Sciencemadness Discussion Board
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
Author: Subject: Discourse split from Urushibara nickel thread
DavidJR
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 864
Registered: 1-1-2018
Location: Scotland
Member Is Offline

Mood: Anxious

[*] posted on 23-1-2020 at 12:10
Discourse split from Urushibara nickel thread


Quote: Originally posted by karlos³  
It is(a gift for amateur chemist, I mean)!
Just check the zink-nickel thread on there.
I use zinc powder that is sold for fireworks, don't know how fine it is, just the usual stuff.
I use the conditions that were used by Scr0t in the thread on here, in his second experiment.
I achieved 84% yield for the direct amination of phenyl-2-propanone, there is nothing out there thats beat this outcome.
Even phenylacetoxime yielded less product with this reduction.
If you ever want to aminate a ketone to its primary amine, this reaction is your best choice, I really love it.

[Edited on 22-1-2020 by karlos³]


Is everyone just skimming right over the fact that this guy casually brings up his literal amphetamine synthesis efforts? smh
View user's profile View All Posts By User
karlos³
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 612
Registered: 10-1-2011
Location: yes!
Member Is Online

Mood: verrückt & wissenschaftlich

[*] posted on 23-1-2020 at 12:24


So what?
It is not against the rules, it is my free opinion what ketones I aminate, or no?
Drug synthesis is a long-term discussion here, as long as it is not spoon-feeding, as long as we talk about the mechanism, it is allowed.
You can aminate whatever ketone you like to aminate instead, but this reaction is not restricted to restricted substrates ;)

Man, you almost want me to make some phenylnitropropane, just to try if the Ni-Zn reduction also works on aliphatic nitro groups, just to show you that it is still science, even when the product is illegal.

[Edited on 23-1-2020 by karlos³]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
DavidJR
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 864
Registered: 1-1-2018
Location: Scotland
Member Is Offline

Mood: Anxious

[*] posted on 23-1-2020 at 12:29


I don't like it. It brings the amateur chemistry community into disrepute.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
karlos³
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 612
Registered: 10-1-2011
Location: yes!
Member Is Online

Mood: verrückt & wissenschaftlich

[*] posted on 23-1-2020 at 12:34


This is why I keep it in scientific order with proper nomenclature.
I don't like it either when our hobby is brought into disrepute.
You are the only one who spoke out clearly to any reader without scientific background what I am talking about.
I suggest you remove the name of the product my experiments yielded, to help remove any issue that brings our hobby into disrepute, so nobody without a proper education will understand what he is reading about.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
DavidJR
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 864
Registered: 1-1-2018
Location: Scotland
Member Is Offline

Mood: Anxious

[*] posted on 23-1-2020 at 12:48


I'm not sure why you think it's my job to clean up your indescretions.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
karlos³
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 612
Registered: 10-1-2011
Location: yes!
Member Is Online

Mood: verrückt & wissenschaftlich

[*] posted on 23-1-2020 at 12:53


Because I would have written phenylisopropylamine, but well, I don't care, I don't worry about this at all.

See?
Here: http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=154179...
More restricted substance related science, whats the matter even?
It is still useful for science.


[Edited on 23-1-2020 by karlos³]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
S.C. Wack
bibliomaster
*****




Posts: 2108
Registered: 7-5-2004
Location: Cornworld, Central USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: Enhanced

[*] posted on 23-1-2020 at 14:09


Quote: Originally posted by DavidJR  
Is everyone just skimming right over the fact that this


isn't organic chemistry? Yes, until now. There used to be rules. Like, no crapping in the organic chemistry forum. Nicodem would have a fit if he were still here.




"You're going to be all right, kid...Everything's under control." Yossarian, to Snowden
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
Tsjerk
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1991
Registered: 20-4-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline

Mood: Mood

[*] posted on 23-1-2020 at 14:47


Urushibara nickel is very interesting, how to use it and finding out what works and what doesn't is interesting as well. Thank you for that.

I only really started reading about it yesterday.

But referring to a dead archive of discussions solely abou drug synthesis as your publications, I find... Discutabel.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
morganbw
National Hazard
****




Posts: 496
Registered: 23-11-2014
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 23-1-2020 at 18:38


Well gentlemen, sadly there has been a couple of holier than thou post which has effectively ruined this thread.

To be sure I have read published papers which has used some of these dead archives as references.
Damn it, what is wrong here. These few and precious reactions may be used however you wish.
Please quit with your holy shit, you are damn sure not holy but you are damn sure quite vain.

[Edited on 1/24/2020 by morganbw]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Texium (zts16)
Administrator
********




Posts: 3150
Registered: 11-1-2014
Location: San Marcos, TX
Member Is Offline

Mood: Graduated

[*] posted on 23-1-2020 at 19:19


Quote: Originally posted by S.C. Wack  
Quote: Originally posted by DavidJR  
Is everyone just skimming right over the fact that this


isn't organic chemistry? Yes, until now. There used to be rules. Like, no crapping in the organic chemistry forum. Nicodem would have a fit if he were still here.
You might be surprised that Nicodem isn't the only moderator who is willing to have some flexibility when it comes to reasoned, intellectual discussions that may touch on synthesis of "disreputable" substances.

@DavidJR: Tolerating someone who asks to be spoonfed "hOw TO mAkE dRuG" is harmful to our community. Allowing someone to share their personal experience with using a reagent to make a substance that happens to be illegal in most jurisdictions is not. This thread is about making urushibara nickel. karlos described his experience with making it, and the results of using it. He didn't start a thread saying "How to make amphetamine in 3 easy steps." His post was constructive and topical.

Edit: I'm moving this split to Legal and Societal Issues for now rather than directly to Detritus to allow for further discussion if desired.

[Edited on 1-24-2020 by Texium (zts16)]




View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
Texium (zts16)
Administrator
Thread Moved
23-1-2020 at 19:22
stoichiometric_steve
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 738
Registered: 14-12-2005
Member Is Offline

Mood: satyric

[*] posted on 23-1-2020 at 22:34


Quote: Originally posted by DavidJR  

Is everyone just skimming


They recognize the value of karlos' contribution, but what do you bring to the table other than whining and bitching? You're redundant. Take your wannabe policing bullshit elsewhere.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Corrosive Joeseph
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 735
Registered: 17-5-2015
Location: The References Forum
Member Is Offline

Mood: Cyclic

[*] posted on 23-1-2020 at 23:13


The Zn-Ni-NH3 is one of the greatest things to happen to amateur chemistry for some time..... Yes, there are others, but this one has a special place in my heart.


/CJ




MSDS Addict and OTC Slut
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Tsjerk
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1991
Registered: 20-4-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline

Mood: Mood

[*] posted on 23-1-2020 at 23:28


I will give the Zn-Ni-NH3 a try when I see fit, thanks for the suggestion
View user's profile View All Posts By User
stoichiometric_steve
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 738
Registered: 14-12-2005
Member Is Offline

Mood: satyric

[*] posted on 23-1-2020 at 23:54


Quote: Originally posted by Tsjerk  
I will give the Zn-Ni-NH3 a try when I see fit, thanks for the suggestion


Now you can "ket on" with your chemistry! :cool:
View user's profile View All Posts By User
woelen
Super Administrator
*********




Posts: 7101
Registered: 20-8-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline

Mood: interested

[*] posted on 23-1-2020 at 23:57


@DavidJR: There is a thin line between drug-cookery and respectable science. A certain illegal substance was mentioned (in scientific terms, not in layman's terms) and it was only used as an example. The thread itself certainly has some scientific merits and contains useful information not only for drug-cookery but for anyone with an interest in organic chemistry. How this scientific knowledge is applied is up to everyone himself/herself and is each person's own responsibility.

Although I personally really hate abuse of drugs, I see no reason to close this particular thread on making urushibara nickel. That would be similar to closing a thread about making red phosphorus if someone mentions that he succesfully used red phosphorus, produced in that way, for making meth.




The art of wondering makes life worth living...
Want to wonder? Look at https://woelen.homescience.net
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
stoichiometric_steve
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 738
Registered: 14-12-2005
Member Is Offline

Mood: satyric

[*] posted on 24-1-2020 at 00:52


I applaud your attempt to reason woelen, but everytime i visit SM, i see some different precious topic totally derailed by shit like this.

It's not always the same people, but it's what i've come to expect from of our little scottish fella here.

While i'm definitely all for giving people the benefit of the doubt, this guy in particular has no inhibitions whatsoever in shitting all over and trying to suppress whatever he deems inappropriate.

Remind me please, why is this being tolerated? Please correct me if i am wrong, but aren't those attacks on the liberties that make SM what it has been for literally decades?


These are totalitarian tendencies for which i personally see no place here. I visit SM because i can reasonably expect to be able to discuss topics that are otherwise frowned upon by people outside the scientific community because of their general ignorance, and for this reason i don't wanna deal with wannabe concentration camp supervisors here, like i have to in real life.

Are moderators going to enforce rules and protect the values of this forum or act with clemency towards people that are clearly a danger to its culture?

I dearly miss the old days when i could talk shop without being disturbed by dummy kids who just can't shut up. Everyone knows i'm certainly far from the most considerate or most docile person around, so please acknowledge this effort as a call for help of sorts.

Maybe this looks like it's blown out of proportion, but i really don't want to be around people like these, so where am i supposed to go?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
j_sum1
Administrator
********




Posts: 5129
Registered: 4-10-2014
Location: Oz
Member Is Offline

Mood: Metastable, and that's good enough.

[*] posted on 24-1-2020 at 04:20


Hmmmm.
If it was up to me, I would draw the line in a far more conservative position. You would likely hate it SS.
It is not up to me. To the best of my ability I try to moderate according to the principles that Polverone describes and that have formed board culture for a long time. This means accommodating things that I am less than comfortable with. I think other mods feel similarly from time to time.

So. A couple of facts to restore a little perspective.
  • We are a pretty diverse group with wide-ranging views.
  • The board culture has evolved over time. It is simply not going to remain the same as it was 15 years ago. Members come and go. The way people respond to online interfaces and their expextations have both changed as technology has advanced (even if our software is still in the dark ages.)
  • No one has censured anything here. It has just been split into two separate topics.
  • It may be that you and other members do not see eye to eye on a particular matter. That is the awkward beauty of free speech. I might not like a particular view but it gets to exist anyway.
  • As mods we don't always get everything right, and even if we did, we would not please everyone. We do value those who voice their concerns especially if it carries the weight of reason and is done in an even-tempered manner.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
DavidJR
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 864
Registered: 1-1-2018
Location: Scotland
Member Is Offline

Mood: Anxious

[*] posted on 24-1-2020 at 04:55


@stoichiometric_steve I see you forgot to go through with suing me.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
karlos³
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 612
Registered: 10-1-2011
Location: yes!
Member Is Online

Mood: verrückt & wissenschaftlich

[*] posted on 24-1-2020 at 05:28


I apologise I acted stupid and took the bait of someone who had the sole and only intent of derailing a discussion.

Quote: Originally posted by Tsjerk  
Urushibara nickel is very
But referring to a dead archive of discussions solely abou drug synthesis as your publications, I find... Discutabel.

It is not dead, it is very active and the part I was referring to is only visible if logged in.

[Edited on 24-1-2020 by karlos³]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
DavidJR
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 864
Registered: 1-1-2018
Location: Scotland
Member Is Offline

Mood: Anxious

[*] posted on 24-1-2020 at 05:59



@stoichiometric_steve I think it's a little harsh to compare me to the nazis. I also object to being called a "dummy kid who just can't shut up" - I'm a degree-holding adult, thanks.

Re "Everyone knows i'm certainly far from the most considerate or most docile person around". That's a nice way of saying "arsehole". In my interactions with you, you have repeatedly been rude, condescending, and unnecessarily aggressive.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
hissingnoise
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3923
Registered: 26-12-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: Pulverulescent!

[*] posted on 24-1-2020 at 07:02


Quote: Originally posted by j_sum1  
The way people respond to online interfaces and their expextations[sic] have both changed as technology has advanced (even if our software is still in the dark ages.[sic])

It's not just the software, apparently?

View user's profile View All Posts By User
woelen
Super Administrator
*********




Posts: 7101
Registered: 20-8-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline

Mood: interested

[*] posted on 24-1-2020 at 07:06


@DavidJR: I usually like your contributions and I know that you are a very active home chemist, who builds up a nice collection of chemicals and has a nice lab, but sometimes you might be somewhat too sensitive when it comes to chemistry, related to recreative drugs. As I stated earlier, many chemistry principles apply to a wide range of compounds, and things which are very useful in the home lab, can also be used for making certain illegal compounds. In a very diverse group of people we sometimes should accept different points of view.

@stoichiometric_steve: I indeed have the impression that you were quite harsh in your last interactions with DavidJR. There is no problem in having a different opinion and you also may express your disagreement, but rudeness and being condescending is not the way we like to see it over here.

Right now I close this thread, I see no reason to allow it going south even further. The original thread on making urushibara nickel remains open and can be used for further scientific discussion. I do not want to see continuation of this discussion in that thread!




The art of wondering makes life worth living...
Want to wonder? Look at https://woelen.homescience.net
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
woelen
Super Administrator
Thread Closed
24-1-2020 at 07:06

  Go To Top