WWWTP: Lipid edition

20130620-082422.jpg

This photo from the New York Times caught my eye not because of the headline* but because of the lipid behind the gentleman in the photo.

It appears to be gamma linoleic acid drawn up, and note the numbering! Here’s the punch line: it’s actually correct!

So at first glance, it’s not obvious why that molecule is there, and it was probably drawn by an intern with a love for Wikipedia, but given how often these things are screwed up, I’m really proud to see it done right for once!

*I still haven’t read the article, believe it or not

Advertisements

How to draw catalytic cycles in ChemDraw

So it’s NSF proposal and seminar season at UIUC and all of the ugliest catalytic cycles are on display around the department. No, I’m not talking about the reactions themselves, but those circular arrows. Ugh! Gross!

If your cycles look like the one on the right, FOR SHAME.

I realized that this is not something they teach in class, so as a public service, I created this video on how one can make gorgeous catalytic cycles using ChemDraw’s Pen Tool.

You’re welcome.

The Perception of Scientists

So, I realize this post is long overdue, but I feel it’s still important that I write about what I consider to be the most important challenge to overcoming chemophobia: America believes that scientists are antisocial wimps who are on a leash held by some evil corporate overlord.

Honestly, the thought occurred to me when I was reading the webcomic Questionable Content a few months back. There was a tangential story arc in which the characters visited a space station (out of context, this sounds quite strange), one of which featured this comic:

QC comic

More importantly, the caption read:

Scienceweight is one division up from Mistakeweight and one division below Kittenweight.

Now don’t get me wrong, if he wants to write characters that are total dorks, that is A-OK with me. His comic is his creation, but the caption exists outside of the “QC Universe” as he calls it. I didn’t appreciate the implication that a kitten could generally beat up a scientist. It’s not even the case that I can name some scientists who are buff: the large majority of scientists that I know and interact with are perfectly well-socialized and I’d like to think that the bulk of us are no less physically fit than any other trade. Sure, I’m no prizefighter, but I’m not a kitten either.

Pictured above: Just a few chemists who could all totally kick a kitten’s ass.

“But Marshall, surely you must know that stereotypes exist for a reason! There must be more examples of dorky, sunlight-fearing chemists than those who can be classified as ‘normal!'” Bull. There was once a day when chemistry, dare I say science as a whole, was the cool thing to do. Back when NASA was the ideal workplace for any kid, there wasn’t this weird bias against scientists. Let’s face it, things have changed: back in BASF’s glory days, being a chemist was a well-respected position. Now I get accused of not having a personality when I tell the barista at Starbucks that I’m a scientist.

There are not words to express how awesome this picture is. V8, really?

So is this really damaging to our field? Certainly. Kids who grow up thinking that scientists are nerds (alright, many of us are, but when was that a bad thing?!) grow up thinking that math and science are either too hard or something that they are “too cool” to do. Those kids then grow up to be students of other disciplines, which is great, except when they then get to be congressmen who don’t understand the things that they have to decide whether to fund or not. Hell, in Europe the funding of synthetic organic chemistry was all but outlawed, and I can’t see a reason for that other than pure ignorance.

Dearest readers, what do you think? Am I full of it? Or have you ever been on a date, revealed your trade and suddenly been treated like some sort of madman? I’m not sure what we can do to combat this image, I would be delighted to hear suggestions.

Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extractor in Action!

While I have three different posts in various states of drafts, I bring you a video of a seldom-used piece of laboratory equipment in action! The Continuous Extractor is for those stubborn molecules that don’t want to come out of the water layer. Why use liters of ether when you can simply run the extraction infinitely with a fixed volume?!

The extractor works with a pot of organic phase (right) that is heated to reflux. This solvent goes up the arm into the main part of the extractor, where it hits the condenser (similar to a Dean-Starke) and drips into a funnel. This funnel brings it to the bottom of the aqueous phase, where it then bubbles up to the top layer. As more organic layer refluxes over, the level of the organic phase increases, and eventually spills back over to the refluxing pot, where it starts all over again, but deposits your desired material before becoming vapor again! Tl;dr the liquid refluxes over to the aqueous phase before spilling back over to the first pot with your product in hand.

Stay tuned for more posts, too!

Click below!

Poll: Staples vs Paper Clips (vs other lesser things)

Courtesy of Prof. Lancaster (UEA), we have a poll for all of you chemicacademics: Which do you prefer for work turned in to you: Staples or Paper clips?

Click here to chime in!

I have some strong opinions on the matter, so expect a post detailing my choice later on today, but for now, let us see where the dice clips fall!