jdurg

Adding water after will decompose it into potassium hydroxide and ethanol. So if you dilute with plenty of water, the ethoxide will go bye-bye.

I have to agree with YT as well. Yeah the early researchers on fluorine had some nasty incidents, but they also did all of this without the use of a fume-hood and with MASSIVE quantities of the stuff. We're talking about hundreds of grams up to pounds of the starting chemicals. In the labs they had at the time, there was no ventilation and no way to introduce 'fresh' air. As a result, the little bits of HF that went into the air caused more damage to them than the fluorine itself. Fluorine is very reactive and WILL react with the air around you. Unless your air is completely free of water, and amount of F2 that you could generate and seal up in a flask would be destroyed by the water in the air anyway. We're talking about a few mL of gas here, not a few liters of it. Also, fluorine gas is generally shipped at room temperature in pressurized containers made of nickel or steel (I can't remember which). In terms of storing it in a non-transparent container, that's pretty easy to do. It's the transparent container that's tough, but it can still be done if you have the time and equipment. Just remember, the chemistry lab of 'today' is much different than the labs of the later 1800's.

Here's a neat little story about Plutonium. Has some neat pictures. That lovely Pu!

Yes. Uranium metal is quite dense (around 19 g/cc), so a 10"x10"x10" cube would weigh about 688 pounds. So it's not quite a ton, but it's still a LOT of weight. Still, 2 grams of plutonium is a LOT since Pu has some pretty high energy decomposition. Uranium's gamma radiation isn't all too high of an energy, so on a gram per gram basis it's not as 'hot' as plutonium is. Plutonium is just really nasty stuff.

Yup. Potassium ethoxide is a light yellow powder which forms when a mixture of ethanol and KOH is slowly heated. The powder is moisture and air sensitive and will rapidly decompose into potassium hydroxide and ethanol. It can cause SEVERE burns if exposed to the skin or respiratory tract.

Fluorine is not nearly as bad as everyone says it is. I know you've done a lot of research on it Bud, but you also need to consider the quantities involved with all these 'stories' you hear. If fluorine was indeed as deadly as it's made out to be, there would be far more tales of death and destruction than there really are. If it were possible to get a sample of fluorine gas in a transparent tube, even if it were to break it would all react before it could get to you and cause damage. In an element collection, there's really more potential for harm with the alkali metals and the other halogens since they are generally purchased in greater quantities since they aren't as 'reactive'. I have a nice big sample of white phosphorus which is just as deadly as fluorine is, but I'm not freaking out over it. In order to safely collect elements you need to know what you're getting into first. I think it's safe to say that those of us here who are collecting them know what we're getting into.

Congrats as well! It's always great receiving a package in the mail from Dave Hamric. He always supplies great samples which have good eye appeal and are well worth the price. It was a blast being able to go and meet him in person and spend a day working on stuff. He was able to put my mercury, bromine, and iodine into seald glass ampoules so that I could store and display them with the rest of my stuff. I also helped him setup a chlorine generating system with all the proper chemicals and whatnot. We made quite a few good ampoules of chlorine gas. It's pretty neat because looking at it straight on, sometimes the green color is barely apparent while sometimes it's really easy to see. However, if you look at it from the end of the tube, the green color of the gas is ALWAYS intense and easy to see. Must be because of the amount of gas you're looking through depending on the angle. It was also neat ampouling the iodine because we actually liquified it! I had NEVER seen liquid iodine and thought it was the coolest thing. It was exactly like bromine, only purple. His PGM samples are also top-notch. The osmium pellet I purchased off of him is completely smooth and has a beautiful blue color. I plan on buying more pellets over a long period of time until I have a vial completely filled with osmium. I think that would be much cooler than just having one large slug of it. For the Ruthenium and Rhenium I plan on picking up a troy ounce button from Dave in order to go along with my Iridium button and my troy ounces of palladium and silver. I need a few more samples of platinum and gold in order to have a full troy ounce of it in my display vials, but that will eventually come. (I have more than an ounce of Au and Pt, but much of it is in coins which I have stored with my coins and in safes rather than in my general display. The stuff in my general display are samples which are duplicates of what I have in my coin collection, or samples which aren't coins). Probably the only PGM which I don't eventually see myself getting an ounce of is Rhodium. At about $1500 an ounce and climbing, I'll just have to be content with my 10-11 gram sample that I bought at the perfect time! (When I bought it, Rhodium was only a little bit above $800 an ounce so my sample cost me $200. A few weeks later, Rh suddenly skyrocketed and I couldn't have been happier. Had I not seen that auction until a few weeks afterward, it would have cost a fortune). I also know that Dave is working on gas-discharge tubes for sale. He's just trying to get the experience in making the tubes and filling them properly before he starts to offer them. I'm rooting for him to succeed in that endevour since I'd love to get a nitrogen gas discharge tube so that I can have a visible representation of every 'colorless' gas out there. He is also doing research into fluorine generation and 'preservation'. There are methods for taking fluorine gas and sealing it into a transparent container. Generally speaking, however, it is quite involved and requires some expensive equipment. He has been reading about some chemical methods of generation which are valid but difficult to get the chemicals for. (A lot of it involves decomposition of Xenon Fluorides and various other 'semi-stable' fluorides via heat. Doing that in a vessel which is free of water will avoid the generation of HF which is what attacks glass). Anyway, there are a bunch of different ideas being thought over that sound pretty neat. If he is able to find a way to safely and effectively do that, I will definitely be getting a sample. Fluorine gas is the only non-radioactive element that I do not have a pure sample of.

Was the glass borosillicate? With heating and the solvent properties of the solutions, there's a faint chance that some boron compounds could have leached out. Also, the yellow color of the ppt could be due to some iodine complexes forming. I know that a very dillute solution of iodine in water is actually a bit of a yellow color.

If you believe in Karma, you're going to have a horrid day for that one.

The US AED does not care one iota if someone has a sample of uranium around. It all depends on the isotope, however. Depleted uranium is of no concern since the process of turning it into Pu-239 is not something that people can do without drawing a LOT of attention to themselves. Also, the common person cannot purify Uranium from the ground into fissionable Uranium as again, the process is very costly for anybody but a government or VERY well funded group of individuals. Also, the chemicals and equipment needed to do that will cost quite a bit of money and draw a good deal of attention. Depleted Uranium, which is 99.8+% U-238 is actually used in the common marketplace. It's used as counterweights in aircraft and as a radiation shield for highly active radioisotopes. (Such as Cs-137 and Co-60 used in the medical industry. Kind of funny how a radioactive metal can effectively block radiation. I guess that tells you just how 'dangerous' U-238 really is). I have a half-gram sample of depleted Uranium and if the government wants to see it, they are free to do so. There are absolutely zero laws saying that you cannot own uranium metal. There are only laws that deal with the amount. (I.E. above a certain mass, it doesn't matter if it's depleted or natural uranium, you'll need a license for it). Now with plutonium, I'm pretty sure that in the USA it is illegal to own ANY amount of plutonium. This is probably because every isotope is capable of nuclear fission and if you were to grab a gram here and a gram there, soon you could have a nasty critical mass once you've obtained enough. I think that's the USA's stance on owning any radioactive material. If it's non-fissionable and below a certain activity level, it's legal to own. If it is fissionable then no amount is legal to own. I'm pretty sure that's how it goes. As for plutonium in a lead box, I see no problems with it. Any activity the lead picks up will be so small that it probably won't even make a noticeable increase in the background levels. If I recall properly, they used to make plutonium powered batteries for pacemakers or devices where going in and changing the batteries just wouldn't be practical. I think those are the ONLY cases where plutonium is able to be owned by the general public, and that's because the uses of it are closely watched and the ability to extract the plutonium is nill.

You really have no problems with heating beryllium metal. In a solid form, it is not that big of a danger. Now in a powdered form it is one of the nastiest things you can ever deal with. (Unless you're one of the VERY few lucky people on Earth who don't develop any adverse reaction to beryllium metal. However that's not something that I'd be willing to risk my life on to try and find out). The toxicity of beryllium really has nothing to do with beryllium itself, but more with how the human body reacts to it. For some reason that is not fully understood, beryllium causes the body to develop a serious allergic reaction that cannot be controlled. This leads to painful sores in the lungs which just don't go away. For some people, they develop no reaction at all and beryllium is pretty much non-toxic to them. For the majority of people, however, they do develop that allergic reaction and once it has started it cannot be stopped. While I have no need to melt down any beryllium, I would not be all too worried about melting a button of it into a cast shape. This is because Be does not readily form oxides even at high temperatures. When it does form an oxide, it adhered STRONGLY to the metal and doesn't come flying off. It's akin to aluminum in that regard. (And it's chemistry is eerily similar to aluminum metal as well. While Be or Al won't dissolve in water, they VERY easily dissolve in basic solutions).

Uh-Oh. I better not go outside anymore without a full SCBA suit on and naturally obtained oxygen! There is also no difference between natural and synthetic fragrances. In fact, the whole natural/synthetic designation is a horrible thing. Which would you rather be killed by, natural cyanide or synthetic cyanide? Guess what, they'll both kill you. At least with a "man-made" compound you know exactly what it is. With a lot of the things you get from "natural" sources you don't know what else might be in there. I think that's a heck of a lot more dangerous. Personally, I feel that this whole natural vs. synthetic argument is all about money and personal feelings. Those who say that homeopathic and 'natural' things are better than man-made products just want to make money off of the ignorant, or don't want to admit that something which didn't grow out of the ground is just as good or even better. Those who say that "natural" stuff is stupid and pointless don't want to lose money off the stuff they are invested in, or they don't want to admit that they are using the wrong product. Personally, I don't care where it came from or how it was made. If it is effective and low-cost, I'll take it. If you were to give me a choice between two identical products, one of which is "natural" and the other the "synthetic" form, I would take the cheaper one. It's as simple as that.

I guess for one atom the probability isn't all that bleak, but when you start mathematically combining the probability for the number of atoms inside a human being, then the probability becomes really bleak.

I actually thought of a vicously neat idea while reading the thread. It would involve bromine, aluminum, and a gun. What if you took a bullet casing and made a bullet out of aluminum metal for it. You would then hollow out the inside of the bullet and fill it with aluminum powder and a glass bead filled with pure bromine liquid. You would then seal it all up and have what looks like a fairly normal bullet. When the bullet makes contact, it should shatter the glass bead inside which would release the liquid bromine into the aluminum powder which would create a tremendous boom. Hmm. If I had any experience with guns and bullet making I'd give that a try.

In my P-Chem class we went over how there is a finite probability that a solid object can pass right through another solid object. So there is a chance that I can run full speed right into a wall and pass right through it. However, that probability is something like 1 in 1x10^(Some insanely large number). For all effects and purposes, it's zero. But mathematically it isn't completely zero.

Another thing you need to take note of is that perhaps the religious 'campers' were under the influence of a chemical? I know that many religions use psychadellic substances before these 'rituals' and this can cause a great distortion on reality. These people may have been hurting themselves but were not aware of it due to either a drug they may have been on, or a deep hypnotic trance they were in. This is why ANYTHING reported at a religious or spiritual gathering has to be taken with a grain of salt. People can become so entranced in their religious beliefs that they refuse to accept any explanation for what went on other than 'divine intervention'.

Very cool! Just one question: Which Pd sample did you get from Smart Elements? The only reason I ask is that on their website they are selling a one ounce bar of palladium for well over $500 U.S. dollars. That's over twice as much as it actually costs. (You can get one ounce Pd bars off of E-Bay for about $210 right now). I'm just hoping you didn't spend too much on it. Nice order from Dave. I've bought so many things from him and have NEVER been dissapointed. The only time something went wrong was the first time I bought off of him. I had picked up some lanthanides which broke their containers during shipping thus causing them to oxidize since the oil went all over the place. He quickly shipped out replacment vials and samples even though the samples I had weren't in all that bad of a shape. I was very impressed with the promptness and how he took care of everything. Ever since then, I've been one of his most loyal supporters and promoters. I even stopped by his place last year to help him setup a chlorine generation/ampouling station. You're going to be VERY happy with the little gold pearl. They're pretty neat, especially if you put it near a similar platinum, iridium, and osmium one. Another thing I like about buying from Dave is that he's very fair and reasonable with his prices and sample sizes. I never feel like I'm being ripped off. He has also done some trades with me and taken off my hands extra elements that I had no need for and giving me massive discounts on other things in his store as a result. Let us know when the stuff arrives.

Perhaps our ability to survive tough conditions and know how to make use of our surroundings to not only lengthen our lives, but make the quality of our lives better? Using animals to test things out on before applying them to ourselves is just another example of using our surroundings to our advantage. In this case, those 'surroundings' are the other animal species. For me it gets into a gray area depending on what is being tested. If you're testing out a new makeup, I have trouble agreeing with the whole thing. In that instance, the makeup isn't something that will help extend our lives. It's only something designed to increase one's vanity and their concept of themselves. (Then again, you could also say that the makeup could make them more likely to reproduce, thus extending our species, but then you're REALLY stretching the argument ). For things like medicines and drugs which allow people to live normal, happy lives, I'm all for the testing.

A little bump here and a move back on topic. How is everyone's collection going? Mine's still going strong and the iridium just looks great. I still can't believe how much this thing has grown. The uranium will be coming in a few weeks, and I really can't wait to see that. (Of course this is all depending on how the lead-lined box performs in its test.) Has anybody else here made any major additions to the collection?

I too have a LOT of trouble in believing that ice can be harder than a diamond no matter how cold it is. Ice is a VERY brittle substance which is easily ripped apart by any kind of force. Diamond, meanwhile, is not very brittle at all and can withstand a good amount of shock before its crystal lattice breaks and the diamond crumbles. Also, in ice the bonds between the water molecules are not actual bonds. They are intermolecular bonds where the electrons are not shared amongst the constituents. They form the crystal structure simply because the individual molecules do not have enough energy to overcome the attractions between the molecules. In a diamond, each of the carbon atoms has an actual bond to three other carbon atoms in a three-dimensional array. As a result, the crystal structure is incredibly strong and a diamond is incredibly hard.

Really, the two trials are independent of each other. There is a set procedure for the approval of drugs by the FDA which is generally practiced all around the world. The first step is the chemical design of the new drug. The drug is 'designed' and the company decides if it's feasible to produce. Once the production is done, a chemical analysis is performed on the drug to figure out its structure and similarities to any other compounds currently in existance. If they find that the the drug is too similar to a compound that kills people or causes other horrendous things, they may decide to rework it or kill it altogether. Once they've gotten all of the paperwork done and have decided that the drug will possibly be useful and is cost-effective, they submit an application to the FDA to begin animal trials. These trials are designed to see what the lethal dosage is of the drug in comparison to its possible therapeutic dose. (If they see that the lethal and therapeutic doses will be too close together, the drug is scrapped). With the animal trials they are also able to see if there is something intensely wrong with the drug that would make it 100% unsafe for human usage. If the data from the animal testing isn't good, the FDA will not approve the drug for clinical trials and the whole process stops right there. If the drug passes the animal testing stage the FDA will then give the approval for the "Phase I" clinical trials. In these trials they want to investigate the short term effects of the drug on human subjects. The subjects are generally paid volunteers, or patients for which the risk/reward ratio is worth the testing. (Like for terminally ill AIDS patients testing AIDS drugs). The studies are performed over a relatively short period of time and data is collected to see what Adverse Events, if any, occur. If there are too many Adverse Events and not enough efficacy, the trial will be stopped and FDA approval will not be granted. If there are positive signs, the drug then goes into the Phase II stage. In the Phase II trials, a wider array of patients are given the drug; both large numbers of healthy and ill patients. While Phase I trials are usually a very small handful of patients, Phase II trials can be in the hundreds. In Phase II the clinical trial is attempting to see the widespread short term and mid-range term effects of the drug. They want to know what the majority of people will experience when they take the drug on a routine basis. This is the most important stage of the clinical trials because the most data is obtained here. After Phase II, the drug is many times submitted for approval to the FDA. If the FDA approves, the drug can be mass produced and sold to the public. If it's not approved, then either further testing will be done or adjustments to the drug will be made and a new set of trials will begin. Even after a drug is released on the market, it will still undergo the Phase III trials which are the long term trials. These attempt to see what the drug does over the long haul of five to six years. A lot of the Vioxx/Celebrex Adverse Events were most likely discovered during Phase III trials. By having the animal testing, the number of patients put at risk for trying an untested drug is greatly reduced. It also allows more patients to try these Phase I drugs and perhaps discover a new benefit. Viagara started out as a heart medication, but during the clinical trials they saw that everyone taking it was no longer impotent. Who knows what other 'benefits' we might find in a drug on trial simply due to the umber of people out there taking it. If there are no animal trials beforehand, far fewer people would probably want to take the risk of trying an untested chemical, and we wouldn't see as much exposure anymore. Less exposure means a lower chance of finding an unintended benefit. Here's another way to look at it. If you went into an organic chemistry lab and threw some things together, would you be willing to put whatever you created right into your mouth? In a sense, by removing animal testing that is exactly what you'd be doing with any new 'drug'. (Sorry for the rambling here at the end. I just got really tired and my brain suddenly died.)

Covance is one of my competing companies. I work for Kendle International and we pretty much do the same thing. Before the drugs even come close to the human testing, they must pass through animal testing and be deemed 'safe' for human trials through a VERY strict set of guidelines. The pharmaceutical companies don't just come up with a random mix of chemicals and then start injecting them into humans. That would be illegal. Instead their chemistry is first investigated to see if it it similar to any other chemicals already known. Then it is moved onto animal testing to see the lethality, if any, of it. Only after it has successfully passed animal testing is it even allowed to be tested on humans.

The "woods" part of the scenario could be determined from plant and vegetable DNA present on parts of the victim's clothing in the forms of seeds/leaf/flower/etc. The stabbing would be determined by the stab wounds on the body and an absence of other marks which would indicate some other type of death. (All determined from an autopsy). Knowing that the body was moved could be determined by how the blood pooled inside the corpse. The combination of all the other evidence in addition to how the blood had collected inside the body would give an indication on how the victim was positioned when he expired. There are a lot of ways you could go with this depending on what other details you've been given.