloroethene, ClCH=CHCl\text{ClCH=CHCl}, show geometrical isomerism?

Step 1. C1 carries one H and one Cl; C2 also carries one H and one Cl — both doubly-bonded carbons have two different substituents.

Step 2. By the same rule as above, this satisfies the condition for cis-trans isomerism, so cis-1,2-dichloroethene (both Cl atoms on the same side) and trans-1,2-dichloroethene (Cl atoms on opposite sides) are both valid, distinct compounds.

Common traps

  • Assuming every C=C bond gives cis-trans isomers — the rule needs each double-bond carbon to carry two different groups; symmetric alkenes like 2-methylpropene or ethene itself show none.
  • Mixing up structural isomerism with geometrical isomerism — but-1-ene and but-2-ene are structural (position) isomers of each other, while cis- and trans-but-2-ene are geometrical isomers of each other.
  • Treating the C=C bond as freely rotating like a C–C single bond — the pi bond's sideways pp-orbital overlap specifically prevents this.
  • Judging cis/trans from only one substituent instead of checking the arrangement on both carbons of the double bond.

Ask the tutor: Not sure if a particular alkene shows cis-trans isomerism, or want help drawing its cis and trans structures — ask the AI tutor to check your reasoning.

Why does 2-methylpropene not show cis-trans isomerism even though it has a C=C bond?

In CH2=C(CH3)2\text{CH}_2\text{=C(CH}_3)_2, one doubly-bonded carbon carries two identical H atoms and the other carries two identical CH3\text{CH}_3 groups. The cis-trans test needs each double-bond carbon to carry two different groups; here neither carbon does, so swapping the groups on either carbon gives back the same molecule. There is simply no distinct "same side" versus "opposite side" arrangement to distinguish, even though rotation about that C=C bond is just as restricted as in any other alkene.

Is restricted rotation the same idea as geometrical isomerism?

No — restricted rotation is the cause, geometrical isomerism is the consequence, and the consequence only shows up under the right substitution pattern. Every C=C double bond restricts rotation because of its pi bond, including in ethene and 2-methylpropene, but restricted rotation only produces distinct, nameable cis and trans forms when both doubly-bonded carbons additionally carry two different substituents. Without that substitution condition, restricted rotation is present but has nothing distinguishable to "lock in."

How is cis-trans isomerism different from the chain and position isomerism alkenes also show?

Chain and position isomerism are both structural isomerism — the molecules differ in which atoms are bonded to which, such as but-1-ene versus but-2-ene having the double bond in a different location along the same carbon skeleton. Cis-trans isomerism is stereoisomerism — the connectivity (which atom is bonded to which) is identical in both isomers; only the spatial arrangement of groups across the fixed, non-rotating double bond differs. Always check connectivity first: if it differs, it is structural isomerism, not geometrical.

Before this

Where this leads