hypervalent_iodine

Not a problem. Glad we could help you with your question.

! Moderator Note Just for the record, I've split this into its own thread. Knyazik, if you think something is off topic, please start a new thread.

What you want is a model kit. Any university book shop will have them, or you can find them online.

First question: yes. Second question: I'm not sure what you mean by this exactly. You use the limiting reagent to calculate how many moles have reacted. You need this value to calculate delta H.

Do you mean 20mL of the CuSO4 solution? As with what studiot has said, you need to work out which of these is the limiting reagent and use that value. Don't worry about the "of ____ displaced," this is not necessary. Studiot is referring to the type of reaction you have, which is a displacement reaction.

! Moderator Note Lance_Granger, Throughout this thread you have done little more than attempt to redefine and misconstrue words that already have very standard definitions. Repeating your fallacies and falsehoods does not make them any more convincing. Since it is apparent that you are here not for discussion of your ideas but to preach them, staff have decided that this thread is to be closed. Please read carefully through the responses given here, for your own benefit. You are not permitted to re-introduce this topic.

Modified in what way? It may be worth contacting whatever department looks after such things for you and asking them about the legality of what you are doing. They will want specific information about the species, etc., so be prepared for those sorts of questions. Could you give more information on what specifically you'll be doing? What do you plan on doing at home and what will you need sent off to a lab to do? Are you sure a lab will do it? From what you are saying, an external lab will have to do virtually all of the work and transformation is not always a simple task. Certainly time consuming. I can't imagine why a lab would want to do essentially an entire research project in this way, so this is a question you really need to address. Without meaning to seem like a downer, I think you are putting the cart before the horse in getting a lab ready before you've really thought about how feasible your project is. You should take some time to plan things out carefully: what exactly are you aiming to do? What are your questions and what experiments do you need to do (and how will you do them)? What parts of that project are doable at home? What are the regulations? How much will need to be done externally? Is there a place willing to do it? What materials do you need for your lab? Equipment? Costs? What do you plan on doing with your results?

You should really be doing something along the lines of a liquid-liquid extraction with a sep funnel to semi purify your products as a matter of course for these things (but be careful not to ruin your products in the process). Have you run a TLC with any of your products? Also, a lack of crystals can often just mean that you haven't dried the product properly, so try removing all of the solvent using high vacuum if you haven't already and see if that helps.

I'm not sure what regulations are like where you are from, but based on what it is like here I would venture that creating any sort of GMO will not be doable on an at-home basis (which I assume is your plan). They tend to be very strictly regulated and any place in which a GMO is kept has to be listed under certain physical containment protocol and is subject to semi-regular checks. This may not be exactly replicated where you are, but there will almost definitly be something in place. Have you thought about this aspect of it before venturing further into the project?

! Moderator Note Lance_Granger, Cut out the childish attitude in your posts. If you believe someone has insulted you, report it and let staff deal with it. However, as far as I can tell, you have been the only one in this thread making veiled insults at other members and it is to stop. To reiterate Phi's comment about soap boxing: that is exactly what you are doing. Please look up what evidence is and start supplying some or this will be closed.

! Moderator Note Since the OP has rather annoyingly deleted all of his posts, I'm closing this thread.

! Moderator Note Your comments were removed because your replies were not on topic. When you are asked by staff explicitly not to do something, it's usually in your best interest to not do it. DO NOT respond to this mod note in this thread. If you take issue with something, report it or PM staff.

Update: Since is clear that Relative refuses to make productive use of this forum, staff have decided that it is not in the forum's interest to allow him to continue here and as a result, he has now been banned.

Or maybe you're just wrong. Thread closed.

I've always thrown them in the biology basket myself, but that's only because almost all of the biochemists I've ever met have baulked at the very sight of a periodic table. From memory, the last 10 years have been for GFP, metathesis, ribosomes, some kind of cell related thing, quasicrystals, palladium chemistry, another biology one from 2004 that I forget, something about surface chemistry, GPCR's, whatever it was last year (it was for something that was actually chemistry) and now this. So, 4/11 were for actual chemistry and the rest were biology, physics and whatever the heck quasicrystals are.

! Moderator Note Evidence =/= more speculation. Thread closed.

! Moderator Note Show evidence or this will be closed.

It refers to change in enthalpy.

And?

More like I'm secretly glad it wasn't given to a biologist for the 5th time in the last ten years.

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/2014/ "Eric Betzig, Stefan W. Hell and William E. Moerner "for the development of super-resolved fluorescence microscopy". I don't know I'd call that chemistry, but congratulations nonetheless! http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/2014/advanced-chemistryprize2014.pdf

Quick note: When writing out the names of these compounds, the (III) should go after the metal and it should be FeI2, not FeI. The III and II denotes the oxidation state of the iron. Iron (III) chloride contains Fe3+, making the molecular formula FeCl3, whereas iron (II) iodide had Fe2+. As I understand it, you can get the iodide and the chloride as both Fe3+ And Fe2+ complexes. Why you would have one over the other is a bit of a null question since it really depends on the context.

Just a few comments: If the paragraph you copied in your last post was written by you, then I would suggest that you need to work on your English (if that is the language this is being submitted in). The paragraph you have Said you need to explain more reads very poorly. I am not sure about your last sentence or at least, it needs clarification. How do metabolic process affect DNA? I am aware that errors in metabolism can cause mutations, though it is not clear that you are talking about this or about something more general. As CharonY said, this is still quite vague and I agree that you need to tie it back to something more specific and illustrative of the story you are trying to tell.

The starting temperatures really don't matter in this case. All that really matters for that section of the results is the temperature change. Unless the OP needs to calculate delta H, I'm not sure they need to worry about impurities so long as each experiment used salt from the same source. Isotopes wouldn't matter regardless.

! Moderator Note s1eep and responders, please try and get back on topic. S1eep, you have discussed / complained about the nature of what a crackpot is at various points in your time here. This thread is not a place for such a discussion. Please review the OP before you respond in this thread again. Any OT posts will be removed.