Sciencemadness Discussion Board - What’s the average age?

What’s the average age?

kclo4 - 26-12-2004 at 03:03

I thought it might be relatively interesting to find the average age.

cyclonite4 - 26-12-2004 at 04:43

16. Started when I was 15. I'm sure you will be finding alot of <9 year olds around here

BromicAcid - 26-12-2004 at 11:42

A poll like this was already done in Whimsy and actually got quite a few responses, however maybe it should be moved out of whimsy because some people don't view that section and it might get more responses that way.

What are you asking exactly, for us to guess what the average age of a poster or just a member is?

[Edited on 12/26/2004 by BromicAcid]

thalium - 26-12-2004 at 11:48

16 and 6 months

kclo4 - 26-12-2004 at 14:09

Because I am 13 and was thinking that the average age was probably some ware around the ages 16-18 because they would most likely just be learning about chemistry in school so I was just seeing if my speculation was correct

tom haggen - 27-12-2004 at 01:19

looks like my age group is winning

Saerynide - 27-12-2004 at 03:29

Theres a tie between 10-19 and 20-29

So which one are you?

cyclonite4 - 27-12-2004 at 04:14

I just broke the tie... i forgot to vote before when i posted

Eliteforum - 27-12-2004 at 05:01

Mental age, or real age?

cyclonite4 - 27-12-2004 at 05:24

In your case, how can any of us be sure

Just kidding.

I wonder whos in the 50-59 group?

tom haggen - 27-12-2004 at 13:51

mental age lower end of 10-19, real age lower end of 20-29.

, I'm sure some of the admins at this site have to be getting up there

[Edited on 27-12-2004 by tom haggen]

kclo4 - 28-12-2004 at 16:40

who is 9 and lower

Getting there !

MadHatter - 28-12-2004 at 19:42

Age 46 - will be 47 shortly. I guess I'm a senior citizen around here !

Saerynide - 29-12-2004 at 01:49

I wonder if someone clicked 9 and under for fun

Who ever it is, reveal yourself!

cyclonite4 - 29-12-2004 at 03:52

Well, if it is by mental age....

Could have been anyone here

bennator - 29-12-2004 at 12:06

17, but I don't post much, because I haven't done any experimenting lately.

JustMe - 29-12-2004 at 17:50

Another "Senior" here. Over 50. But chemistry was my hobby when I was 15 AND at a time when a fella could go and buy reagents with no questions. Ah, it was NO PROBLEM buying things like Sulfuric Acid, Chloroform, Sodium, Nitric Acid, pretty much anything for awhile there.

Then the books came out on how to make things like LSD and DMT in your kitchen. Well, that stopped a good thing fast. Yep, no more thionyl chloride, diethyl amine. Still, "unwatched" chemicals were still easy to buy like potassium dichromate, iodine, high volume hydrogen peroxide and so on.

I read this board and remember how easy it was to get things that people here are struggling to manufacture. I had a LOT of fun those days, it's amazing I survived it.

Commendations go out to those of you practicing this hobby in these days of "terrorism." Sheesh, all I wanted to do was make neat stuff... so do you. (Well, some of you like the stuff that goes boom, but that's whole 'nother thing.)

Cheers

age group

mick - 30-12-2004 at 06:47

I put myself in the 50+ group since I have less than a month to go. If I get my act together and keep of the beer, I could submit my part-time PhD very soon, second attempt, the first was messed up by divorce and stuff. Graduate at 50, I fancy that.

Same has already been mentioned, things used to be a lot easier. When 13/14 I got to know the local independant chemists. I started of by asking them for empty containers for my hobby, ended up giving them a wish list of chemicals and if they could I got them. Parents thought it was great that I had an "interest" and did not bother about what I did down the garden shed. In the kids section of the local library you could get old books on how to make fireworks at home and they told you where to get the chemicals and cost.

Sorry about some of the posts, but it easy to forget the relative age and experience (and write a load of crap), especially after a few beers.
mick

Friends father was a metallurgist and he would bring the chemicals from work.
mick

[Edited on 30-12-2004 by mick]

kclo4 - 31-12-2004 at 02:32

I wonder what age group the 9year old really is

My guess it that has around 10-16 simply I couldn’t image any one that would think it was funny saying there 9

Unless they like turcher people from knowing a nano-bite of info witch for some reason bugs the hell out of me

Revel your self
:mad :

Ref: Age is irrelevant when you are learning.....

solo - 31-12-2004 at 11:08

My interest in chemistry for fun didn't come to me until I was 40 ......now at 59 I'm still learning and the interest has only grown, .....this has become my fountain of youth......solo

JohnWW - 31-12-2004 at 14:46

I'm also in my 50s, a chemical engineer among other things. When I was in my mid-teens, I could easily get a lot of chemical stuff OTC from the local pharmacy, or in some cases groceries, hardware stores, and farm and garden supply shops, e.g. hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, nitric acid, potassium bromide and iodide, chloride of lime, sulfur, potassium nitrate, ammonium nitrate, sodium carbonate, copper sulfate, potassium permanganate, zinc carbonate. Some are now more difficult to get. Glassware was also relatively a lot cheaper.

mick - 31-12-2004 at 15:05

My son is 23 now and he has other thing to do.
When he was very young, 4-9, he used to help me fix the car. Pass the spanners and stuff, but he also liked to jump on the bonnet and roof. Luckily the car was strong enough.
No problem

mick

Magpie - 31-12-2004 at 15:20

I am likely the resident geezer here at 62. I liked chemistry from an early age. One of the few Christmas gifts I ever asked for was a Gilbert chemistry set. I didn't take this hobby up again until I retired 2 years ago from a career in chemical engineering.

Getting supplies is more difficult now - requires more creativity and effort. But if you make some of your own you are bound to have more fun and learn more chemistry.

Easy access

MadHatter - 1-1-2005 at 13:15

I too remember the gold old days when getting chemicals was easy. Try finding
red P in the U.S. nowadays. No thanks to the meth-making bastards who have fucked
it up for the rest of us !

indigofuzzy - 9-4-2007 at 01:20

Wow, the folks who voted are younger than I thought. I'll be 25 in august.
Youn'z guys are making me feel old!

quicksilver - 9-4-2007 at 06:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Magpie
I am likely the resident geezer here at 62. I liked chemistry from an early age. One of the few Christmas gifts I ever asked for was a Gilbert chemistry set. I didn't take this hobby up again until I retired 2 years ago from a career in chemical engineering.

Getting supplies is more difficult now - requires more creativity and effort. But if you make some of your own you are bound to have more fun and learn more chemistry.

You do have a few years on me (I thought I was at least one of the oldest - I'm close) but I remember Gilbert's Chemistry Set. I have the one that folded out upon itself and I believe was made of thin sheet metal; all items stored within.

12AX7 - 9-4-2007 at 07:30

Hmm, I have to change my vote, I've been 20 for a while.

Tim

Aikimike - 9-4-2007 at 12:04

I'm 14 now but 15 in two months. I really should post more...

Regards,

Mike

vulture - 9-4-2007 at 13:16

22 years here and approaching 23 soon...getting pretty old for a vulture. Maybe I should become an old wise owl, they're more pretty anyway.

The_Davster - 9-4-2007 at 13:28

I would think it would be interesting to start a new poll on this, to see how the demographic here has changed over time. Any objections?

Magpie - 9-4-2007 at 13:44

Vulture you are still just a "spring chicken." Please do not become an owl. You would lose your valuable talent of being able to detect carrion from miles away. But you would gain in the area of night vision. Hmm...

Elawr - 9-4-2007 at 16:33

Looking at the age distribution makes me feel REALLY OLD. I'm almost 51 -aaaagh!!!
We need more ancient members here so Iwon't feel so old!

...I just bumped the 50+ group to just over 9% with my vote!

[Edited on 9-4-2007 by Elawr]

enhzflep - 9-4-2007 at 17:04

Nearly 30.

Always loved chemistry from the first contact with it.

Got especially turned on to it when as a 12 or 13 year old, our science teacher chose me to be the one that dropped the lumps of sodium and potassium into a vat of water from the end of a 1m ruler.

Oh, and I guess the rockets we made in yr7 using soda bulbs hardly moderated my interest...

Approaching 50

MadHatter - 10-4-2007 at 01:12

I'm 48 soon to be 49. When I reach 50 I fully expect my friends to give me some of those
gag gifts related to age. Bastards !

Mumbles - 10-4-2007 at 16:55

I've also changed demographics since I voted. Hit the big 2-0 a few months ago(Don't tell the liquor store though

). It'd be interesting to see how things have changed over time. I do find it interesting to see that 60% of the forum is between 10-30. I knew there were plenty of people in my age range there, but is a lot higher than I thought.

[Edited on 4-10-2007 by Mumbles]

Levi - 11-4-2007 at 05:52

Quote:

Originally posted by The_Davster
I would think it would be interesting to start a new poll on this, to see how the demographic here has changed over time. Any objections?

I'd be interested in seeing the current demographic, but I don't think it will yield a meaningful comparison to the "old" since I just voted in -this- poll a few days ago and I doubt that I'm only one to have done so. If I had been around here to vote when the thread was started I'd have been in a lower age group.

vulture - 11-4-2007 at 08:06

A new poll would be more meaningful if the age boundaries were more narrow. Say 18-22, 22-26 and 26-30 for example.

Interesting how there is a gap in the age groups. Maybe because the babyboom generation has been growing up with chemophobia?

[Edited on 11-4-2007 by vulture]

YT2095 - 11-4-2007 at 09:52

40 in less than a month, so I ticked the 40 box.

Magpie - 11-4-2007 at 10:18

Vulture says:

Quote:

Maybe because the babyboom generation has been growing up with chemophobia?

I have to take some exception to this. I was born in 1942. Technically, a pre-babyboomer I suppose, but close. I don't consider my generation chemophobic. I would think that the later generations "X" or "Y" would more fit this stereotype.

I want to quote the last paragraph in my freshman chemistry book: "The chemist and his colleagues in the other sciences are constantly facing new and exciting challenges. With the beginning of the space age, scientific horizons have been tremendously broadened. Once again we are willing to set out to achieve the 'impossible.' Even the sky is no longer the limit." This was published in 1961.

In my generation Dupont's proud slogan was "Better Living Through Chemistry." I also remember an ad for toothpaste proudly stating that it contained hexachlorophene. I don't think that would happen today.

Chemophobia

MadHatter - 11-4-2007 at 14:03

This baby boomer grew up with little or no restrictions when it comes to chemistry. Even the
chemical suppliers were friendlier in the 70s. That can't be said by today's standards. I'm
sure the suppliers are somewhat less willing to provide budding chemists what they
need given the harassment they face from the DEA and the CPSC.

seb - 11-4-2007 at 18:54

I'm 54. My birthday is next monday. How am I supposed to feel? I made some meth before. I am not some bastard. I never was. I was addicted. The meth labs could be some of the more interesting labs, with a sort of Edgar Allen Poe feel to them, with a stuffed raven over the door, and skulls with candles in them. We have a duty to end war, which kills people, not to worry whether someone has given all geeks a bad name and made it harder for them to go about "perfecting ways of making sealing wax", or whatever it is you do with YOUR phosphorous, MadHatter. It's all good.

gambler - 24-5-2007 at 01:15

20

Still young and happy about it

Ozone - 24-5-2007 at 09:46

A spry 32. Ha.

Cheers,

O3

vvz - 24-5-2007 at 11:35

i'm 30 and only start reading this forum... (i'm from Russia) verry happy to look that most of peoples there do not get crazy for drugs )). Sorry for my bad english....

DerAlte - 27-5-2007 at 09:12

I am 70 - hence the handle.

First interested age 12 - father had a fine library that I read. I got one of those 'chemistry sets' ( don't knock them! I think they have started many a youngster off on the path).

In 1952 my father, also an enthusiast in his youth, created a chemical lab in a small room off my bedroom. It had a tiled bench, a fume cupboard ( no fan but sliding glass front, vented to outside). I could get almost any reagent you can name form the local druggist ('chemist' in UK, where I lived then. My father had to sign for those on the poison register, such as arsenic oxide, antinomy oxide, mercuric chloride, sodium cyanide(!), and a few others.

For about 5 years I lived and breathed chemistry (literally!) when I was not doing electronics. If I had that lab now I'd be in hog heaven! For college I opted for Electrical Eng. - electonics won out. I did consider doing another year to get a Chem Eng degree as well. Father died, we had yo move and the lab was lost - all I have now is a lovely old balance by Becker of NY, circa 1890, still works like a charm.

Son number one became intersted when he was about 16 and I went back to experimental chem with him. I had followed theoretical chem by reading all the time. That was 26 years ago. Then son #2 came along, and i began to try to get him interested seriously, but he suffered from pyrotechnomania and was not serious about real chem.

I retired over a decade ago and still dabble.

Regards, DerAlte

tito-o-mac - 20-7-2007 at 06:08

It's always GOOD to have seniors and older aged guys. They much experience and are certainly a great deal of help here

riisa - 6-5-2008 at 10:51

Just turned 18! Woo hoo!
The love afair with chemistry has been around for most of those 18.

MagicJigPipe - 6-5-2008 at 15:12

I forgot to post my actual age. 23. Will be 24 in a little over two months. I don't know why but I feel like I'm getting older too fast. Every year seems to pass faster than the year before it and I don't like thinking about the fact that I have already lived 1/3 of my expected lifespan. It's time to start living it up!

Yeah, yeah, I know, I'm young but it seems like just yesterday I was thinking "Damn. 20 just sounds old compared to Xteen."

tumadre - 6-5-2008 at 15:26

I feel you MJP, from the are of 18 to almost 20 it seems like the time just disappeared.

I've always enjoyed chemistry, but electronics and mechanical was where the brains went.

woelen - 6-5-2008 at 22:56

I'm 42 and I have the impression that I really belong to a minority group over here, although I also think that the average age over here is higher than it is on most other forums.

@MJP: The feeling you express I also know, the effect becomes stronger and stronger every year. The past few years have gone soooo fast...

len1 - 6-5-2008 at 23:27

Im 42 and belong to a minority group on this forum in more ways than one. Sometimes I wonder why I bother. The truth is I suspect this stuff is read more and has potential to do more good than my articles in physics journals. People often boast how many articles they have - it doesnt matter. Hardly anyone reads these periodicals - they just collect dust on library shelves. Their use is in the citation game 'you cite me, I cite you' used in academic circles for personal advancement. And their authors - I suspect Im in a minority of 1 there, they couldnt give two hoots about science and integrity - 95 or so percent just use it as a tool. Some of you younger ones might think this is the musing of a disgrantled sod, see what you think when you get to my age if you continue in science (assuming of course youre honest with yourself).

[Edited on 7-5-2008 by len1]

-jeffB - 7-5-2008 at 06:49

Quote:

Originally posted by len1
Im 42 and belong to a minority group on this forum in more ways than one. Sometimes I wonder why I bother. The truth is I suspect this stuff is read more and has potential to do more good than my articles in physics journals. People often boast how many articles they have - it doesnt matter. Hardly anyone reads these periodicals - they just collect dust on library shelves. Their use is in the citation game 'you cite me, I cite you' used in academic circles for personal advancement. And their authors - I suspect Im in a minority of 1 there, they couldnt give two hoots about science and integrity - 95 or so percent just use it as a tool. Some of you younger ones might think this is the musing of a disgrantled sod, see what you think when you get to my age if you continue in science (assuming of course youre honest with yourself).

Wow.

I was about to say something about "I hope I'm not as jaded as you are by the time I reach your age", and then I realized that I'm already 45.

I'm not a principal investigator angling for grants. Hell, I'm not even a "scientist" in my day job -- I'm mostly just a programmer. But I work with people who are doing real science, and I see what their work is like. Yes, there's a certain amount of stamp-collecting and a certain amount of write-only publication, but most of the scientists I work with really are driven by a love of the field. They love the problem-solving. The absolutely love accomplishing something nobody else has ever been able to do. They absolutely love being able to do something better than anyone else has ever done it. And the very best thing is the serendipitous discovery, the observation that comes completely out of left field.

Science involves a certain amount of tedium. In fact, unwillingness to deal with that tedium is one thing that led me in another direction. But it's not unrelieved tedium. I don't know what advice to give someone who sees no relief.

jokull - 7-5-2008 at 11:03

I'm 25 right now.

Sometimes I think is the quarter of my whole life because people in family lives up to 100-102 years.

I am involved in the chemical research since I was 19 studiyng plant extracts, now I work in topics related to photochemistry.

497 - 8-5-2008 at 22:51

Halfway to 17.

I've loved chemistry (initially biology) ever since I was about 12 or 13.

I am eagerly waiting for a career in some sort of chemical engineering.

azo - 9-5-2008 at 01:35

You recond your supprised .

I am 46 i feel oooooooooold.

azo

[Edited on 9-5-2008 by azo]

Saerynide - 9-5-2008 at 09:16

Just turned 21 this year... I feel so old

chloric1 - 9-5-2008 at 15:55

I am in middle ground here. I am 35. Also, the 30's seem to be middle in numbers also

I have been into chemistry for nearly 20 years. Since 1989 or 1990, I have seen remarkable changes in availability in reagents and equipment. On one hand there was no Internet then and you really had to work to find catalog sellers that delt to individuals. On the other hand, even with the "war on drugs" in the late 80's into the 90's there was still plenty of reagents at "speciallized" pharmacies. Anyone remember Hook's drugs? I remember Tucket state pharamacy in the early 1990's up to 1996 had the BEST selection or chems. They had potassium nitrate, sulfur, potassium permanganate, Trichloroethane, oxalic acid, basic bismuth nitrate, copper sulfate etc etc all in one isle!!!

I remember in 1999 when chemicals first appeared on ebay. WHOA! This is an golden opportunity to aquire reagents with little or no investigation. It reached its peak in 2003 when I almost won an auction for one pound of sodium azide for $20!! I did not get it though

. Soon after that, ebay really put there foot down and these items where no longer permitted.

chemoleo - 9-5-2008 at 17:00

Quote:

You aren't alone in the world....

I hate the citation game, even at a >10 years younger age... it is so petty, so political, requires so much ass kissing and is hugely popularistic - if your type of science is 'hot' then everyone cites you and vice versa even though this so very hot field may be a whole truckload of horseshit....

I'm speaking of the biological sciences...and there's a looot of bad science in there... I wonder how it is in the more physical sciences, I always thought there's more truth in it?

Anyway I'm thinking this topic might deserve its own thread...something like
'The integrity of academic science today'.

The_Davster - 9-5-2008 at 17:35

It is that way in chemistry too. A paper I would have been second author on was declined as a result of our reviewer(name leaked out somehow) being in a related field, yet wanted to be cited despite his work being essentially irrelevant to the topic of our paper. The review actually said "you did not cite the work of xxxxxxx", and xxxxxx turned out to be the reviewer who said this, not sure how that leak occured.

[Edited on 9-5-2008 by The_Davster]

Nicodem - 10-5-2008 at 05:42

Quote:

Originally posted by chemoleo
Anyway I'm thinking this topic might deserve its own thread...something like
'The integrity of academic science today'.

Too late for that thread. The academic science already lost its integrity or else we would not have the Bologna spaghetti process in the European universities. The selling of the universities to the corporations is more than a clear sign that the ship is going down and we with it. The corrupted peer review system might have had a big role with this decay but it itself was probably just a phenomenon secondary to the changes in the society and culture. The academic science simply is not compatible with the new values brought by the neoliberal society and corporative culture.

len1 - 10-5-2008 at 16:35

Oh I thought I was the only one and noone would understand what Im talking about.

In that case Ill add some more info.

My first intro to the citation system, was as a green graduate who has just published his first paper. An envelope arrived soon after, it was marked with the name of an eminent physicist in HEP, it contained nothing but his paper, which I havent read and so hadnt cited. He was inviting me to join the game. With years I learnt that others will only cite you if you cite them - those papers you do cite because you really used them might be from 5 years ago and so will attract you no favours. Otherwise they use your work but ignore you. Thats the integrity of physics these days if anyone is inetersted.

Lets take another example. A colleague at my dept came up with an idea that to me was obviously false - I explained why to him. Several months later he casually informed me that this paper is accepted for publication - as if that justification replaces scientific argument. His paper took 3-4 weeks to write with his student, got lots of citations from his 'citation gang' of international colleagues, and was mentioned as his achievement of the year. It took me 6 months to write a paper to show that the idea is wrong and theres a gross mathematical error in the paper. It got published. I have no 'citation gang'. I still have no citations. He is continuing to gather citations for his papers, which producing at 1/month with his students he has a factor of ten more than me. Anyone viewing his or my CV, will have no doubt as to whos the better scientist - theres no contest.

a_bab - 11-5-2008 at 00:53

It's sad that even in science, that has to be the most correct and "human factor" free enviroment we boil down to the human faults, like envy and others. I once assumed that some of these articles we all like to search and download, and probably many of the patents are false. What len1 said would only confirm me this.

I'm 31 and 'been involved in science since I was maybe 2.

I sometimes ask myself what is it good for to stockpile all of these exotic or basic reagents, chems, aparatus and such whenever I have the opportunity to get them since I have almost no time to use them. I just hope for days when I'll have more spare time, maybe when I'll get retired or something if I'll live till then.

[Edited on 11-5-2008 by a_bab]

Th0r - 12-5-2008 at 13:02

I'm a late teen... I guess I got interested in Weapons, particularly firearms at a young age. Having one side of your family extremely Pro-Firearm Ownership and another completely Anti-Gun Ownership makes you curious...

Then I moved on to kewl style explosives... Before advancing to proper Chemistry. A subject that fascinates me. So here I am a teenager...

As for being younger I think you guys are mostly older...

Zinc - 12-5-2008 at 13:59

I am 15 years old and I got interested in chemistry when I was 4 or 5 years old. My first "chemical experiments" were mixing paints

My interest peaked when I was 13-14 years old. Now my interest in chemistry as science has mostly faded but I make more higher quality experiments than before (although they are mostly explosives related, me and my friend celebrated the Victory day with 150g MEKP/AP/AN

). I remember the old times when I could spend days mixing everything with anything to see what would happen

I spent hours a day reading about theoretical chemistry trying to understand how something works and why does it work like that. I was a real "science kid" back then and wanted to be a chemist when I grow up

Now the "scientist" in me disappeared. I just don't care why something is like it is and why is it so. Chemistry in school has turned from my favorite subject to a regular boring subject.

But I didn't and won't give up chemistry. Now I have more glassware and chemicals than ever before and a lot of practical knowledge and I do a lot of experimenting with explosives. I have no more interest in "ordinary" experiments as they started to appear to me as useless. Whats the point of wasting reagents to make a product that cant do anything, just sit in a bottle to look at? My theoretical knowledge has completely gone away (last year I had a 5 (equal to A) in chemistry, now i have 1 (F), and I have no wish to bring it back. Just because I know how something works and why wont change anything and the knowledge would just unnecessary fill the place in my brain that could be used for some other knowledge that has some practical use. So I become very interested in metalworking, especially in metal casting.

Sorry for the lengthy post but today I was really bored and tired so I had to find something to do that doesn't require a lot of mental or physical work

MagicJigPipe - 12-5-2008 at 14:51

That sucks.

Wasn't it Adolf Hitler who said, "retain the essential and forgot the nonessential" or something like that?

Not that he's the best person to quote but it seems like that's basically what Zinc is saying. (I'm not trying to insult Zinc, Hitler is just the only person I can remember that apparently believed that way. I mean, it's not like he didn't accomplish a lot, as horrible as it was...)

Is he on to something? Personally, I always liked to learn whatever I could whether it was "essential" or not. I'm not really concerned with my brain "overloading". That might actually be quite an accomplishment. To have so much knowledge that you can't store anymore and your brain starts "dumping" information by default.

I think that's what happens when some people get really old.

Chrisn - 14-5-2008 at 00:55

Quote:

Originally posted by JohnWW
I'm also in my 50s, a chemical engineer among other things. When I was in my mid-teens, I could easily get a lot of chemical stuff OTC from the local pharmacy, or in some cases groceries, hardware stores, and farm and garden supply shops, e.g. hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, nitric acid, potassium bromide and iodide, chloride of lime, sulfur, potassium nitrate, ammonium nitrate, sodium carbonate, copper sulfate, potassium permanganate, zinc carbonate. Some are now more difficult to get. Glassware was also relatively a lot cheaper.

I'm in NZ and can get all those chemicals plus numerous more OTC (within roughly a 5km radius of each other

)

16 here btw

indigofuzzy - 14-5-2008 at 18:10

Quote:

someone has given all geeks a bad name and made it harder for them to go about "perfecting ways of making sealing wax", or whatever it is you do with YOUR phosphorous

Making sealing wax? Darn it, Seb, you may have just given me something new to research.

Make sealing wax, hmm. Then I'd have to start writing letters, and buying stamps, just to have fun with such newfound "gothic" elegance

But red's really not my color, so I doubt I'll be needing phosphorus, maybe some copper acetylsalicilate, or copper acetate as pigments.

[edited: fixed spelling error.]

[Edited on 5.14.2008 by indigofuzzy]

Jor - 19-5-2008 at 06:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Zinc
I am 15 years old and I got interested in chemistry when I was 4 or 5 years old. My first "chemical experiments" were mixing paints

). I remember the old times when I could spend days mixing everything with anything to see what would happen

If the science behind something doesn't matter to you, just the BOOM, you should be here on sciencemadness.

Im 18.

Jor - 19-5-2008 at 06:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Zinc
I am 15 years old and I got interested in chemistry when I was 4 or 5 years old. My first "chemical experiments" were mixing paints

). I remember the old times when I could spend days mixing everything with anything to see what would happen

If the science behind something doesn't matter to you, just the BOOM, you shouldn't be here on sciencemadness.
I don't remember when I started to get interest in home-chemistry. But science since was very young.

Im 18.

[Edited on 19-5-2008 by Jor]

Zinc - 19-5-2008 at 11:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Jor
If the science behind something doesn't matter to you, just the BOOM, you should be here on sciencemadness.

Why not? I can find a lot of practical knowledge here.

Rich_Insane - 11-5-2009 at 17:17

13 now. Just setting up my lab.

My interest started young, when I was reading some textbooks, not getting a thing. When I was 10, I began researching explosives, and designing devices from theoretical reactions. Now I am 13, about tot take the AP Exam for Chemistry next year (I just took Bio this year instead of Chem, because I wasn't well prepared). I am more interested in Energetics and Biochemistry, especially alkaloid/protein extraction.

[Edited on 12-5-2009 by Rich_Insane]

Sedit - 11-5-2009 at 18:41

You folks are alot younger then I anticipated. I expected the range to be somewhere within the 30-50 range and here I am 27 thinking Im a youngin. Now I feel old.

Iv been playing with chemistry since I was 12 and made my first electrolysis setup for a sciencefair and the things I would do for the chemistry set I had back then with hardly any use for it.

kclo4 - 11-5-2009 at 19:53

Well, a lot of these users who vote here probably come and go. I get the feeling that most of the people here that post and are well known are around 20+

Rogeryermaw - 7-10-2010 at 23:20

i made my start in chemistry way too late in life. i'm 35 going on 60 (judging by all the pops and creaking bones) and only really took an interest maybe 7-8 months ago. but i have at least been involved in science and technology most of my life. perhaps schooling would be beneficial since everything i have learned has been self taught. i started with electronics at around 8 or 9 and went through phases. electronics, carpentry, metalworking, auto mechanics, computer sciences, and now chemistry.

i have loved and hated, been inspired by and totally let down by every bit of it and would not trade any of it for the world. figuring out problems on my own has been incredibly frustrating at times (i know many of you have felt exactly what i'm talking about, having a theory and working weeks or months to see it fall apart in your hands) but also been so uplifted to see something you've worked for come to fruition.

it has given me a level of self reliance and skill that so many in this world are lacking. so maybe i can't go and buy the latest $5,000 home theater on a whim but i can put on a more entertaining show in my workshop any day of the week.

older than dirt

Rosco Bodine - 8-10-2010 at 10:05

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdquTQYybAQ&fmt=18 This Is All I Ask

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frlkD3cd1rQ&fmt=18 Sleepy Lagoon

[Edited on 9-10-2010 by Rosco Bodine]

franklyn - 9-10-2010 at 17:42

I was born in the later half of the 20 th century
The year of my birth ( subtracting 1900 ) is the same as my age.

How's that ?
Take your year of birth and double it , for example
if you were born 1934 , 34 X 2 is 68
so , in 1968 you were 34 years old , equal to your year of brith

Lets say you were born in 1972 , 72 X 2 is 144 , ( minus 100 ) = 44
so , in 2044 you will be 72 years old , equal to your year of brith

At present some of you are over the hill , many of you have the
hill before you.
There won't be so many alive in 2098 that can say they were born
in 1999

Oh almost forgot , so how old am I

present year 2010 minus 1900 is 110
divided by 2

.

Rogeryermaw - 9-10-2010 at 17:56

@ Rosco like that nat king cole song! good stuff.

kinda profound innit?

[Edited on 10-10-2010 by Rogeryermaw]

psychokinetic - 9-10-2010 at 18:51

When this poll was started I was one, but now I am the next.

12AX7 - 9-10-2010 at 21:53

Strange, didn't I already vote in this? Were the votes reset recently, or am I mad?

...A possibility, I know...

Tim

Rosco Bodine - 9-10-2010 at 22:16

Quote: Originally posted by Rogeryermaw

@ Rosco like that nat king cole song! good stuff.

kinda profound innit?

Ummm, yeah, ... and if you like profound ..... try this one :cool:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96px84SJQJI&fmt=18 Moonlight Serenade - Carly Simon ( song circa 1939 - Glenn Miller )

or this one, if being laid back has a theme song, this is probably it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWh-ppeyFB4&fmt=18 Dreamsville - Henry Mancini ( 1963 )

[Edited on 10-10-2010 by Rosco Bodine]

psychokinetic - 10-10-2010 at 17:01

Quote: Originally posted by 12AX7

Strange, didn't I already vote in this? Were the votes reset recently, or am I mad?

...A possibility, I know...

Tim

Just a little bit more than you were before.

franklyn - 21-10-2010 at 23:49

I have vicariously seen a past I have not experienced , experienced a past never
to be seen again and I can foresee a future I will never experience.

It was in the middle 1920's , before he met my mother my late father bought what was
then the only consumer electronic item that there was. It was called a " radio set " , to
play broadcast music , it had a horn to concentrate the sound of the feeble loudspeaker
and three dials to carefully tune to a station as NBC ( National Broadcasting Company )
CBS ( Columbia Broadcasting Company ). He paid about $ 150 for it , at a time an
average salary was $ 14 for a 6 day week working 10 hours a day. A pocket radio today
does much more and sells for less than $ 15.

I can still watch the old science fiction series " Outer Limits " from the early 1960's
after 4 Am. As a youngster , Television then was of course black and white , and
stations went off the air after the late , late show movie , playing the national anthem
and a poem about God ; a TV test pattern of an indian in feathered hat then came on
and was there until TV shows started again in the morning at about 6 a..m. with the
farm show and locally produced news featuring local people. Before there was Sesame
street there was Captain Kangaroo. My favorite show was Colonel Bleep ( no not an
expletive that was the cartoon's name ).

In a rural area the only phone in the house was on a party line. Before you could dial,
you had to listen and make sure some people you didn't know weren't already using the
line. To call long distance ( more than a few hundred miles ) you had to do so with the
help of the telephone company operator ( there was only one , American Telephone &
Telegraph ) after saying " I'd like to call long distance ". Before there were area codes
we had " exchanges " which were two leading letters of a telephone number. Ours then
was RE ( Regent ) , there was also MU ( Murry Hill ) , PL ( Plaza ) , UN ( University ).

Before there was Xerox and the copy machines it made , if you wanted a copy
you had to use carbon paper to produce it at the time you typed it on a typewriter.
If you wanted to make many copies you instead used a Mimeograph machine which
made a miserable ghostly transfer copy of the stencil on which you had typed.
You would swoon from the methanol vapor that put out. Some years ago the last
typewriter repair shop in Manhattan closed for ever.

How about 45 RPM records and the portable battery operated record player that took
6 , carbon D cells.

Threading a film roll into a camera under your jacket over your head , manual film
advance and single use blue flashbulbs.

No one delivers milk any more - now instead it's pizza , back then they were called
pizza pies and you had to go out to get it yourself. I could buy a slice of pizza and
a paper cone of soda for 25 cents. The same thing today costs $ 3.50
Soda pop machines dispensed glass bottles , coke's had curves , you needed to use
a bottle cap opener to open one.
Instead of vending machines there was the Automat a cafeteria commissary with a
wall to wall vending machine with anything you could want. Coffee shops and diners
had tableside jukebox selection keypads. Instead we now have Starbuck's and wi-fi.

Newsreels ran before the movie show at the movie theatre.
At the Drive-in theatre you could watch from inside your Packard or Studebaker.

OMG I'm starting to sound like Andy Rooney.

school.JPG - 44kB

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><&g t;<><>

P.S.
According to the poll 75 % of members are under 30
When I was under 30 we used to say
" don't trust anyone over 30 "

Can't imagine why now , lack of perspective I guess.

Age spread.gif - 5kB

[Edited on 22-10-2010 by franklyn]

average age

cyanureeves - 22-10-2010 at 03:57

10 to 19 yrs. is great.but what about gender?i was reading an interesting entry and pussy washing popped up.i thought it was funny if women members read it.maybe it was just a pseudonym for some chemical compound and had already been precipitated and isolated.anyway i think female members here are unique as well as the males.chemistry is priority!

Eynigma - 23-10-2010 at 03:35

27 going on 60 here. Can't hear worth a damn and depending on the weather I can't walk (arthritis-and the hearing is NON pyro-related btw!). Set the parent's trash can on fire when I was 9 (who woulda known pool shock and sulfur aren't compatible?) and I've been hooked ever since. The fires are usually intentional these days, though. Of course the shockwaves are always accidental-when the neighbors ask...

franklyn - 20-6-2011 at 12:36

How many of these threads do we need ?

http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=2120
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=3100
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=16170

.

DerAlte - 5-11-2011 at 20:44

How many of these threads do we need ? asks Franklyn - good question. However, the sample available quote above is as poor as a typical media poll - around 250 out of 10650 members.

Statistal significance is therefore questionable: especially since C. 1% are age nine or lower!

Anybody beat 74? As the old song goes, I don't get around much anymore. Rosco, a chance to find it on Youtube - Sinatra?

Der Alte

Rosco Bodine - 5-11-2011 at 22:51

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOJV3VrEBt8 Night And Day - Frank Sinatra

I'm sending over a nurse to help lift your spirits.

Take two viagra and call me in the morning.

More from Sergio and Lani, and Herb, and Lani

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mM9Jc2E2Khs Night And Day

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCiFxRqI-hE Put A Little Love Away

Herb Alpert and Lani Hall

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeotM8dasB4 Come What May 1980

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljS-ZuwyArE ditto (lyrics)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inKZU5FFc-Y You and I - Kenny Rogers and The Bee Gees

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EfHZtCKJGY The Water Is Wide - Karla Bonoff and James Taylor

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8HgAVenbUU Bring The Rain - Mercy Me

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9L1dGKLWuY You Are Mine - Faith Alumni Chorale

[Edited on 6-11-2011 by Rosco Bodine]

DerAlte - 6-11-2011 at 15:01

@Rosco:
I guess Frank didn't record that one. Here's a version:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxwvOncHVbQ - don't get around much any more.
Always did love that jazz...

Quote:

I'm sending over a nurse to help lift your spirits.
Take two viagra and call me in the morning.

Don't need 'em, old pal! You could perhaps sneak in the nurse...

Not getting around much is relative. I don't have arthritis or any of those things they say old folks ought to have. Just got a bit of cataract in the left eye and a deaf right ear and possible deterioration in between, and a load of white hair, though. Otherwise all systems go but unable to run marathons any more.

I was referring to travel. I am content to sit on my backside in the sun way down South here and watch the garden grow in the sunshine. I've done my travel - from the New York Island(s) to the redwood forests;

cf http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuo5AvAn_Ak&feature=relat... now you've got me at it!

... Every county in England, Wales and Scotland and several of the Inner Hebrides...

Nearly every state in the US except a few mid West and Alaska, Hawaii; I've thrown stones across the Rio Grande into Mexico and walked into Canada from Maine.

Bahamas, Jamaica; nearly every country in Europe bar Scandinavia and the East; every province in Canada except PEI Saskscatewan and Manitoba. I've seen Albania and Greenland from afar, crossed the Atlantic by liner. Missed Australia by a hair, was due for a six months stint. Have worked in UK, Canada, North & South US and in Silicon Valley. Loved then all (except New Jersey).

I can remember when air travel was a a pleasure, not a cramped ride in an airborne cattle car. They didn't change the air every half hour then but every few minutes: You could smoke, get free drinks, meals that were edible; and air hostesses were not over thirty and would let you pinch their bottoms. Flirting was an art in those days, not a dangerous pastime as it now is in this ridiculous PC era.; men were men and women were women. Those were the days.

I've been everywhere, man: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ov4epAJRPMw

So I don't need to get around anymore...

I leave you with this thought - Not only that, I did it my way, as Frank Sinatra sings here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tVi121_h-I&feature=relat...

Regards,
Der Alte

[Edited on 7-11-2011 by DerAlte]

Gary1234 - 24-11-2011 at 11:43

Rather than start a new post on member's ages, I thought it would be more appropriate to resurrect this long, well-established post.
Initially, I thought that this forum was mainly for young amateur chemistry enthusiasts under the age of, say, 16, but I was pleasantly surpised to discover than there are quite a few adult (i.e. 18+) members here, with some into the grand age of 70

I have not clocked as many years as 70 (yet)- I am 25.
I guess that you are never too old for an 'adult' chemistry set!

Hexavalent - 10-1-2012 at 12:08

Started when I was 10, I'm now 13 and have refined my interest to synthetic organic chemistry.

neptunium - 10-1-2012 at 12:42

34