Our Partners

chemistry main page

Welcome to the Chemistry Frontpage

Calixacrownophore

Sometimes I wonder about nanothiniee chemists. It’s like they have a pretty limited tool box or something with three things in there: crown ethers, calixarenes, and big carbon balls/tubes and, wherever possible, they put one of those things on something to make the newest and greatest “molecular elevator” or “pointless polymer with cool things attached.” Stoddart’s bread and butter, if you will. It is in this spirit, I assume, Jong Seung Kim and Rae Cho hit up their latest contraption in J Org Chem (DOI: 10.1021/jo0610098) where, not satisfied with simply having ONE nanothingiee, they put TWO nanothingiees in there and, amazingly, the molecule does crap (another group did that here).

Firstly of all, this paper is an exposition on the use of two-photon microscopy, which gingerly punches the poo out of a molecule (but its gentle about it) as opposed to one-photon fluorescence, which does the same thing, but it works with shitty diode lasers and doesn’t get nearly as high energy emission out of the thing. I don’t really understand it but the molecule is an accessory, I think, to this greater idea. (If it is an accessory, it-s the friggin- Prada purse that perfectly matches those Manolo Blahniks stilettos you got, girl!) *ahem*- Basically, the guy works like a pair of tweezers. The glowieness of the molecule is messed up when those two arms (labeled crap 3) are together because of pi-pi stacking (see here and here) but when you bind something like Al3+z or Pb2+ to those amides (crap 2) those two arms are pulled apart and glowieness occurs. Now, if you toss K+ in there, it will obviously hit up the crown ether, which will pull the calixarene apart and promote the ultimate power of the Pb2+ (The aluminum needs no help, it’s already too hard core and kicks y’alls asses six days from Sunday.) This folks, is what they’re calling an allosteric promoter, which I had never heard of as referred to any sort of nanothingiee. So, perhaps this is novel, maybe ever JACS material. Had they done it in an ionic liquid, it would have gotten a Nature cover.

Ronald Breslow wants you to vote for Josef Michl. I want you to vote for Joseph Francisco!

As interesting topics are often created for me in the comments section, so was this. Ronald Breslow sent many of us an email shilling for Josef Michl as ACS president. The other candidate, who still hasn-t gotten a shout out, is Joseph S. Francisco, who could easily loan the other Josef a vowel for his last name, at least until the election is over.

I-m frankly confused as to why I got this email. I-m even further confused why the -to- address is acs@columbia. edu. My first reaction was -This is a mistake-- It seems to me like it would be odd for a well respected scientist to use a listserv to push his own political agenda - even if that agenda is simply as naive as getting my friend elected. Maybe I-m a cynic, but there-s no such thing as altruism in politics. You vote -cause you got some interest in a candidate-s policies - you endorse so you can get control in a candidate-s policies.

New Linkers and Polymer-supported Reagents for Organic Synthesis

Dr. A. Ganesan, School of Chemistry, University of Southampton, UK will present the following seminar at the eCombiChem “Cutting Edge Technologies in Combinatorial Chemistry” Web Conference running at http://ecombichem. com/, and opening 20th September 2004:

New Linkers and Polymer-supported Reagents for Organic Synthesis

Warming Shit Up To Bacon part two of three

The salute to Tenderbutton continues…

Cooking shit up like bacon is a good way to get cancer and die. While it’s profound and sexy to cook shit up just like bacon, especially in the lab; perhaps you would rather roast shit up just like pre-microwaved calf liver.

Jolt Chicken

I get up at the ass crack of noon everyday at the perpetual protest of my body. I am simply not functional until I’ve consumed my first cup of coffee. Then, from there, I’ll usually consume anywhere from one to three liters of Coke products in a given day and crash it all out with a glass or two or four of red wine at night. While I’ve known, for as long as memory serves me, why ethanol ends up in my evening wine, I’ve never known, or honestly given a shit, as to why caffeine is in my coffee and cola. I suppose my innate assumption was, as should be with anyone of Anglican decent, it was simply put there for me to enjoy. Lo and behold, it’s a stone cold killa’ of bacteria and it was probably put there for the plant and not my pasty American ass.

S. A. Ibrahim’s recent publication in Food Chem. (2006, 99, 645-650) gives us a new and wonderful idea as to why the hell the plant started to make this wonderful, wonderful drug that I’m hopelessly addicted to. The results of Ibrahim’s study shows that concentrations as low as 0.1% retard E. coli O157:H7 (bad stuff) growth. Inhibition, however, doesn’t become meaningful until the total concentration of caffeine is increased to 1.75-2.00%. Now, bearing in mind that a cup of coffee will typically have about.004%, the journey to consume something that is 2% caffeine is, you know, something stupid drug addicts and system administrators would do. But, nevertheless, the world needs some way to safely inoculate things against deadly bacteria but not with “artificial compounds” and since we already load our poultry up on antibiotics now, why don’t we simply give them a 5 or 10% solution of caffeine?