tycon69

Ok, So I am a junior chemistry major doing organic research, but my question hasn't really occured in organic lab and is really more microbiology related, but I assume chemists in certain fields have either run across this problem or already know how to prevent this from happening. I have a chemical, its a racetam nootropic (completely legal), that I ordered a gram of from a chemical provider. Because this nootropic is for personal use and not laboratory use, I have no access to lab chemicals, scales, etc. I dissolved the entire gram in solution and was going to measure my dose in concentrations of 2mg / ml H20. My problem is that because I was in a hurry, I poured this solution into a rootbeer bottle that I had only rinsed out twice with water. Well it appears that their was trace sugars in the solution and a few days later it turned from a clear solution to a cloudy solution with moldy fuzz floating around.... Now how am I to salvage this solution of nootropic? My first idea was to raise the pH a little bit (hopefully I still have a vial or two of 1 M HCl that I had stolen (yes i was so interested in chemistry that I stole a few chems and glassware from my terrible chem teacher) in high school). If I can't find that I was going to use a little lemon juice or whatever else I can find around the house (you think ascorbic acid would help? or is it too weak?). Then after a reasonable pH change, assuming a pH change would kill and prevent any more mold, I was going to filter it through a coffee filter a couple times (don't really have access to laboratory grade filters right now). After doing this would the solution be safe to ingest? Or should I try to attempt some sort of other extraction method? That would be difficult as I can't just steal chemicals from the lab (im not in high school anymore). I'm sure noone would miss a few mLs of acetone, DCM, ethyl acetate, or any of the other common solvents I use everyday in lab, but I do not want to wait till after the weekend as I am trying to get a start on studying for finals. Any suggestions or a confirmation of my idea would be great. Thanks alot

I understand what you all are saying and agree. I guess it just annoyed me that nobody has really given this guy the time of day because he didn't go about his research in the traditional way. I'm sure he has at least showed it to a few physicists and if it were really that promising it would have caught on. The possibility that this may not be the case, that nobody ever gave the guy a chance because he is not a traditional physicist, is what was bothering me. It would truly be a disgrace to the scientific community if he were right though, IMHO, though I seriously doubt this is the case. Another reason why I was so troubled by this, is because I always thought that I may want to tackle the problem myself after accumulating a reasonable amount of success in my own field (organic chemistry). But the whole reason I chose O-chem over physics in the first place was because of the relatively large chance of never making any significant impact in physics (especially in theoretical physics). I just don't know if I would ever want to waste as much time as Dr. Brown on something that will never even be considered appropriately.

Haha well that pretty much addresses all of my questions and is to the point. Thanks. However, I disagree with the last part. Dr. Lisi is an independent researcher without an academic position (According to wikipedia). How is that any different than an engineer who may be extremely gifted in mathematics. Dr. Lisi may have gotten a direct Ph. D, but any engineer could easily take his background in physics and self-study the subject deeper with todays easy flow of information. I guess its more about the headlines than it is anything else because it gets the information to the masses. And why would this topic get moved to the speculations forum? Does the book not get enough respect to be in theoretical physics? Is it that bad? Haha. By the looks of it, this is the sub-forum that science forums mods send the shitty crackpot posts that everyone brings up. Why is this like that? I brought up a legitimate topic that wasn't nearly as "outlandish" as the posts I see in the subforum. Maybe I should repost this to physicsforums, maybe they will be more respectful.

Has anyone heard of Dr. Joseph M. Brown and his unified theory of physics? I saw this book in my school's bookstore, but I could only find places to purchase it online rather than any actual scientific discussion or commentary. He really thinks that he has it figured out. Here is the description from the website: This book completes the theory of physics as outlined in Principles of Science. The postulates make up an ether gas of identical, perfectly elastic, smooth, spherical particles. Inhomogenieties of this gas exist in volumes with a diameter in the order of the mean free path. These inhomogeneous assemblies are neutrinos. Neutrinos generally have straight paths and travel at the speed of light. Certain mass neutrinos can take circular paths and thus are matter particles. These matter particles interact in various ways to produce gravitation, the weak nuclear force, electromagnetism, and the strong nuclear force. The theory is a true unified field theory since it unites all four force fields. And from amazon: The strong nuclear force, the electromagnetic force, the weak nuclear force, and the gravitational force are all derived from one postulated particle, the postulated velocity of the particle, and the postulated collision mechanism of the particles. Thus, the unified field theory so long sought after by Einstein and others has been obtained. In addition, the unified theory presented here also derives the particles of matter, radiation, and even the neutrinos. A truly unified theory of physics is presented. Here is his website http://basicresearchpress.com Apparently he did all of his research in his spare time. He has published a few books on physics including one claiming to provide a structure for the photon. Is there any reason why this theory did not explode like Lisi's AESTOE? Is it even plausible?

FYI, acetaminophen and alcohol are metabolized by the same enzyme in the liver. Ibuprofin is metabolized by a different enzyme in the liver, so it a bit safer post-binge. Both ethanol and the other chemicals in alcoholic beverages contribute to the hangover. As for the OP's original question, I personally believe it to be a great hangover treatment but not a cure. If one were to wake up with the need to throw up, a small portion of marijuana would inhibit the nausea, from my experience, although in extreme cases it is ineffective. I also believe it to be beneficial in the treatment of hangover headaches. Generally, marijuana also brightens a person's mood, especially when one is grumpy and hungover.

So I have been straining my mind for a science fair idea since august and have just now came up with a good idea. I was planning on studying the effects of addiction in mice. My idea is to get 9 mice and place them into 3 different cages and assign them each different numbers, A1 B1 C1, ect. I would then fill 3 different syringes with 2 addictive substances and one placebo ( Nicotine, Alcohol, and a saline/glucose solution). From then i would inject each of the three in A intramuscularly with a small dose of a chemical, B with a moderate dose, and C with a larger dose at a specific time each day for a few weeks, all the while trying to keep myself blinded from which mouse gets which of the three chemicals. I would also try and implement some sort of sensory detail for the mice to associate with the doses like maybe a citrus aerosol spray or a specific music track. After two or three weeks, or whatever time period at which they would be dependant upon the drugs, i would cease the doses and observe the withdrawal symptoms. I then plan to inject all of the mice with a placebo at their specific time with the specific sensory detail to test for a placebo calming of the withdrawal symptoms. I would also like to test any known treatments for addiction that i can find. Thanks for reading and I wish for some feedback, since my science teacher is of no help at all. Is this procedure ethical to the mice? How hard is it to keep these mice up and alive? Is there anything that i should not do or should change? Are there any other legal addictive substances that I could test? What are some over the counter or traditional addiction cures that i should test on them during withdrawals? Is there anything I could add to make this experiment better? Is there a way to extract the nicotine or can i purchase nicotine in a pure aqueous form? Any feedback will help, I truely appreciate any help that I can get from you.

http://www.hunkinsexperiments.com/pages/nuclearfission.htm This site tells you how to make a homemade nuclear reactor from an apple, a few graphite pencils, and 6 luminous watches. Is this truely possible? Would it work? I came here because i can not find anything else about this anywhere on the internet. I would have dismissed this as a joke, but everything else on the site seems credible. If it is real, is it safe?

my chemistry teacher says that h2o2 , if consumed, will decompose in you bloodstream and cause you blood to clot.

Me and a friend are considering doing our science fair project on rockets. We were going to try and build one and test it to a reasonable thesis somewhere along the lines of "Which rocket fuel will fly the rocket the furthest", "What rocket design is the most aerodynamic" , etc. But in our innitial brainstorming, we encountered a few problems. Can we actually make this rocket without having to buy anything substantial? We were going to build the body out of a thin aluminum cylinder we found and some other scrap metal, but we encountered a dillema when we realized we would need a motor. We do not want to buy the motor, if possible we want to make it ourselves. Is this possible? Is it possible to instead of including a motor, fill a chamber in the rocket with said fuel and by a burning fuse, ignite the fuel and harness the energy through a hole in the bottom of the rocket? And once we have solved the engine problem, what different kinds of fuels could we test? Alcohol? Black powder? What else? Could someone please help us to figure this out? Keep in mind that we are only high school students so our knowledge is not that extensive. Thx.

thx for the reply, turns out i had it right on my paper, when i tried to remember what i put, i did it mentally and for got to multiply the 4, but i had it right on the test, just forgot to show how i found my c value to graph it, but thanks for the help anyways. I titled it "standard form for a circle because thats what i was trying to find and i was in a hurry lol.

So i had a trig test today, and my teacher marked off a problem, and ive reviewed it plenty of times, but cant seem to figure out what i did wrong. Could someone please help me with this, i am simply converting to standard form of an ellipse/hyperbola. The equation is x^2 + 4y^2 +2x +16y = -1 . I believe that my answer was something like ((x+1)^2)/4 + ((y+2)^2)/1 = 1 . I am not possitive if that was my exact answer, but i am sure the problem is exact. I think i got it right and just neglected to show some valuable piece of work, and my strict math teacher counted it off. Thx in advance for the help, and i appologize for not using latex, i was in a hurry.