hypervalent_iodine

I would have been on board for Tanya Plibersek myself (or better, Penny Wong, although she wasn't in the running at the time); I still don't think I would have voted for Labor without a serious change in their policy platform away from appeasing the right, however. I have had the pleasure of watching Bob Hawke speak on several occasions at Woodford, which he attends almost every year. He always has a lot of interesting opinions on the future of the country, a lot of them I tend to agree with. He's a funny guy. My main problem with the LNP is their callousness towards the middle class and the disadvantaged, and their short-sighted economic and environmental policies, all of which seem to be par for the course in right-wing politics these days.

Achilles has been suspended for 1 week for insulting behaviour and using the forum as a personal soap box.

The up and down voting options don't ever appear on your own posts, which is what you appear to have linked to. Editing for Senior Members is set to a 60 minute time limit.

Are you referring to Labor as the "left wing" opposition party? I think I agree with you, in that the term could not be further from the truth. They have been so interested in trying to pick up votes from and placate the right that they have alienated the very ideals they used to champion. I (for example) could never (and will never) support a party who actively pursues the offshore / indefinite detention Australia has engaged in as a solution for refugees who arrive by boat. I would love for Shorten to be ousted and someone else to take his place as I think he's nothing less than a vapid waste of space with no courage of conviction, and no real opinions of his own. Unfortunately, I suspect Labor is very keen to appear cohesive in the wake of all of the turmoil within the LNP ranks ahead of the next election. If ever there was a Steven Bradbury of Australian politics, it is Shorten. I can't totally decide what I think about it. I do think that having the extra check in place is a good thing least the party leader goes rogue upon being voted in. That being said, if the party in question was able to form government, then they have the votes to challenge anything the PM would try to pass on his own anyway. As well, having the leadership role cemented upon being voted in might help to stop all of the self-interested rubbish that has led to recent turmoil. Or maybe not, I can't quite decide. I am very okay if the LNP doesn't achieve any of their often reprehensible goals, but it might be nice if they spent time more time governing and less time plotting. I do think that 3 years is too short a time, and that we should increase it to 4.

There's always other routes to your destination, some of them just take a more scenic route. Don't stress. A few extra months, even a few extra years, is nothing in the grand scheme of things.

I'm nothing if not resourceful. Just now I forcibly opened an elevator door that had myself and 10 other people trapped inside with my bare hands.

I saw this yesterday, made a mental note to change it for you, then immediately forgot. If it hasn’t been done in the next 12 hours or so, shoot me a PM. Edit: it was easier to do on my phone than I anticipated, so it’s done now.

! Moderator Note You can try, but you will find this thread gets closed rather quickly if you decide to use it as a soap box.

It doesn’t give a particularly clear path to understanding the basis of the OP’s question, but it does hint at it if read correctly. As a further clue for the OP, it is important to consider the position of the carbon undergoing substitution relative to the aromatic ring, and how that ring might be able to participate.

What factor generally distinguishes SN1 from SN2? In other words, why do certain substrates go via SN2 and not SN1?

It’s more like Linked In for people in research based careers.

! Moderator Note As others have said, speak to your doctor. Thread closed.

! Moderator Note Brett Nortj, this reads like soap boxing. Do you have a point related to the thread title that you wish to discuss? If not, this is getting closed.

! Moderator Note Cool it with the attitude, T. McGrath.

! Moderator Note There is no other word to describe this than nonsense. I can’t see how this would help anyone learn chemistry, let alone students who are being introduced to it for the first time. You need to start putting a bit more care and rigor into your posts. Most of them appear to be little more than half baked ideas you’ve spewed on to the keyboard. Such threads make little room for discussion. If it continues, your account will be placed into a moderator queue and nothing you post will be visible until staff approves it.

My guess is the tea tree oil.

! Moderator Note We don’t give medical advice, sorry. Consult with a doctor.

! Moderator Note This appears to be little more than trolling. I am closing your thread pending review.

David Hine has been suspended for 1 week for constantly attempting to reintroduce closed topics.

! Moderator Note We're done here.

Making slime is always a hit at open day at my university. It's easy to do, colourful, low risk, and you can talk about cross linking of polymers. Get yourself some plastic cups, paddle pop sticks for stirring, PVA based glitter glue and borax solution (and wear gloves!). You'll find plenty of recipes online for it. I recommend a few different glitter glues if you can, and to practice first (it's easy, but you want to get the volumes right). Some glues work better than others.

A good place to start is to high light where the starting materials are in the product, and use that to identify which atoms have formed bonds between them. Another question that may help, do you know what the functional group is on the aromatic starting material above the arrow is called?

Could you please clarify which salts, and for what purpose?

Much better. That all seems reasonable to me.

What about the ethyl groups? And can I ask what the purpose of the aromatic chlorination is? Do you think you would get dichlorination in that way?