hypervalent_iodine

Have you tried attempting this yourself?

! Moderator Note Mike, could you please stop opening multiple threads on this. This isn't the first time I've asked you to do this, so I'm not going to merge this thread with your other one, I'm just closing it.

! Moderator Note Do we have to rehash this argument over and over in every single GMO thread ever made? iNow, feel free to PM me if you think this is incorrect, but my take of the OP is that this is very much *not* a thread on whether or not GMO's are safe and as such, any discussion to that effect is off topic. In fact, I'm making an executive decision. Given that this is the mainstream, accepted science section of the forum and the mainstream, accepted view is that GMO's are safe, we can assume for the purposes of productive GMO-related discussion that the question is already asked and answered, with the exception of those that specifically wish to address it.

! Moderator Note You've been asked before to not post multiple threads on the same topic. Please stop. Additionally, your minimalist approach to OP's and posting in general is getting tiresome. Please try and put a little more effort and substance into your posts.

Do you mean the text shown in the grey speech bubble on your profile? If so, that is a status update and you can make by going to the profile feed tab on your profile.

I'm closing this and making your signature less visually insulting. Begging for rep points is a fast way to nothing.

We don't delete threads unless they are spam or the OP is some other rule violation.

You can post the question and maybe give a little detail of where you got up to with the link, but do not just post the link and nothing else.

Thank you for the shout out, Lightmeow, it's kind if you to say. I'm glad you're enjoying yourself here and I look forward to reading more of your posts! I too enjoy the community atmosphere here and I like that there is an emphasis on skilful debate in the forums; I think it's taught me a lot in the few years I've been here. I personally don't frequent many other forums except sometimes when I'm doing detective work, though of the ones I do visit, this is by far my favourite one to read and participate in.

! Moderator Note You have not been banned from saying Jesus or love, you were warned for soap boxing, hijacking discussion and not providing sufficient evidence for your claims. These are all clearly outlined in the forum rules, which you clearly refused to read despite agreeing to them upon signing up here. Personally, I don't really care if you think you're being censored. That's your problem. I do care that you have come to a science forum and refuse to engage in meaningful discussion, whether that be about science or politics or whatever. You can believe whatever you want to believe about why staff are coming down on you (and I'm sure there is nothing anyone could say to convince you otherwise), the fact of the matter is that you're breaking the forum rules with almost every post you make and whether or not you agree with those rules, if you get banned - which you will should this keep up - it will be because of that and nothing else. I am closing this pending further review. Update Upon further review, staff have agreed to keep this closed. Again, Davidjayjordan, this is because you continue to break the rules and make threads that do not open the way for productive discussion.

! Moderator Note So basically, you're proselytising with a bit of math? I would strongly urge you to go and read the forum rules before you make any more posts here, Davidjayjordan. As it stands, you are skirting close to suspension and any more posts like this will probably push you over the edge. I'm closing this thread pending review.

! Moderator Note My goodness, you certainly do know how to make yourself known to staff in less than 20 posts. As swansont said, this is a science forum, not a conspiracy site. Unless you have evidence to support this nonsense, it does not belong here. Thread closed.

! Moderator Note Davidjayjordan, it is not up to the other people posting in this threads to research what you are trying to discuss. That job is entirely yours. If you wish to keep this thread open, please set out your hypothesis clearly, provide evidence and respond to the questions that have been asked of you properly and without telling them to look it up. If you continue to not do these things, I will close the thread. Please do not respond to this modnote in the thread. If you are unhappy with it, please PM a member of staff or report it.

! Moderator Note Davidjayjordan, do not hijack discussion with off topic posts and soap boxing. I have removed your posts and their replies to the trash. ! Moderator Note Moontanman, I know the temptation is almost too much, but it would be appreciated if you could hold back from responding to these sorts of posts as it derails the thread further. Just report it and move on in future.

! Moderator Note daphne2013, please do not post links to commercial sites like that. You can easily ask your question without the advertising.

I don't follow your logic. Chlorine isn't a metal or a metalloid and neither are any of the other diatomic halogens. And hydrogen is considered a non-metal.

What? The OP is trying to reduce the phenolic OH of salicylic acid. An alkylhalide (which I assume is what you meant by alkylide) isn't going to help one bit and in fact that was my point. You're suggesting the OP make a Grignard reagent, which is not only very tricky to do effectively, it also won't do what the OP wants. This is why I asked you to consider what a Grignard reagent plus a carboxylic acid would produce. I'm sure I mentioned this to you before in another thread, but it apparently needs repeating; you shouldn't be giving out chemical advice if you don't know what you're talking about.

I can think of a couple of ways off the top of my head, but they would also mess with your acid group. In any event, your lacking knowledge of organic chemistry is a little concerning and I'm not sure I feel comfortable encouraging you to experiment like this. Maybe try to stick with some simple reactions if you're just doing this for fun and try to get a better feel for the theory before you continue with more complex / dangerous set ups.

Oxygen and nitrogen are diatomic also, but not halogens. Clearly being a halogen is not a requisite for diatomic molecules.

NaBH4 really isn't that scary and it doesn't react too violently with water. It fizzes and gets a little warm, but it won't catch fire the way that Na or LiAlH4 would. You would have to store it in a desiccator, but it's not difficult to keep over long periods of time. In any case, I understand your caution with pyrophorics. However, if you do ever find yourself having to use them for whatever reason, I would strongly urge you not to be scared of them. Be cautious, wear lots of PPE and have appropriate measures in place to avoid and extinguish any fires (if they occur), but never be afraid. People make more mistakes when they're nervous and that's clearly not something you want when dealing with dangerous chemicals. I don't know how much the Pt would cost you. It would vary from supplier to supplier and I don't know which ones sell to hobbyists. How much depends on the scale. IIRC, I used to use about 3-5 mol% and the work up and purification was very easy as far as my compounds were concerned. The trickiest part was degassing my solvent to get rid of any oxygen, but even that is not difficult.

That wouldn't work either. What do you think would happen if you had a Grignard reagent in the presence of a carboxylic acid?

And the vessel probably warmed up a little? Most likely what you did was make a Mg salt - I suspect of the acid - and hydrogen gas. You were never going to get rid of the phenolic OH like that. What is this for, exactly?

Why are you trying to make methylamine?

I'm not sure why you thought it would do that. Did you notice any bubbling?