Will there be no more major discoveries in chemistry?

[Elite Engineer]

I'm not too keen on my history of chemistry, so correct me where I'm wrong.. It seems all the major discoveries in chemistry happened in the 19th, and early to mid 20th century. (i.e. Avogardros number, molecular orbital theory, Grignard reagents, etc.). Im not update to date on the current discoveries made in the field of chemistry, but it seems as though all the big, fun discoveries are gone....are they?

 

I get jealous of reading the physics threads. There's always some kind of new development about a new particle or a change in a theory. It looks like quantum physics is till a baby, and chemistry is an old geezer. I know every once in a while some chemist(s) receives a nobel prize for creating a more efficient synthesis of some industrial product..but is this what chemistry has come too? Increasing yields of products, and improving precision? Are all the Rutherford, and Millikan-like discoveries all gone?

 

~EE

Edited March 28, 2014 by Elite Engineer

[rktpro]

I feel the same sometimes. Though, I don't agree with your time period of major breakthrough. I think a lot is happening, it is just not changing our textbooks too much.

[swansont]

I think a lot is happening, it is just not changing our textbooks too much.

 

Arguably the same for physics.

[CaptainPanic]

Chemistry is just applied physics. So, I'm always confused where to draw the line between the two. And in this discussion, that line seems to be important.

It's true that on a very fundamental level, nothing new is being researched in chemistry. But that is because when you make chemistry more fundamental, we call it physics.

 

Anyway, let me give an example of a field where a lot is happening in chemistry: Bio-based chemistry.

 

All practical chemistry is mostly based on oil and gas at the moment. Since a few decades, people are looking to plants as a new feedstock for chemical processes (and also for energy). First, they tried to convert plants to something that looks like crude oil. That mostly failed (it works, but it is too expensive). Now, the new idea is to leave the plant molecules mostly intact, and convert them to useful materials (e.g. plastics) without totally rebuilding the molecule.

 

Also, I wonder if the latest graphene, borophene count as chemistry or physics?

[slyrat]

but is this what chemistry has come too? Increasing yields of products, and improving precision? Are all the Rutherford, and Millikan-like discoveries all gone?

 

~EE

perhaps things just need to sit and ferment a bit. We have just begun to explore some interesting new advances in the materials sciences and we may have to get more familiar with them before an idea sparks in someone's brain and they come up with the next mind-boggling idea.

I recently read an editorial about how big business and the government are severely tightening up the research dollars on projects that aren't seen to be immediately applicable to a problem they can relate to. As an example of how this is damaging to research, the editorial spotlighted polymerase chain reaction, developed in the '80s. According to the editorial, Kary Mullis, developer of PCR, credits a research paper published 15 years earlier. The paper mentioned an effect that was interesting but only loosely related to the focus of their research, which was not focused on any marketable goal but strictly for pure research. ( the editorial did not mention what this effect was.) Muller thought this might be useful in his own research and eventually produced PCR.

 

 

 

 

 

Also, I wonder if the latest graphene, borophene count as chemistry or physics?

 

I looked up borophene and the articles I read about it looked like chemistry written by engineers, or vice-versa.

Edited March 28, 2014 by slyrat

[studiot]

 

It seems all the major discoveries in chemistry happened in the 19th, and early to mid 20th century.

 

Well yes, for some reason that is all they seem to mention in schools.

 

But really there has been tremendous development in chemistry during the second part of the twentieth century. I am reading a really good book at the moment

 

Introduction to Surface Chemistry and Catalysis by Gabor A Somorjai (Wiley ISBN 0-471-03192-5)

 

You should find this much easier to find than the last British book I recommended.

 

Fantastic developement of surface chemistry since I studied at university in the 1960s.

 

Structural Chemistry and Materials Science in general have both also proceeded at a pace in the second half of the twencen.

 

Analytical chemistry has changed beyong all recognition from the early twencen to the latter part. Chromatography, spectroscopy, Xray microscopy, ....

In the first part of the twencen organic chemistry looked like Mrs Beatons cookery book. Pies, Cakes, Puddings, Roasts etc

Alkanes, Alkenes, Alkyn, olefines and other homologous series.

This has all been replaced by functional groups and reactions - nucleophilic, electrophilic, substitution etc.

This has all lead to

Plastics, carbon fibres, nanotubes, fancy drugs, kevlar, modern agrichemicals, a revolution in paint chemistry, a revolution in cement chemistry, chemical waste processing, the discovery of long chain compounds using other atoms than carbon ....... the list goes on

 

What's your brew?

Edited March 28, 2014 by studiot

[John Cuthber]

Let me know when there's a shortage of contenders for this

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/

[Elite Engineer]

 

This has all been replaced by functional groups and reactions - nucleophilic, electrophilic, substitution etc.

This has all lead to

Plastics, carbon fibres, nanotubes, fancy drugs, kevlar, modern agrichemicals, a revolution in paint chemistry, a revolution in cement chemistry, chemical waste processing, the discovery of long chain compounds using other atoms than carbon ....... the list goes on

 

What's your brew?

But aren't these revolutions in paint chemistry, cement chemistry, etc, just different applications of chemistry? I know finding a new application of chemistry is technically "discovering" something new, but what about the discoveries that change the whole structure of chemistry. If all I have to look forward is just a new Suzuki reaction, where's the fun in that. A couple years ago, quantum physicists may have sent a proton (right?) faster than the speed of light, and the God particle was discovered just last year or so..this is amazing stuff. I majored in chemistry back in college because I loved the changing and opposing theories, and how it was always moving. I fear chemistry will just become a sorta of pseudo-culinary , with an occasional new discovery of making the cake rise a bit more..

 

-sorry if I just repeated myself.

 

~ee

 

 

 

I looked up borophene and the articles I read about it looked like chemistry written by engineers, or vice-versa.

This is what I'm talking about.