hypervalent_iodine

! Moderator Note I think we can close this.

! Moderator Note Where does this thread end? It must end somewhere!* *Here. This thread ends here. **David Levy, posting your own ideas / hypotheses in a mainstream thread (or any thread) is considered hijacking. You're welcome to open your own thread in Speculations if you wish to discuss your thoughts.

What do you think?

The period number doesn't represent the number of 'shells.'

Depending on the buffer in the media and the pH you need, using HCl or NaOH should be fine. I don't think you can use the HH in the case of adding another buffer to something that is already buffered, since I assume you don't know the buffer or the HA / A - ratios already present. Can you not just ask for a bit more than you think you'll need and go from there?

Without knowing what the growth medium consists of, I think it's impossible to say. Do you have to specify an exact amount? In my limited experience in making growth media, I've always adjusted the pH by slow addition of HCl or NaOH to a beaker containing a stirring solution of the media with a pH probe in until it gets to where I need. Is there any reason you can't do it this way?

Try not to be too put off. Organic chemistry has quite a steep learning curve to it, and it can look impressively daunting when you're starting out. Persevere. It does get easier.

I appreciate that you are just looking for help, but the questions are so broad that anything I could say would just give you the answer. If you have looked these things up as you say, then perhaps you could be more specific with what you aren't understanding so I or someone else can help direct you. You could also have a look at these: http://courses.chem.psu.edu/chem36/Experiments/PDF's_for_techniques/Liquid_Liquid.pdf http://www.chem.ucla.edu/~bacher/Specialtopics/extraction.html http://www.foothill.edu/psme/armstrong/recrystallization.shtml However, if these questions are not forming part of the college's basis for accepting / rejecting your application, I'm not sure why you are worried. Most likely the reason they are asking is just so the professor(s) has some idea of what the class knows going into the course.

Have you made any attempts at these yourself? These look like questions probing your knowledge on basic purification techniques more than anything else. How familiar are you with liquid-liquid extraction and acid / base work ups? Recrystallisation? I would suggest you look into these to help you.

! Moderator Note We have rules that prohibit the posting of slurs against a person or group of people. Disclaimer or not, your posts are in violation of this. As well, they are off topic in a thread that aims to discuss Hillary Clinton in a political sense. Further posts of this nature will be removed.

! Moderator Note If you wish to discuss the BLM movement, please do so in a separate thread.

! Moderator Note I am closing this pending review. Posting threads for the purpose of flaming and inciting hostility is not appreciated, waitforufo. If you wish to discus the POTUS and fate of the work he has achieved, do so respectfully.

There's no need to redeem yourself. Chemistry has quite a steep learning curve to it.

! Moderator Note The conversation about who is or is not racist stops now. It is not productive, nor is it on topic. If you disagree with someone's points, then do so by discussing the science, not the person. Any more posts along these lines will be removed.

Just saw this. You are very close, but I am not sure where the 3.935 g comes from at the end. The question states that the solution has a mass of 2.017 g. Everything else looks correct.

A few things before I go into some of the posts. Making abortion illegal doesn't reduce the rate of abortion, it just diverts the women (particularly poorer ones) seeking out these procedures to have them done by people who are often untrained and in places that are unsafe. It should not be surprising to note that no one really wants to have an abortion, and making it illegal to have one really does not take away the necessity. If you truly want to decrease abortion rates (and I'm sure everyone here would), increasing the availability to sexual education and cheap / free contraceptives is far more effective than simply punishing those too poor to overcome the draconian laws being passed in places like Texas. Your views are so contradictory that I wonder if you've actually thought them through to any extent. In your initial statement you state as a blanket claim that it should not be legal because you think it is wrong: But yet, you concede later that it is okay in the cases where the foetus (it is not a child or a baby, it is a foetus) is inevitably going to be stillborn, or live only a few hours / days / weeks after birth. In the above post, you also make a spectacular shift in the goal posts stating that, "As for rape, that's a different story. We are talking about the aborted babies because a parent decided they changed their mind, and/or had it on accident." You never specified in your OP that there were caveats. You simply said that it was wrong and should be illegal. Why do you think that abortion in the case of rape or incest is okay when in your own words, "you still have the option to give it away."? What's the difference if the foetus is similarly viable? This is ridiculous, and highly offensive to anyone who has been through the trauma of having to get an abortion. You seem to be implying that women go and get them like it's a fun day out at the mall. Have you ever spoken to someone who has had to make this decision? I promise you that if you had, you might not be so cruel as to suggest their motives were this flippant or casual. How exactly do you determine that a foetus is absolutely going to go to term and be born a healthy, living child? I'm sure many people would be fascinated to hear about these predictive powers of yours. Do you know anything about the world of foster care and adoption? In the US the system is so woefully overburdened and underfunded that it can barely keep on top of the children is currently has to deal with. What kind of life do you think this child is going to have in this system? What sort of future? What about the psychological trauma on the mother who had to give up her child? I'm sure many, many women (myself included) would love to know how exactly one simply chooses not to conceive. Do I have to buy a morning after pill after every time I have sex? At $30 a pop, that seems a bit unreasonable. What if that doesn't work? CharonY mentioned this, but your argument for the foetus's right to life seems to ignore the mother's almost entirely, as well as the life of that child the moment it exits the mother. Point being, given that you don't seem to really care about the mother or child (once born), you can hardly claim that you advocate for life. What you seem to advocate, as so many other pro-lifers do, is the ability to control the sexuality of women.

Yep, that's what I would think also. The question is whether the oxygen of the ester is on the CH2 end or the alkene end. I also considered that the CH2 might be between the ring and the nitrile. I don't know exactly how the shifts would change in that case, but perhaps you could look them up.

I believe you are right about the ester, however I am confused as to why you think the ester is saturated. you are right about the dq being one of the alkene CH's bonded to the CH3 and other alkene CH, but that does beg the question of why you would then think the CH2 singlet is bonded between the ester and CH3? The CH2 is a singlet; it is bonded to carbons containing no hydrogens. Also, I came up with 4 possible structures based on your OP. I don't think I could distinguish between them without looking them up, or looking a bit more into your aromatic NMR peaks.

Some of what you've posted doesn't make a lot of sense. For instance, what does this mean? Do you mean that you took a solution of NaOH (purported to be about 0.1M) and diluted it to 500 mL? Based on the image you scanned, the moles of NaOH comes from knowing the amount of the other thing you used in the reaction (potassium hydrogen pthalate; KHCH4O4). There is a reaction between these two species, so knowing the amount of one required for complete reaction will allow you to know the amount of the other thing. This isn't how you calculate it. The whole point of this titration as far as I can tell is to standardise the NaOH. In other words, you assume the concentration is around 0.1M, but not exactly. I think perhaps you need to look up how simple acid base titration works and how we use it to standardise solutions.

Do you happen to have images of the spectra or just the peaks? Okay, I think I figured it out. I would agree that you have a para substituted nitrile system. That takes care of 6 of your DBE's. You clearly have some other carbonyl, which you can hopefully figure out based on the IR carbonyl peak. It would be helpful to have a picture of the spectra though, because there are two carbonyl groups that the peak could correspond to, and the presence and appearance of another peak would let you rule the wrong one out straight away. At any rate, you are then left with 1 DBE. Going through your NMR and looking at the coupling constants you should be able to figure out peaks from from carbons carbons that are connected. Your 2H singlet peak is quite a standout here, because it implies that the carbon those protons are bound to are not next door to any other carbon with protons. This leaves you with only two possible connections given what you already know. The other stand outs are the two 1H peaks at 6.10 and 7.65ppm. Their coupling suggests they are next door, but there is only 1 hydrogen involved on each carbon, leaving you with only one realistic possibility for what functional group they're in. I'll leave that as a starting point for you work from. Let me know how you go.

C10H6Cl8 is chlordane. All you really need to take away from the first reaction is that all of the Cl- ions came from the C10H6Cl8. You can calculate the number of moles of Cl- based on the stoicheometry of the reaction between it and AgNO3 (you're given concentration and volume of this). If you have that and if you know that there is one molecule of C10H6Cl8 per 8 molecules of Cl, then you should be able calculate moles of C10H6Cl8. The 100(x/2.017) is skipping ahead. It is for the last part of the question where you calculate the mass percentage of chlordane in the solution. With units it is: 100% x (mass of chlordane / 2.017 g) = mass percentage of chlordane in the solution.

I don't recall anything misconceptions of my own (I'm sure there were many things), however I do remember once making one of my sisters believe that chicken nuggets were made from fish so I could have hers (she hated fish). She believed it for about a year (she was 5 at the time), until a babysitter heard her say it to someone else and corrected her. She was not happy.

! Moderator Note Once again, could we please refrain from the use of the word 'retarded.' It won't be tolerated, and if I see it again I am simply going to hide the offending posts. Edit: I have hidden the last offending post as it was also off topic.

! Moderator Note Let's all calm down and stick to the OP. Moreover, if we could cut down on the argument by way of repeated logical fallacy, that would be great.

What you've written here is a bit confusing. The compound produced in the key reaction is AgCl (which you are right to say you don't need to calculate). What do you mean by 'left behind'? You aren't worried about anything that's 'left behind' in this question.