Sciencemadness Discussion Board - Amateur/Home Chemistry: Historical Achievements

Amateur/Home Chemistry: Historical Achievements

The_Davster - 20-12-2007 at 18:48

I am wanting to use this thread for the purpose of collecting a list of great historical achievements by those doing their work outside a 'formal research setting'
I am sure others know of other such instances, I will look for more later myself, as currently the only couple I know by heart is below.

Aluminum production by the cryolite method: Charles Hall discovered it in the woodshed behind his parents' house. Even had to make the batteries to power the electrolyis setup himself.

Radium and related elements: Marie and Pierre Curie did much of their experiments in a shack on their property.

Finding the exact locations of where such discoveries occured is difficult, as before Edison's menlow park lab(being the first commercial research lab of its kind) most research was either done in Academia, or at home, and such distinction was not noted often from what I have seen as a result of noone really caring, and home reseach being commonplace.

[Edited on 20-12-2007 by The_Davster]

12AX7 - 20-12-2007 at 18:57

I'm sure it was more commonplace in the olden days, when there were simply fewer labs of an official nature. A tricky and interesting question to answer!

Tim

chloric1 - 20-12-2007 at 19:06

Does anyone know how Edison obtained his lab? According to the History Channel documentary he was emplyed as a telegraph operator or something like that and he took a device apart and rebuilt it to run better. His boss was so impressed that he gave Edison $50,000! Now I still have not convinced myself of the realism in this claim. If it is true, I need to find a generous boss!

I guess in those days, business owners where not so worried that if they paid there employees alot that could quit and start there own busniess. Now, we are raised and taught to be good workers and not think for our selves.

A society based on servitude and paid slavery.

Magpie - 20-12-2007 at 20:10

It is tough to define a "formal research setting," but I think we all have a gut feeling of what you mean.

I offer two that come quickly to mind:

1. Alfred Nobel's invention of dynamite (the 1st practical use of nitroglycerine as an explosive). He moved around alot between Russia, Paris, and Sweden but much of his inventing was done in a shed on some leased property in Heleneberg outside of Stockholm.

2. Goodyear's discovery of the vulcanization of rubber with sulfur, which I believe happened on his kitchen stove.

[Edited on by Magpie]

The_Davster - 20-12-2007 at 23:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Magpie
It is tough to define a "formal research setting," but I think we all have a gut feeling of what you mean.

Exactly. It is any examples that can be amenable to the defence of home chemistry.

Don't forget when Nobel got kicked out of town and moved his laboratory to a barge

. This may not be the best example however

woelen - 21-12-2007 at 00:28

The problem with all these examples is that they are from long ago. 100 years ago, much still remained to be discovered.

The fruits in the tree of discovery, which are hanging low, all have been picked already. Nowadays only the high hanging fruits remain, and picking these requires a lot of special apparatus and large investments. So, I am quite pessimistic about world-shocking discoveries in home chemistry labs in the 21st century.

Of course, we all have personal discoveries, and sometimes we find nice methods for making reagents in sich a way, that it becomes practical for home use. Even sometimes we find puzzling things and riddles, which are not yet solved, but all these things definitely are not of the big order as the things of 100 to 200 years ago.

The_Davster - 21-12-2007 at 00:40

Oh I am not saying that I still believe such 'easy' discoveries could be made today. I completly agree with you on the low-hanging fruits on the discovery tree.

It is merely a defence of lack of regulation and a rejectment of the climate of fear of today, which if present in those days could have stifled such discoveries.

Would we have rubber today if the DHS/CPSC had prevented goodyear for purchasing some sulfur? Let alone what would be done to Nobel...

[Edited on 21-12-2007 by The_Davster]

franklyn - 22-12-2007 at 22:51

From _
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulcanization
" Most textbooks point out that Charles Goodyear (1800–1860) invented
vulcanization of rubber as used today by the addition of sulfur in high heat.
Depending on what you read, the Goodyear story is one of either pure luck
or careful research."

.

quicksilver - 24-12-2007 at 05:51

Times have changed to such a degree; what with liability laws and public perception, that experimentation itself is frowned on.

In the local university they took the couch and chairs out of the lab. "We don't need that in here". That couch saw some pretty strong thinking at one time...

With fear of injury, often times experimentation itself has been curtailed... "Leaving that out could start a fire"... We live in times that narrows the field of thought "What do you want to make that for?"
It starts to seem obvious that only in places like this that people can dream without someone "policing their actions". But even here the questions are often phrased with care due to sociological influences censoring them.

YT2095 - 24-12-2007 at 07:16

check this out: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1236856/posts

I actually remember seeing this guy on TV also

I think This sentence sums it All up quite nicely:

"It seems that Maurice Ward's greatest strength as a researcher was that he had not been taught how to think."

21st century home experimenter

chloric1 - 25-12-2007 at 04:08

Some of you may have heard of this guy in Canada. This guy does not have formal scientific or engineering education yet he comes up with some novel concepts of his own. In this case he is able to reach the higher fruits of discovery by mere persistance. This "fire paste" invention he came up with he reportedly tries 1,700 times. I am very inspired by his adventurous spirit but I take all with a grain of salt. I have yet to see a patent in his name and some of his ideas are quite sensational. But before I ramble on too much, heres the link:Firepaste Inventor

The_Davster - 25-12-2007 at 10:02

There is also this kid in Alberta, who succeeded in making bullet proof armour for a science fair, and the RCMP is currently testing it.

Quote:

By THE CANADIAN PRESS

SPRUCE GROVE — RCMP snipers took aim at Darren Shulte’s Grade 9 science project last week, firing at his non-ceramic bullet-proof plate to see if it could save lives.

Shulte, of St. Albert, created the plate five years ago for a junior high school science fair when he was just 13 years old.

Now, law enforcement officials are taking his invention seriously, with even Defence Minister Peter MacKay showing an interest.

“This is my life right now,” Shulte told CTV Edmonton. “There isn’t anything else.”

The plate is designed to be worn inside a tactical vest by police and military personnel. Unlike other such plates, it isn’t made from ceramic or Kevlar.

Shulte wouldn’t divulge the materials he used, but the plate has gone through several revisions.

http://www.reddeeradvocate.com/portals-code/list.cgi?paper=1...

YT2095 - 21-1-2008 at 08:17

not sure if This applies but both Lee and Perrins were both Chemists, and the recipe for Worcester sauce was given to them, they tried it and it was disgusting, they left it in the cellar for 3 years and after that time it had changed flavor, and became the product we know now!

http://leaperrins.com/myths/legends.php
http://www.foodhistory.com/foodnotes/leftovers/sauce/worcest...

quicksilver - 22-1-2008 at 05:52

It occurred to me that a great deal of patents are the result of home experimentation. Just how many would be anyone's guess however at a certain period in history almost all chemistry patents would come from "home experimentation" settings!

microcosmicus - 22-1-2008 at 09:45

Leo Baekland invented Bakelite in his home laboratory in Yonkers, NY in the early
years of the twentieth century.

http://www.chemheritage.org/classroom/chemach/plastics/baeke...

No more cataracts

franklyn - 12-3-2008 at 22:18

Eye drops.JPG - 79kB

S.C. Wack - 13-3-2008 at 04:08

It should be mentioned that Scheele, although technically a professional chemist, quite casually experimented with HCN, arsenicals, etc. in a shed. Although many newer refs ascribe his early death to chemicals, say to dropping an ampoule of liquid HCN, mercury poisoning, etc., the good, long older references do not blame chemical exposure, and there isn't really any evidence for it AFAIK. Many chemists have tasted their materials and lived quite long.

From one of a few such older refs on Google, a partial list of accomplishments:

"We owe to Scheele our first knowledge of chlorine and of the individuality of manganese and baryta. He was an independent discoverer of oxygen, ammonia, and hydrochloric acid gas. He discovered also hydrofluoric, nitro-sulphonic, molybdic, tungstic, and arsenic acids among the inorganic acids and lactic, gallic, pyrogallic, oxalic, citric, tartaric, malic, mucic, and uric among the organic acids. He isolated glycerin and milk sugar determined the nature of microcosmic salt, borax, and Prussian blue, and prepared hydrocyanic acid. He demonstrated that plumbago is nothing but carbon associated with more or less iron, and that the black powder left on solution of cast iron in mineral acids is essentially the same substance. He ascertained the chemical nature of sulphuretted hydrogen, discovered arsenetted hydrogen, and the green arsenical pigment which is associated with his name. He invented new processes for preparing ether, powder of algaroth, phosphorus, calomel, and magnesia alba. His services to quantitative chemistry included the discovery of ferrous ammonium sulphate, and of the methods still in use for the analytical separation of iron and manganese, and for the decomposition of mineral silicates by fusion with alkaline carbonates."

Essays in Historical Chemistry
By Thomas Edward Thorpe
http://books.google.com/books?id=rCJDAAAAIAAJ

He did all this and more mostly at night and at home over 20 years, while working by day as a pharmacist. An all-time hero of scientific method.

Neil - 22-3-2008 at 19:10

http://acswebcontent.acs.org/landmarks/landmarks/cal/index.h...

acetylene and calcium carbide by Thomas Willson perhaps?

microcosmicus - 22-3-2008 at 20:17

Of course, in the days of Scheele, the line between amateur and
professional scientist was rather blurry. It must have been interesting
and exciting doing chemistry in those days when it was still taking off
as an exact science, with the notion of chemical element, the atomic
theory, and other things we take for granted as foundations were being
invented. Of course, the excitement is still there, just the position of
the frontier has moved; someone 200 years later will surely take our state
of the art for granted and look back at us similarly.

The following quote from the Wikipedia biography should prove an
inspiration to us all:

Quote:

Correspondence between Lavoisier and Scheele indicate that Scheele
achieved interesting results without the advanced laboratory equipment
that Lavoisier was accustomed to.

Quote:

He did all this and more mostly at night and at home over 20 years,
while working by day as a pharmacist. An all-time hero of scientific method.

This reminds me of Weierstrass who invented modern
mathematical analysis under similar circumstances. While
it can be rough going, there is something to be said for working
persistently on the research one thinks considers important free
of distractions such a pressure to publish or pleasing funding
agencies even if one has to do it after hours. Too me, such a
course seems the surest approach towards profound discoveries,
even the discovery of whole new fields of science.

[Edited on 23-3-2008 by microcosmicus]

Moldy bread

franklyn - 9-4-2008 at 16:32

While by no means an amateur, even seasoned professionals have humble beginnings.

His name was Fleming, and he was a poor Scottish farmer. One day, while trying
to make a living for his family, he heard a cry for help coming from a nearby bog.
He dropped his tools and ran to the bog. There, mired to his waist in black muck,
was a terrified boy, screaming and struggling to free himself. Farmer Fleming
saved the lad from what could have been a slow and terrifying death. The next
day, a fancy carriage pulled up to the Scotsman's sparse surroundings and an
elegantly dressed nobleman stepped out and introduced himself as the father of
the boy Farmer Fleming had saved.

'I want to repay you,' said the nobleman. 'You saved my son's life.'
'No, I can't accept payment for what I did,' the Scottish farmer replied waving
off the offer. At that moment, the farmer's own son came to the door of the
family hovel.
'Is that your son?' the nobleman asked.
'Yes,' the farmer replied proudly.
'I'll make you a deal. Let me provide him with the level of education my own son
will enjoy. If the lad is anything like his father, he'll no doubt grow to be a man
we both will be proud of.' And that he did.

Farmer Fleming's son attended the very best schools and in time, graduated from
Saint Mary's Hospital Medical School in London, and went on to become known
throughout the world as the noted Sir Alexander Fleming, the discoverer of Penicillin.
Years afterward, the same nobleman's son who was saved from the bog was stricken
with pneumonia. What saved his life this time? Penicillin.
The name of the nobleman? Lord Randolph Churchill.
His son's name? Sir Winston Churchill.

Someone once said: What goes around comes around.

.

7he3ngineer - 9-4-2008 at 19:07

Well, you all may not remember the name, but I'm sure the story's familiar to most of you...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hahn

Definitely enough to be considered a real amature achievement (even though never completed!)

Josh

Sauron - 10-4-2008 at 12:38

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned Perkin and his at-home discovery of mauveine at the age of 18, which resulted in the launch of the British aniline dye industry and an enormous struggle between Britain and Germany for commercial supremacy in that field.

He was a student of von Hoffman at the Royal College of Chemistry, but conducted most of his experiments at home.

Perkin became fabulously rich as a result and devoted himself to pure research.

The small contratemps that Perkin hadn't a clue about structural chemistry and blundered his way into success and fortune does not distract from his accomplishment. (Look at Bill Gates.)

-----------------

There have been threads on David Hahn already. NOT someone I would choose as an icon for home science. A good example of complete irresponsibility giving amateur science a bad name.

[Edited on 11-4-2008 by Sauron]

[Edited on 11-4-2008 by Sauron]

7he3ngineer - 10-4-2008 at 15:29

Quote:

David Hahn... [is] NOT someone I would choose as an icon for home science. A good example of complete irresponsibility giving amateur science a bad name.

I'll accept that criticism, and in all honesty I agree, though it is still impressive in its own way.

Josh

chemkid - 10-4-2008 at 15:44

David Hahn is both a great failure and wonderful success of home chemistry. Leaning towards great failure. He stole, cheated, harmed others, broke the law and really did not safely pursue chemistry at an amateur level. However, he managed to study nuclear chemistry on an amateur level, a colossal achievement i think, considering how challenging obtaining radioactive materials can be.

Chemkid

Sauron - 10-4-2008 at 22:43

Shit! I post about Perkin, and no one has a word to say.

But David Hahn, a great exemplar of what NOT to do, that's a hot topic.

There's no justice.

sparkgap - 10-4-2008 at 23:58

franklyn,

As much as the tale warms the heart, alas! It looks to be spun yarn.

sparky (~_~)

Pulverulescent - 11-4-2008 at 14:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Sauron
Shit! I post about Perkin, and no one has a word to say.
But David Hahn, a great exemplar of what NOT to do, that's a hot topic.

IIRC, Sauron, Perkin's discovery came about, in part, through the low purity of reagents available at the time.
This doesn't detract from his great achievement, in any way, since chemists other than Perkin would, in all probability, have simply dumped the products of all "failed experiments", without thinking.
What singled him out, was his great openmindedness coupled with a singlemindedness and great scientific curiosity.
At the time it was the right combination, and he had it!

'Don't think Hahn contributed anything to any science!

P

Sauron - 11-4-2008 at 17:42

I'm not trying to knock Perkin, far from it. However the fact remains that his lack of knowledge of structural chemistry led him into an erroenous synthetic strategy, which, along with the circumstances you mention, led seredipitously to a major commercial discovery. He was after indigo, right? He didn't get near it but he got something unexpected instead, something akin to Tyrollean purple.

Not bad for 18. What he did was screw up and come up fragrant.

Because of the economic impact on Britain, Perkin was lionized the rest of his life and beyond, and deservedly. And since his accomplishments were made under home-lab conditions his story ought to be at the vanguard of our struggle.

Sandmeyer - 11-4-2008 at 18:13

Wasn't it him (or Fisher?) who had a reply to the smartasses that accused him of having luck to discover serendipitously: "My friend, I do more experiments than you."

To stay on the topic, Traugott Sandmeyer did experiemnts in his kitchen, he discovered Sandmeyer reaction in 1884, he never took a doctorate degree.

[Edited on 12-4-2008 by Sandmeyer]

pantone159 - 11-4-2008 at 20:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Sauron
I'm not trying to knock Perkin, far from it. He was after indigo, right?

I think it was quinine. He was not looking for a dye, so that part was not at all in the plan. He was, however, explicitly trying to find a way to get rich, so that part went exactly as intended.

Sauron - 11-4-2008 at 23:10

See the following excellent webpage.

http://www.ch.ic.ac.uk/motm/perkin.html

Contrary to what I had read, Perkin's mauvine was not 6,6'-dibromoindigotin at all. What Perkin made accidentally in 1856 and commercialized a year later was far more complex. Indeed, it was quinine he was after, and he was experimenting with oxidizing allytoluidine with dichromate. The correct structure for what he made (which turned out to anyway be a mixture) was not determined until 1994. See reference cited in site above.

Perhaps Perkin made Tyrian purple later. But it was not the foundation of his business and fortune. Mauvine was.

There is a lot of contradictory information about this on the net, but the page I linked to is by the well known chemist Henry Rzepa of the Imperial College of Chemistry, successor to the Royal College of Chemistry that Perkin attended in the 1850s.

As pointed out in this article, it is worth noting that my remark that Perkin knew nothing of structural organic chemistry, is accurate, but, no one did. The tetrahedran nature of carbon was not settled. Kekule only expounded his benzene ring theory in 1857. So Perkin's lack of such understanding was the general state of play in 1856. I meant no denigration by my comment.

-jeffB - 12-4-2008 at 04:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Sauron
Shit! I post about Perkin, and no one has a word to say.

Perkin was in the forefront of my mind from my first glance at the thread title -- so much so, in fact, that I somehow convinced myself he'd been mentioned from the beginning! His story was certainly one of my biggest inspirations when I was first getting interested in chemistry. (In fact, I have a very clear memory of reading about his story while sitting at the base of our attic stairs -- in a house we left less than two years after I got my first chemistry set. I would've been around 10 at the time.)

On the other hand, had I started out twenty years later (and were I twenty years younger), I have no doubt that Hahn's story would have been more compelling to me.

Pulverulescent - 12-4-2008 at 05:17

No disagreement Sauron, you have it just about right!
Your mention of Kekule and serendipity got me thinking about the large number of fortuitous accidents in chemistry.
Some seem to have come about by a combination of a lack of information and poor standards of purity of the materials worked on.
Modern practice has virtually closed the latter avenue, however!
And Wohler's "Urea Synthesis" looks like serendipity, pure and simple.

P

Sauron - 12-4-2008 at 05:39

The door is not completely closed on serendipity. It wasn't that long ago that a new form of elemental carbon was first observed (the fullerenes) in the soot of an alectric arc from graphite electrodes. Electric arcs and graphite electrodes were not new. It was just that no one had ever looked at them the right way. I bet the people who discovered them were not expecting what they found.

Planning an experiment, expecting result A and getting instead result Z, is serendipity, at least when result Z is useful and/or interesting. The fullerenes were certainly interesting and it seems like they will be useful as well.'

Those guys got a Nobel for their troubles. Well, I guess a million bucks isn't what it used to be. But still.

Nothey didn't do it in a home lab. How would the politics of the discovery have proceeded, if they had? Derision most likely till some academic lab replicated the work and very likely, snatched the Nobel or at least shared it. Unfair? To be sure. If you think there's nothing political in the Nobels, ask Robert Gallo or the fellow at the Pasteur Institute that Gallo plagiarized.

The Need for Skepticism

franklyn - 12-4-2008 at 05:52

One of my first posts here _
An abridged excerpt of an editorial from Science ( 12 October 1962 )

The synthesis of xenon tetraflouride and related compounds makes
necessary the revision of chemistry textbooks. For about 50 years,
students have been taught that noble gases are nonreactive.
Millions have absorbed this dogma and parroted it back in exams.
The first evidence that xenon might participate in chemical
combination was obtained by Neil Bartlett, who suggested that
compounds of this type might be made. The ease with which XeF4 is
made and its properties are explored is almost shocking. One can
introduce the two gases into a simple system, heat the mixture
for 1 hour at 400º C, and observe the formation of crystals.
The essential ingredient in discovering noble gas compounds was
not money or equipment, but an idea.
There is a sobering lesson here, as well as an exciting prospect.
For perhaps 15 years, at least a million scientists all over the
world have been blind to a potential opportunity to make an
important discovery. All that was required to overthrow a
respected and entrenched dogma was a few hours of effort and
a germ of skepticism.

.

pantone159 - 12-4-2008 at 08:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Sauron
Perkin knew nothing of structural organic chemistry, is accurate, but, no one did. The tetrahedran nature of carbon was not settled. Kekule only expounded his benzene ring theory in 1857. So Perkin's lack of such understanding was the general state of play in 1856.

I have a book re the history of chemistry, 'The Development of Modern Chemistry', by Ihde, a Dover book. It mentioned Perkin amongst many others. One of the most interesting things I got from reading that book, was that for a very very long time, the understanding of what made chemistry work the way it did (bonding geometry, physical chemistry, etc.) was nearly nonexistent. It is really remarkable how much was worked out when the understanding of the 'basics' was nearly zero.

Sauron - 13-4-2008 at 05:27

Some further wrinkes re Perkin and mauve:

These cadged from one of the dye chem books in forum library:

1. von Hoffmann, Perkin's professor, was on holiday at the time.

2. Perkin's experimental logic was that allyltoluidine has half the MW of quinine and both contain nitrogen so why not put two mols of the allyltoluidine together? So he heated this aniline derivative with potassium dichromate and conc H2SO4.

3. He noticed that the product was colored.

4. He decided to repeat the experiment with aniline rather than allyltoluidine. The result was a tar. However alcoholic extraction gave some colored product. This initially refused to crystallize.

5. Hoffmann returned from holiday and after hearing Perkin's report, advised him to chuck the intractible product away!

Perkin however persisted and eventually managed to crystallize the substance, naming it mauve. He and von Hoffmann commercialized it the following year by that name, while in Europe it was known as aniline violet or Perkin's violet. It was distributed as an alcoholic solution, and was too expensive for any application other than dyeing silk. Fortunately the silk industry took to it immediately.

Normally we would think that experimental focus would have been a virtu and likewise, one's teacher's advise is not to be lightly cast aside. In this instance a great industry arose from a refusal of both.

Magpie - 28-11-2008 at 21:06

Recently I finished reading the book "Thomas Edison, Chemist," 1971, by Vanderbilt. Although he did his work in large, well staffed laboratories at Menlo Park, NJ, and Ft Meyers, Florida, it was all his. So in some ways he was a "home chemist." He did remarkable work in the following fields: magnetic iron ore separation, Portland cement manufacture, Ni-Fe battery, synthetic organic chemicals, and rubber, as well as in those of his more well-known inventions.

Another home chemist of whom I was not previously aware is Christian Shonbein, a professor of chemistry at the University of Basel in Switzerland. One day in 1846 he was performing some experiments in the kitchen of his home. He accidentally broke a flask in which he was distilling a mixture of sufuric and nitric acids, spilling it all over the floor. He wiped up the mess using his wife's cotton apron. Then he washed the apron and hung it in front of the hot stove to dry. But instead of drying the apron flared up and disappeared. It had been transformed from cotton into guncotton-the base for smokeless powder. (paraphrased from "Giant Molecules," 1966, Life Science Library)

hissingnoise - 29-11-2008 at 05:44

Most chemistry hobbyists, I'm sure, can relate to that Schonbein anecdote (mentioned on a previous thread, btw) because as I read it originally, his wife had expressly forbade experimentation in "her kitchen", so he had to wait till she went shopping, or whatever women do when they go out.
Imagine his panic on seeing acids fizzling (and releasing NO2) all over the floor, as he scrabbled for a cloth to clean up.
Imagine, too, what might have happened had the apron not ignited in front of the stove.
The version I read ended with, "Schonbein's wife's comments were not recorded".

hissingnoise - 29-11-2008 at 06:02

While on the subject, Christian Friedrich's "Eureka euphoria" was quickly dissipated by an horrific series of explosions which cost many lives; lives that were lost to his new invention.
Again, his later despondency can only be imagined. . .

Need Proof ?

franklyn - 30-5-2009 at 21:19

http://www.yahoo.com/s/1078775

No real relation to chemistry per se , however it invokes events largely unknown
that mathematics can presage undiscovered chemistry, as the prediction of then
yet to be named " Prions " by mathematician John Stanley Griffith, nephew of
Frederick Griffith. http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Frederick_Griffith
" Transformation was first demonstrated in 1928 by Frederick Griffith in what is
today known as Griffith's experiment, he discovered what he called a transforming
principle, which is today known to be DNA."
( They exhibiit familial traits reminiscent of the swiss Bernoulli's )
http://www.biochemist.org/bio/02704/0033/027040033.pdf

Spongiform encephalopathy such as CJD, BSE, and " Kuru "
is now generally accepted as being the result of pathogenic proteins
( without infinitive proof however, some remain unconvinced of this )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creutzfeldt-Jakob_disease
[ The prion exhibits at least two stable conformations. One, the native state,
is water-soluble and present in healthy cells. The other conformational state
is very poorly water-soluble. The CJD prion is dangerous because it promotes
refolding of native proteins into the diseased state, producing a self-sustaining
feedback loop in which the number of misfolded protein molecules will increase
exponentially. The process leads to a large quantity of insoluble prions in affected
cells. This change in conformation disables the ability of the protein to undergo
digestion, readily accumulating into protein aggregates. The mass of misfolded
proteins disrupts cell function and causes cell death. ]

Flash Video describes Prion transmission
http://www.1lec.com/Microbiology/Prion/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuru_(disease)
" the disease spread easily and rapidly in the Fore people ( new Guinea ) due
to their endocannibalistic funeral practices, in which relatives consumed the
deceased "
http://www.as.ua.edu/ant/bindon/ant570/Papers/McGrath/McGrat...

The culprit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prion
" mathematician John Stanley Griffith developed the hypothesis [ in a seminal
paper in Nature entitled Self-replication and scrapie] in 1967 that some
transmissible spongiform encephalopathies are caused by an infectious agent
consisting solely of proteins "

Self-replication and scrapie
Griffith JS.
Nature ( 2 September 1967 ) Num 215(5105) pgs 1043-1044
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v215/n5105/pdf/2151043a...
Num 17 on this list
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&cmd=D...
unrelated other important work by Griffith
http://www.amazon.com/Mathematical-Neurobiology-John-Stanley...
http://tinyurl.com/n5gnc5

Controversy continues
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/01/what_really_cau

Contemporary Investigation
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17085779?ordinalpos=1&...

.

franklyn - 26-10-2010 at 09:20

http://www.livescience.com/history/top-10-mad-scientists-1.h...

The WiZard is In - 26-10-2010 at 09:45

Quote: Originally posted by The_Davster

I am wanting to use this thread for the purpose of collecting a list of great historical achievements by those doing their work outside a 'formal research setting'

A text in the Tao Tsang, entitled Chen Yuan Miao Tao Yao Lueh (Classified
Essentials of the Mysterious Tao of the True Origin (of Things)), is attributed to
Cheng Yin. Although the text available to us in the Tao Tsang is probably mostly
of the + 8th or the + 9th century, the putative author himself may have been
responsible for the older parts of the book. It mentions no less than thirty-five
different elixir formulae which the writer points out to be wrong or dangerous,
though popular in his time. ....... The book also warns against a very interesting procedure, saying
that some of the alchemists had heated sulphur together with realgar, saltpetre
and honey, with the result that their hands and faces had been scorched when
the mixture deflagrated, and even their houses burnt down. This passage is of
out standing importance because it is one of the first references to an explosive
mixture, proto-gunpowder, combining sulphur with nitrate and a source of
carbon, in any civilisation. The book also gives a test for saltpetre. Exactly how
much of all this material goes back to the days of Cheng Yin himself is extremely
difficult to determine, but future research may be expected to throw more light on
the problem. In the meantime, having regard to the general pattern of
development of chemical knowledge and use of explosives, we place the
essential passages in the Thang period.

--------
Some discoveries that may have been Sun Ssu-Mo's are embodied in short
extracts quoted in other collections. For example, the Chu Chia Shen Phin Tan
Fa (see pp. 159, 197) appears to quote him as follows:

Take of sulphur and saltpetre (hsiao shih) 2 oz. each and grind them together,
then put them in a silver-melting crucible or a refractory pot (sha kuan). Dig a pit
in the ground and put the vessel inside it so that its top is level with the ground,
and cover it all round with earth. Take three perfect pods of the soap-bean tree,
[Gleditschia sinensis] uneaten by insects, and char them so that they keep their
shape, then put them into the pot (with the sulphur and saltpetre). After the
flames have subsided close the mouth and place three catties (lb) of glowing
charcoal (on the lid); when this has been about one third consumed remove all of
it. The substance need not be cool before it is taken out-it has been 'subdued by
fire' (fu huo ) (i.e chemical changes have taken place giving a new and stable
product).

Someone seems to have been engaged here about + 650 in an operation
designed, as it were, to produce potassium sulphate, and therefore not very
exciting, but on the way he stumbled upon the first preparation of a deflagrating
(and later explosive) mixture in the history of all civilisation. b Exciting must have
been the word for that.

Joseph Needham
Science and Civilistion in China
Volume 5 chemistry and Chemical Technology
Part III: Spagyrical discovery and Invention: Historical Survey, From Cinnabar
Elixirs to Synthetic Insulin
Cambridge at the University Press 1976

lab chemists

cyanureeves - 26-10-2010 at 14:23

in the book the history of chemistry.i read that as late as the 1800's i believe.some top chemists did not even believe in compound structure symbols and were quite satisfied with archived compounds and how to derive them like recipes.something science madness shuns.the ones who believed in the structures of atoms and such werent even in agreement with each other.the non believers actually had their own notion.most of them the first ones were backyard chemists.some were persecuted even as heretics.probably by the f.b.i.

23 000 year ago fireworks

The WiZard is In - 26-10-2010 at 15:55

On account that the PDF of the complete article is toooo
big, I have just scanned this. Contact me if'n you want
the complete PDF, a bit over 2-Meg.

Paleo-fireworks.jpg - 240kB

[Edited on 26-10-2010 by The WiZard is In]

Mister Junk Pile - 26-10-2010 at 18:05

2 megabytes is no longer a significant amount of information.

The WiZard is In - 26-10-2010 at 19:11

Quote: Originally posted by Mister Junk Pile

2 megabytes is no longer significant amount of information.

Upload size limit is 2MB. Image limit is 800x3000.

Dem's da rules here.

Say .... what is the relationship between sizeand a
significant amount of information?

E=MC squared. Do be - despite its brevity a SL of information.

This could be expanded to what happens to information in a
black hole and Hawking radiation......

Mister Junk Pile - 26-10-2010 at 19:39

But of course. I was unaware of the upload limit, hence my remark. Still, the way you worded your sentence made it look like you thought it was "tooo big" (mainly b/c of the extra 'o').

Some people's minds are like black holes except they do not emit Hawking radiation. Information flows into them never to be regurgitated. Unless, of course, there is a big bang/crunch series. But still, the information is lost.

E = mc^2. What the hell does that even mean? Just because some supposedly smart guy made it up back in the 1800s doesn't mean you have to talk about it or that it's true. I saw it on a chalk board once and I thought it was about my favorite rapper: Dr. E MC square. Why would a "smart guy" from the 1800s copy off the greatest MCs of all time?

EDIT:

What is the relationship between ANYTHING and significance? A general consensus I would say. Otherwise, it can be given individual meaning. :cool:

[Edited on 10-27-2010 by Mister Junk Pile]

Chloroform

The WiZard is In - 27-10-2010 at 10:54

In 1831 Dr. [Md.] Samuel Guthrie at Sackets Harbor, New York
reading of Dutch chemists synthesis of 'choric ehter' / 'Dutch
liquid' (ethylene dichloride) reacted ethanol with chlorinated lime
used as a disinfectant in his hen house, independently discovering
chloroform. (Chloroform was that same year synthesized by
the German chemist Justus von Liebig the French pharmacist
Eugène Souberinan all three by different methods.)

For the early history of chloroform as an anesthetic —

Linda Stratmann
Chloroform : The Quest for Oblivion
Sutton Publishing Company UK 2003

Not seen by me :—

Dr. Samuel Guthrie, Discoverer of Chloroform:
Manufacturer of Percussion Pellets, Industrial Chemist 1782-1848
Jesse Randolph Pawling

Memoirs of Dr. Samuel Guthrie and the History of the Discovery of Chloroform ...
O. Guthrie, Henry M. Lyman

djh
----
The worst one [accident] was from
putting his hand into a keg containing
four pounds of percussion powder and
cracking a piece of of it between thumb
and finger. The friction set fire to the
powder and the resulting detonation
resulted in terrible burns to his hand and
arm, and tore most of the skin from his
chest, neck and face.... Altogether Gurthrie
was involved in eleven major explosions,
and was often seriously burned.

franklyn - 11-11-2010 at 16:44

Quote: Originally posted by Mister Junk Pile

2 megabytes is no longer a significant amount of information.

Depends on the information , read last paragraph here _
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=6299#p...

Who would guess the difference beyween an ape and a human is a floppy disk !

.

Sandmeyer - 10-12-2010 at 01:17

Some Russian made a powerful psychotropic in Siberian tundra, using OTC chemicals, in a place where he couldn't even flush a toilet... It was a Herculean task.

Magpie - 15-7-2011 at 15:25

Many of you are familiar with the achievements of the Nobel prize winner Robert B Woodward, one of the most famous chemists of the last century. What I recently learned was that as a youth he was quite the home chemist. According to Wiki:

"From a very early age, Woodward was attracted to and engaged in private study of chemistry while he attended the public primary and secondary schools of Quincy, Massachusetts. By the time he entered high school, he had already managed to perform most of the experiments in Ludwig Gattermann's then widely used textbook of experimental organic chemistry."

Alas, today poor Robert would be led away to prison in handcuffs and scorned by his neighbors. Thanks to all those who have made this possible: Terrorists, illicit drug makers, DEA, HS, media prostitutes, and the science illiterate public. :mad:

nagyepf - 6-9-2018 at 11:00

You shouldnt mention edickson as a chemist.He was a dishonest businessman who cheated Nikola Tesla with 50000$ and even ecectrocuted innocent animals.