hypervalent_iodine

Turns out mods can edit polls. Who knew?! Awesome poll, by the way.

The odds of which are also quite low.

! Moderator Note Thread moved to the lounge.

chilled_fluorine, Firstly, if you want to debate mod note, do so via the report feature or PM. Secondly, you've had two experienced chemists tell you that this thread presents no obvious danger to a passer by. We are mindful of people's safety here and you can rest assured that if anything in this thread did present a serious risk to inexperienced readers, we'd deal with it.

I don't think it's an issue, but since I'm involved in this thread, I'll defer to other mods.

We don't generally delete posts in threads unless they are obscene, irrelevant or spammy. I do have to question why you would want it? Also, Yes, but I'm wondering if you do based on this: John beat me to the solvation issue. Asides from the intrinsic reactive properties of the compound, I would think that you also wouldn't have hydrogen bonding, which is where water gets a bulk of its solvation properties from. This would depend on whether it exists as NH4+/ F- or NH3 / HF in its molten state (I actually don't know which is the case; perhaps John might). Regardless, a mixture of ammonia and HF would of course be nothing like water as a solvent either.

You of course know the difference between sublimation and vaporization? Additionally, ammonium fluoride is not NH3F. The ammonium ion is NH4+ (ammonia is NH3), making the neutral salt of ammonium fluoride NH4F. I'm really not seeing many similarities with water. It's a salt, water isn't. Melting point of ammonium fluoride is reported to be anything from 100oC to 160oC, though it tends to decompose before it melts (water is stable into the thousands of oC). Not very soluble in alcohols and not soluble at all in ammonia; water is. When it sublimes, it exists as HF and NH3, where as water just remains as water. etc. I did notice that they had similar crystal structures and that their bond distances were similar; outside of that, the chemical and physical properties are quite different. As a solvent it would not be useful, especially since it decomposes around or before its melting temperature. From what I've read, it's used for oil well acidification or turned into a more acidic relative (ammonium bifluoride) for glass etching.

! Moderator Note I don't think that arguments over formatting really belong in a thread about calcium metal. Back on topic, please.

! Moderator Note I've removed the last three posts from this thread, as they have not a single thing to do with the topic at hand. afungusamongus, in the future, please do not enter threads for the sole purpose of creating a flame war.

Just to add to CP's post, typically when staff notice a member coming in line for a suspension, a PM is sent to that person. There are exceptions to this; for instance when a new or existing member decides to make multiple, large violations in a short time frame. But in general, if we spy a problem member then we do send them a private message.

! Moderator Note Moved to speculations.

! Moderator Note Topic split from here. This thread is not to become a flame war. As well, the OP is also very specifically about religious and atheistic societies. The question of whether or not God (or Allah or whoever) exists or the veracity of the bible (or the Torah or whatever else) has no place here. Please do not derail this thread by asking or answering such questions.

! Moderator Note I'm splitting the relevant posts into a new thread. This one is to stay on topic. And Moontanman, 'I couldn't let that one go,' is in no way an acceptable excuse for continually ignoring a staff warning in this thread. You do not get a free pass just because your stance happens to agree with the majority of other members.

! Moderator Note It's also off topic. Please feel free to start your own thread on abortion, etc. if you wish to discus it.

Well for one, you shouldn't have any problems with solubility and it won't stick so badly to the column. With nitrogen containing compounds, you also tend to get smearing as opposed to a nice clean spot on TLC and this is fairly representative of what happens in the columns. MeOH/DCM mixtures help with that. I would say this is definitely related to polarity. Another thing to try is to flush your column with your solvent + 5% TEA and then run it with 1-2% TEA. If you do this, you'll also want to pre-wash your TLC plates with the 1-2% TEA/solvent mixture and play around with your solvents to figure out the optimal system. Then there is also basic alumina or alternatively, you could deactivate your silica gel by stirring it with bicarb for a few hours and then washing it through with water and acetone. I use the last method for my especially hard to purify amides.

Nope. That would be CH3Br. Also no. The OH croup is attached to the carbonyl, making it a carboxylic acid. Nonanol (asides from not being the name of compound 2) also does not provide a full description, since it doesn't tell you where the OH group is situated. You've also completely ignored the methyl group and the alkene in your naming. Again, no. Heptanol is a straight chain alkane with one OH group on it. This compound is cyclic, has a hydroxyl group, an aldehyde (not a ketone) and an alkene. Definitely not. A tetra-ol would have 4 OH groups. Yours doesn't even have 1. It is not hydrogenated and the functional group is an alkyne, not an alkene. The carbonyl group is a carboxylic acid (as above). I don't mean this to be in any way insulting to your person, but you lack a very basic understanding of organic functional groups and IUPAC conventions. That is far too much work to expect members here to try and teach you. My suggestion to you is to go an read an o chem text book, or spend some time going through wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia....unctional_group and http://en.wikipedia....ganic_chemistry) and try and problem solve with those as references. Then if you are still confused about something or you need to clarify, you can bring your question here and we can help point you in the right direction. I hope that helps.

The obvious solution would be to try a different solvent system. Have you tried MeOH:DCM combinations? In my experience with nitrogen containing compounds, they are often the best systems.

You need to think about this yourself instead of just randomly stating reactions. If you did a Grignard reaction on your compound, what do you think the product(s) would be? A much easier way to approach this is to identify your functional groups and list the reactions you know you can perform on those groups and draw your predicted products. You would then be able to cross check to see if the reagents used in one reaction for one of the functional groups also has an affect on one of the others. Going about this in the reverse direction - I.e. by naming reactions and then seeing if they fit your compound - is going to quickly lead you astray.

Substituents at axial and equatorial positions can also be described as being cis or trans relative to one another. FC alkylations and acylations are aromatic substitution reactions. Your compound is not aromatic. Is this an actual question posed in the book? It seems too broad to have one clear answer.

! Moderator Note Once again, the speculative posts belong in the speculations forum. Thread moved. A reminder also of this modnote, from your other thread.

! Moderator Note All of you, Quit with the insults and general hostility and get back on topic.

What exactly was wrong about juanrga's post? Are you trying to say that juanrga is claiming resonance bonding doesn't exist? Because that's certainly not what I just read.

! Moderator Note Elshamah, The preaching stops now. You don't need to provide proof of anything (proofs belong to math), but you sure as hell need to stop ignoring people and provide evidence for your assertions. This is your last warning. Since this is not your thread I am reluctant to close it, so be warned that you will be considered by staff for suspension if this keeps up. Before posting again, read these: http://www.scienceforums.net/index.php?app=forums&module=forums&section=rules&f=29 http://www.scienceforums.net/index.php?app=forums&module=forums&section=rules&f=29 Once you've read those, read them again and then go back to the start of this thread and read the links that were already provided by other posters. While you're at it, perhaps you could also go back and read the answers to the questions you keep posting instead of ignoring them. Finally, please don't derail the thread by responding to this mod note. If you have a question about it, please use the report feature, located at the bottom left of each post.

! Moderator Note pawelkolasa, I suggest you have a good read of the general forum rules as well as the speculation forum rules before posting in this thread again. You are required to back up your claims with evidence. You are also required to respond to rather than ignore posts that disagree with what you are saying. Disregarding these rules and this warning will result in your thread being closed. Please do not respond to this mod note within the thread. You are welcome to use the report feature (bottom left corner of every post) or to PM me if you have any concerns.

! Moderator Note Elshamah, You don't get to cherry pick what you respond to. People have offered you rebuttals and links, which you have ignored in favor what is really little more than preaching. It stops now. On a related note, I don't really know what this thread is doing here and so I'm moving it to speculations.