Sciencemadness Discussion Board - Mad Science at the max, where do you draw the line?

Mad Science at the max, where do you draw the line?

BromicAcid - 13-6-2004 at 15:57

Sorry if there is another older thread on this but searching for this topic proved to be difficult.

I was thinking today, "You know what, potassium bifluoride is pretty cheap, maybe I could set up a fluorine generator, use electrolysis, yeah, that's the ticket! Then I could use the fluorine directly, or.... I could react it with xenon to make xenon difluoride and react that with bromate to make perbromates!"

Then I stopped in my tracks, "Do I really want to work with fluorine, it's so toxic, and reactive, and what am I going to keep it in, I'm going to need special alloys and such and new safety equipment and..." So that was the end of that line of thought..... for now.

Regardless, what would all of you consider too crazy to attempt. It used to be that I thought molten NaOH was incredibly dangerous, but now I don my gloves and kick up the burner and I don't give it hardly a second thought, I'm always mindful of the dangers but, things keep going further and further. The distillation of a mixture of KClO4 with H2SO4 under reduced pressure is looking feasable....

Anyone here been tempted to make ethyl perchlorate

I know many of you have, and there are innumerable other dangerous ventures that many of us have considered. So what wouldn't you do, what would scare you to attempt? Some of it might get you laughed at or make the readers go "Yeah, I wouldn't do that either..." but it's all in good fun!

The_Davster - 13-6-2004 at 16:27

Well, back in my early pyro days I decided to make nitroglycerin. But after I had added the glycerin to the mixed acids I chickened out. I was really freaking out even though I had made TATP before without incident and it is more sensitive than nitro. I was probally fearing it becuase of all the media attention it gets as "incredibly unstable". So I had read on megas site to destroy nitro with a solution of sodium hydroxide and ethanol. But stupidly I neglected to realize that you mix the sodium hydroxide/ethanol mix with the nitro After it has been extracted. So guess what I do... Yup concentrated basic solution poured right into the mixed acids. And of course this shoots acid all over and luckily I was able to jump away without any hitting me. Then due to the heat produced the nitration goes runaway and copius ammounts of NO2 are emmited. It did not detonate luckily.

Keep in mind this was many years ago and I havent slipped or chickened out like that since.

[Edited on 14-6-2004 by rogue chemist]

Darkfire - 13-6-2004 at 16:39

Hahaha ive sliped like that, i decided to destroy some mn2o7 i made, befor ei flushed it down the drain, i simply ran it under the sink and predictibly, the thing blast boiling h2so4 and kmno4 all over me and the sink...

~H

JustMe - 13-6-2004 at 17:35

Ha, ha indeed. Thirty years ago (when it was a lot easier to obtain chemicals and glassware and I was much younger and fool hardy and intensely interested in chemistry as a hobby), I mixed up some salt, potassium dichromate and sulfuric acid in a retort and distilled off Chromyl Chloride (neat dark red liquid resembling Bromine).

The foolish part was putting a little of the liquid in a petri dish (behind a small concrete wall) and allowing a couple of mL of anhydrous alcohol to drip out of a pipette onto it.

Incredible whoooooosh and very high flames. The dumb part? (as if I hadn't already done it) Was pouring water over the wall to put out the flame. You see, Cr02Cl2 reacts explosively with water.... duh! Good thing I had the wall there!

Those were the days. (Even made H2Te... nasty, evil smelling substance... amazing I'm still alive) But even if I could have gotten fluorine, I wouldn't have. More power to you.

Darkfire - 13-6-2004 at 18:41

Hahaha things like that are like memorys worth having though, little bloopers that we can look back on, with all 10 fingures.

BromicAcid - 13-6-2004 at 18:52

So Rogue Chemist chickened out from nitroglycerine, Darkfire got paranoid from Mn2O7, and JustMe had a mishap with CrO2Cl2 and wouldn't touch fluorine.

Surprisingly enough I kind of have a paranoia of making potassium. I've read stories of superoxides causing explosions unexpectedly and ripping off fingers. Also organic mercury compounds have always been intriguing because of their toxicity, although that is the main reason I don't think I'll ever make dimethyl mercury.

I've never really aborted while already conducting a reaction but I have got those sinking feeling moments where I think something is going to go wrong for sure. Like one time when I was doing electrolysis in nitrobenzene and the two electrodes touched and a huge spark jumped across and the electrodes fused together. I remembered that dinitrotoluene despite it's extremely poor oxygen balance can detonate and in a split second I was totally to paranoia. Also I worry about oxidizers at high temps, for example, I would not heat chlorates to decompose and form perchlorates. Also molten nitrates are freaky, got some on a glove once and it instantly burst into flame. I also worry that I'll heat them too high and a catalytic breakdown might ensue resulting in deflagration of the mixture.... jeeze, I sound like a worry wart.....

So where does everyone else draw the line, what won't you do in the name of mad science?

Cyrus - 13-6-2004 at 19:51

I don't mind working with things that are corrosive, like conc. H2SO4, molten NaOH, etc- it's just skin (usually) that you can lose.

I would not worry a bit about peroxides from potassium and other "tame" stuff, like thermites, black powder, burning most liquids, etc. However, I draw the line at nitroglycerin and similar stuff. Haven't made any of that.
Yet...

I don't mind bad smells.
Unless they are brain damaging.

I like very hot/cold temperatures. As long as I am not the object at the high temperatures.

I like high/low pressures. ie water rockets- I can remember once when a rocket sprang a leak with a big pow sound. I just stood there, seeing that nothing would happen (I knew the rocket had a weak spot) while my friend went into air raid mode, covered his ears, and bounded about 10 yards away, before he realized that the rocket had not actually done much besides leak water.

But then again, he has had rockets
explode in his closed garage while he is in there, and then put (small) craters in his roof.

I try not to work too much with compounds that will lower my IQ a lot,
or kill me, or fill me with glass/metal shards. I wouldn't mind flourine, but I would have to be very sure that the apparatus was going to hold.

And I am PLANNING to do some stuff with molten nitrates.

EDIT: I like high volts, but not high watts.
I hate radioactive things. They give me the creeps. Is Barium Carbonate radioactive? I have some, how should I store it?

[Edited on 14-6-2004 by Cyrus]

DDTea - 13-6-2004 at 21:09

I'm scared of Dimethyl Sulfate. Yes, it's a common and mundane chemical... but it's a vicious carcinogen and a nasty nasty poison.

On that note, I'm scared of Mustards too--sulfur, nitrogen, sesqui, all of them. I just don't like carcinogens. However, I wouldn't mind attempting the Phosgene Oxime synthesis.

Poisons don't scare me so much--the trick is to just avoid exposure; and if you are exposed, the treatment is often straight forward. Furthermore, work only in tiny amounts--this is a given. I am terrified of carcinogens and mutagens though...I don't like the thought of getting some freaky deforming and uncurable disease later in life, or having children born without arms and missing half their face..

Highly Toxic Organophosphates are things I don't want to deal with. The actual poisoning is not what scares me, but the long-term physical and mental effects of them.

Explosives are a no-go for me. I hate the thought of losing fingers.

Basically, as long as it won't cause long-term permanent damage to me, I will go for it. Death doesn't count, as the threat of it just adds to the thrill

IvX - 14-6-2004 at 06:43

I've made most 'unstable' explosives except ethyl perchlorate.Thought about making percholric acid but I only made it as far a getting the KCLO4 out of the bag

That about it unless you count the time I stuck a cigeret in a pile of AP(to this day I still have no idea how it got there).

Theoretic - 14-6-2004 at 07:14

Hmmm, you don't need special alloys to handle fluorine. Monel metal, nickel or just plain copper will do.

If you want to make it by electrolysis, you would use graphite electrodes and Cu/Ni/monel apparatus... just my ideas.

I don't know anything so dangerous I can do that I wouldn't dare trying, so I don't have a problem.

Oxydro - 14-6-2004 at 13:06

Pretty much the only things I wouldn't do, are work with chemicals that might do brain damage, carcinogens, and mutagens, and stay for long periods around significant radioactivity. Plus I'd be damn careful making very large batches of anything explosive.

I don't think there are any really hard rules though, I'd do anything if it was fun enough and I thought I'd get away with it.

Darkfire - 14-6-2004 at 13:28

Large amounts of explosives dont scare me, its the middle of small and big that scares me, i dont wanna lose a hand id rather go in one blast.

hodges - 14-6-2004 at 16:23

I don't work with poisons - especially the ones you can't even tell you've been exposed to until it is too late. Granted, things like NaOH and HNO3 are poisons, but if you spill a drop of these on you you'll have no trouble knowing it before it is too late. Something like copper sulfate may be somewhat poisionous, but if you get a small quantity in a cut or in your mouth accidentally its not going to kill you. I won't mess with lead salts (lead metal is okay) or mercury or cyanides (cyanide complexes like FeCN OK). I tend to fear organic chemicals, because I know little about them. Also many are volatile and I have a fear of the vapor catching on fire, say from a leak in a storage container.

I'm generally not afraid to make explosives, even very unstable ones like NI3 and Ag3N. I just assume it could and probably will explode at any time and accordingly take precautions and make very small (0.1g or less) amounts. Likewise thermites (1g or less - I would do more if I had a place to experiment outside).

I bought some sodium on E-Bay and have messed with it. I've also made my own sodium by electrolysis of NaOH. However, I find I have to be so careful when working with sodium that I don't really enjoy doing it very often. Calcium is fun though. I'll likely never mess with white phosphorous due to the toxicity and fire hazard of dropping tiny pieces.

The_Davster - 14-6-2004 at 18:19

I just realized my first post was kinda off topic

so...
I dont mind working with explosives, I never make more of any then can be used in a few sensitivity tests and other types of testing. Surprisingly I never really got into making large charges like some do. I would probally do larger except I dont really have an area for suitable testing.
I absolutely will not work with carcinogens, mutagens, or extremely toxic compounds. Despite benzene being so very usefull it is just something that I have set a limit on and told myself I will not work with it unless it is in a professional/university lab, not my basement one. Any cyanide compound I simply will not work with under any circumstances.
Radioactive substances, I will work with any that only emmit alpha, never with any that emmit gamma or neutron and substances that emmit beta I would work with only if really necessary.

BromicAcid - 14-6-2004 at 18:38

Out of all the chems I have, my white phosphorus gives me the heebie-jeebies more then anything. My 5 kg of KClO4 is pretty intimidating as well.

So Theoretic, I remembered the name Monel metal as being one of the choice materials for working with F2 however I forgot the composition, it's mostly nickel? I might be able to fabricate something from nickel. I know you're supposed to run a steady stream of F2 though it to make an unreactive surface coating but other then that Ni would work on its own? Then react the F2 with Co and make CoF3 which I can later decompose with heat to form F2 at will.... (Theoretically of course, in case I get over my paranoia

)

Seems many people don't like poisons or especially mutagens. I don't blame you. I've never really shown much concern for them though in relation to the dangers they pose.

Quote:

Is Barium Carbonate radioactive? I have some, how should I store it?

I don't think it is to any extent worth noting. Mine is still in the paper bag it came in from the pottery supply although I would prefer a wide mouth HDPE jar. Just remember soluble barium salts are toxic and make you sick pretty quick.

Boiling sulfuric acid makes me nervous....

Saerynide - 15-6-2004 at 00:03

For me, I wont mess with extremely toxic stuff like cyanides, lead salts, or mercury. Carcinogens also scare me. I hate the thought of being destined to die 20 years down the road without even knowing it. Explosives scare me the most though. The thought of dealing with something that can blow up anytime in my face and take parts of me with it is just too horrible.
I don't like halogens either. Chlorine has left me forever scared of it, but I'll use it if I have to (just very hesitantly and nervously). Iodine isnt so bad, but Im still kinda edgy around it. Br and F are not things I even wanna touch.

PS: Boiling drain cleaner is VERY scary shit

Cyrus - 15-6-2004 at 10:39

I have to say, carcinogens/mutagens/randomevilthingstoyourbodygens scare me too. Man am I careful while handling my CrO3! It's stored in a glass bottle in a plastic bag on a shelf with a special safety lip to keep it from falling off.

Insidious gasses like HCN are bothering, but I like chlorine, and am looking for some sodium bromide to make bromine.
And if "plain old" nickel will take fluorine, I might have to get some calcium fluoride from the pottery store.

Not yet though...

Theoretic - 16-6-2004 at 01:25

Monel metal is mostly nickel and copper, with some other stuff, for better mechanic properties.
Nickel gets an inert fluoride coating when in contact with fluorine pretty quickly, copper too. Apparently Monel is preferred because it forms a stronger layer, but let me just Google a bit...

Ah yes, steel will work also. :cool:

Inthis order from least to most resistant : (but all will work fine, even Cu vessels are used for electrolysis and subsequent handling) copper, steel, nickel, Monel metal.
Graphite electrodes (NOT carbon) are used.
If you want to make something with it, make OF2 by reacting with an alkali superoxide. Much better that the traditional method of reacting with alkali, yield twice as big for fluorine spent.
Fluorine is easily detectable by odour, at very low concentrations, namely 20 ppb, which is 50 times less than the maximum tolerable concentration for 8 hours every day.

Now I hope that disspelled your paranoia.

Good luck, and send us some pics of the weird and wonderful yellow gas.

[Edited on 16-6-2004 by Theoretic]

axehandle - 16-6-2004 at 03:55

For me, I draw the line at nerve agents, strong carcinogens or poisons, and highly radioactive materials. Large HE destructive devices goes here as well.

I also don't do anything that at the given time has the possibility of hurting anyone else apart from me.

Star - 16-6-2004 at 07:44

For me there are no limits.

The only limit i can think of is apparatus aquisition and stuf,which comes down to Ching Ching.And there are always enough ways to get to the Ching Ching.Why ever would madscience be --=Mad=--science.The people in the labs would be more mad than you guys,since they WILL work with carcinogens and poisens and the like,and you all will not.

Wanna draw lines? Get a pensil and start writing.

But, man i Do have respect for all those people writing in this thread about the experiments and synthesis's described below...

'WOW'

~Notoriously AWEsome~

axehandle - 16-6-2004 at 08:06

Quote:

For me there are no limits.

I don't believe you. Would you, say, create a nuclear device and detonate it in your house if you could?

Saerynide - 16-6-2004 at 08:44

You seem extremely cocky... Before you start calling us whimps, consider the fact that, maybe some of us understand the value of one's life. Moreover, maybe some of us cannot afford to risk those around us? :mad:

Star - 16-6-2004 at 10:28

Wow Ms. Saernyde,Please lets keep it 'friendly'[hehe] .Cocky , i think ,is somewhat animate...I am not some kind of beast running around ,showing of my ass...

I ,seriously, didnt ment to call you all whimps.I admire the experiments and the synthesis that you all ,including you Ms.saernide and Mr. axehandle , described and carried out.I only can dream of the chemicals and the aparatus that yall have and therefore you may be having a point when you would say ' you wouldnt understand the dangers' .
But I dont think, you or anbody else could better understand the risks than me per se,because this varies from person to person.

I think i have seen enough~ to understand,at least seen more than some others,the dangers of this kind of a thing.

I just wanted to point out that you dont have to be a madman to be a madscientist.

There all kinds of furnuture and apparatus that can protect you .If i would be able to protect myself to a certain degree, no danger could stop me from synthesizing any compound, and no ,not even a nuclear RARA~ ,because the risk simply would be reduced to a minimal.
And off course not~ ,i would in no way detonate the nuc' anywhere ,anytime!

The nuclear RARA simply wouldnt be much of a fun , to be honest.Should I,because i can make somekind of conventional explosive,build a huge bomb with it and detonate it in front of my house???

Interesting though, would be to use somekind of nuclear energy to induce electricity, smallsize!
Radiation is to be shielded off,off course.

And ,almost forgot,Watch Out for the car that is doing a 100 miles,it could kill you.This doesn't mean you stop walking along highways to get to your house,or does it?And if you werent ,this wouldnt mean you would walk a midst the road.Just watch out for the car that is going fast and even more for the car that is going faster.

Sorry for the miss-spelling...

[Edited on 16-6-2004 by Star]

axehandle - 16-6-2004 at 10:41

Wow, Mr Mis-spell... grow up. We were (although I can only speak for myself) merely opposing your statement that you had NO limits (which is logically impossible).

Edit: Besides, Saerynide is a Ms, not a Mr.

[Edited on 2004-6-16 by axehandle]

Star - 16-6-2004 at 10:46

I havent.

axehandle - 16-6-2004 at 10:48

Quote:

I havent.

Haven't what?

Seen pink elephants? Smoked crack? Had sex?

Star - 16-6-2004 at 11:01

The pink elephants!

of course~Duhh~

What were we writing about in all those previous posts?

axehandle - 16-6-2004 at 11:02

You stated that you had "no limits". I pointed this out as a logical fallacy, and you replied with "I havent" (sic).

Star - 16-6-2004 at 11:27

Well , then it just depends on how you define the word 'limit'.
-1-You can take it as an all-incorporating word.Which gives a possibility of doing insane things.

-2-You can also ,like i did and most of us did[though i can only speak for myself]take it as the limits within , logical thought.

The second definition wouldnt incorporate the possibility of someone blowing him or herself up.

Within that logical and sane thought, the statement 'havent got limit' wouldnt be a logical fallacy'.

Me saying that i havent got limits doesnt mean i ll just blow my self HighSky.

Like i said it depends on how you define things.

axehandle - 16-6-2004 at 11:34

The "logical thought" meaning of the word actually implies your 1st definition, but never mind. Let's get back on topic and forget about the misunderstanding, OK?

Star - 16-6-2004 at 11:50

The difference between the 1 st and second definition is :the first incorporates Everything. The second doesnt ,it only incorporates logical 'sane' things.Everything conducted in a lab anywere is sane,i think. And therefore within my possibilities.Therefore i dont have a limit,because sanity itself is my limit~!

But Let It Be and Let It Rest.

Ok.Lets just get back on topic,whatever that may incorporate{hihihi}.

--=HUG=--

Eliteforum - 16-6-2004 at 11:53

Draw the line? I'm so far past the line that it's just a faint dot on the horizon..

Quantum - 7-8-2004 at 17:37

I am not going to work with very radioactive stuff, explosives that weigh more than I do(no drums of ANFO in a field) or nerve agents and stuff like that.

Sarevok - 7-8-2004 at 20:35

Nothing is "mad" enough, as long as you have adequate protection and skill.

trinitrotoluene - 7-8-2004 at 22:23

Certain things I will avoid. Making explosives dosn't scare me too much, unless they are super senistive, like NI3. Other than that I've made 50 grams of AP before.

I will not work with nerve agents, too toxic. Another thing that scares me are heavy metals and their salts. They tend to bio-accumulate, and don't leave your system so it stays with you for a long time. I will avoid working with mercury. I have a jar sealed away.

CommonScientist - 7-8-2004 at 23:41

Hmm, havnt thought about this, I guess I have. No nuclear shit, nerve agents, carcinogins, excessibe amounts of HE's, etc, along those lines.

I only make stuff to see how it reacts etc, unless Im going to make it for doing a job, like some NC for a stump or something.

As far as I see it, you guys define the term "mad scientist", some of that stuff you guys mention I couldnt dream of making.

Nick F - 8-8-2004 at 07:35

The line is somewhere between fluoroacetates and nerve agents, I think.
And I generally hate organometallics containing transition metals.
I like radioactive things, as long as they're not radioactive enough to cause thermal burns

neutrino - 22-8-2004 at 09:51

For me, the limit is things that will do me loing-lasting damage (sensitive explosives, carcinogens, heavy metal salts, etc). I have no reservations about working with stuff that can just temporarily do harm. That includes gasses that I can smell before they kill me, including ammonia, chlorine, bromine (it fumes a lot, so I consider it a gas), etc).

unionised - 27-8-2004 at 13:38

Nick F
Where do you get your vitamin B12 from if you don't like organometalics containing transition metals?
Presumably, not many of us worry that we and our friends are radioactive.

I think that the point has been made, it's quite possible to do most things safely provided that you take care. The question is "what risks are we prepared to accept and what equipment have we got to offset those risks."
I wouldn't work with nerve agents at home but at work I probably would. That way I get paid and (more importantly) the facillities are ther to do it safely.

(Safe is always a relative term, if somethng can go wrong you are not absolutely safe. While you are alive, you can die. The only way to be safe is to be dead). Someone should explain this to politicians who keep asking "Is it safe?".

mick - 29-8-2004 at 09:21

Just like to mention something I did many years ago, did not see any problem then.
When I was 15, I went from the UK to France to stop with a family who ran a hardware shop and their friends ran a pharmacy. When they found out I liked chemicals they gave me everything for free, stuff I could not get in the UK at that age. When I came back on the plane on my own, I had in my hand luggage 1litre conc HCl + 130 vol H2O2, 250ml conc nitric + conc sulfuric, potassium chlorate, potassium bromide and iodide, some stuff with mercury in it + others. Luckily nothing leaked, the container were nothing special and no one check my hand luggage.
Mick

Draw the line

MadHatter - 29-8-2004 at 19:46

That's easy - unpredictable primary explosives and most poisons.

n-methyl-fentanyl

Hermes_Trismegistus - 29-8-2004 at 21:01

When I first started doing chemistry, It seemed as if there were no limits. Chemistry was synonymous with sorcery.

And of course the most accessible websites with the best pictures and easy to understand instructions were illustrating unlawful activities.

It seems that doing harmful and destructive things will always be easier than doing useful and productive stuff.

sigh.

Anyway, It certainly did more than pass through my mind to synthesize the high profit margin chemicals for resale and thereby better my lot and fund my fancies.

I wondered long and hard about it.

But by giving it more thought, I began to really see the evil in what I was considering.

Money for nothing sounds lovely, but I like being able to look in the mirror when I shave without wanting to spit in my own face.

The pyramid scheme of drug dealing depends on exploiting the weakness of the feebleminded and weakwilled and no decent person would have any part of the very real suffering and misery that come with it.

I used to walk by junkies on Hastings + Main in Vancouver. Shambling wrecks and skeletons that looked as if they came out of some cheap horror film, and smelled like they were dead. I was a teenager at the time and naturally just looked at them as lesser life forms to be kicked out of my way or taunted and humiliated.

They were almost universally fearful, like stray cats, and guys I worked with would sometimes beat up a few after a hard night of drinking at the local bar (the Ivanhoe). They were so used to being tormented and victimized they would hardly even protest much less report the assaults.

Now; I don't have any more respect for junkies than I used to. But I also don't want to add any more fuel to that particular fire.

There is no profit in it, only loss.

so that is where I will draw the line.

Hermes.

Polverone - 29-8-2004 at 22:40

Quote:

Money for nothing sounds lovely, but I like being able to look in the mirror when I shave without wanting to spit in my own face.

Ah, don't worry Hermes. Even if you'd wanted to tread that path you probably would've discovered before long that it's not really "money for nothing." The fentanyl doesn't just fall out of trees! It seems to be more like "money for a lot of work and stress," for those who sell their products. I know of at least one case where a person with reasonable chemistry experience thought he was going to whip up a few moles of methamphetamine in a couple of weeks and live like a clandestine prince. Instead he suffered from lachrymator inhalation, wounds from flying glass, and the loss of many personal possessions when a procedure went wrong.

Clandestine chemistry-for-profit seems to be for the desperate, the greedy, and the foolhardy. In theory, it looks like there's a lot of easy money to be made. In reality, I think it's harder to imagine a more stressful job than "clandestine chemist." I don't have the foggiest idea how one would go about reliably and anonymously selling the output of one's drug lab. I suspect the answer involves compromising anonymity or reliability. What a lot of hassle when there are already so many legal jobs available to the technically skilled!

mick - 30-8-2004 at 00:58

Where I work they are trying to make anti-cancer, anti-TB etc stuff (some promising stuff on the TB front). When some people find out what I do its WOW can you make ........The answer is yes if I wanted to, probably be easy compared to the other stuff I have made, but no because, followed by a list of what ifs and anyway why would I want to mess up my dream job.
When a chemical is dropped because it has been found to kill not just cancer cells but just about every other type of cell, its amazing how you start being very careful with the stuff rather than treat it as just another chemical.
Being able to control an explosion or exothermic reaction is practically useful sometimes.
Mick

S.C. Wack - 1-2-2005 at 10:03

The US carcinogen list was updated yesterday; some additions to the "reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen" list:

Naphthalene, "lead and lead compounds", cobalt sulfate, nitrobenzene, and nitromethane.

Far more hazardous IMO is telling things to people that you don't want to be known. For some reason people do this even though we find from an early age that this never turns out well, and this is learned repeatedly until we finally get it.

tom haggen - 1-2-2005 at 10:35

Well, I have to say browsing through this I would have to say that some of you are in the wrong field of work. Now that I'm learning a little about chemistry, I am fascinated with halogens. Anybody that would never want to work with halogens has to be crazy, with the exception of fluorine of course. Bromine however is a beautiful element. I'm particularly nervous about the idea of working around mercury vapors. Nerve agents are very fucking scary. I don't really mind HE, I actually feel quite comfortable around them. I'm some what of a natural in this field. However, dangerous primaries scare the shit out of me. I'm always paranoid that I’m going to lose a finger. Placing a detonator isn't very fun either. Actually nitrobenzene sounds particularly dangerous. I've herd reports of fatalities from people wearing clothing contaminated with this explosive.

[Edited on 1-2-2005 by tom haggen]

hey, chillax

budullewraagh - 1-2-2005 at 13:37

just a note to you kids, fluorine will attack copper, nickel, etc, even platinum. you have to realize that any fluorine gas you produce will be wet to a degree and the fluorine will self-catalyze fluorination using small amounts of HF

i am careful with what i do and i research everything i do. i'm skittish around my lab often. my first exposure to chlorine gas was bad because i got an entire breathful and i coughed for two minutes. the last time i worked with chlorine however, i was actually fine despite being exposed to quite a bit of it and i suppose i dont mind it much.

i hate HI fumes, H2S and SO2.
i would never make organophosphates and highly toxic compounds as mentioned above. cyanides? no. i also don't like explosives. i hate bromine. i fear 97% sulfuric acid. the oleum that is evolved is moderately disturbing, then theres the prospect of spilling it et al.

neutrino - 1-2-2005 at 14:40

Fluorine will attack most metals, but it usually forms a passivating fluoride coating which resists further corrosion. Oxygen does the same thing to aluminum.

budullewraagh - 1-2-2005 at 14:54

yeah, but there will surely be water in your fluorine and hydrogen fluoride would continue the attack beyond the fluoride layer

BromicAcid - 1-2-2005 at 15:17

That's why you would normally heat the potassium bifluoride before initiating the cell to drive off H2O, you then pass the fluorine formed over sodium or potasisum fluoride which removes the hydrogen fluoride from the gas stream as the bifluoride. The apparatus from Inorganic Synthesis says that it can run for years with no need for part replacement, the high temperature cell I described in the fluorine thread doesn't even need the HF trap, the high temperature process produces very little gaseous HF.

From me June 2004

Quote:

The distillation of a mixture of KClO4 with H2SO4 under reduced pressure is looking feasable....

It was only 2.5 months later that I tried this, then tried it again, and again. And my reasearch on orgaic perchlorates continues, and the fluorine cell.... well... you'll all see one of these days... and then there was that huge Castner cell disaster and the Downs cell I've been working on. Phosgene though, I had to draw the line there, I did not want to use a war gas, no matter how useful, in synthesis.

Oh, and on the subject of bromine, as I've said before I's my favorite halogen, and I like it's slightly sweet biting smell, and it's so very beutiful, I'm currently stockpiling it

[Edited on 2/1/2005 by BromicAcid]

budullewraagh - 1-2-2005 at 15:35

if you want to do the fluorine thing, go for it. personally i find fluorine to be far more dangerous than phosgene, but hey that's me. if you do the fluorine thing, good luck, because any mistakes and you're dead

Reverend Necroticus Rex - 2-2-2005 at 16:24

I tend to draw the line at really volatile toxins, such as HCN, and gaseous phosphines.

I have often contemplated fluorine, I would quite like actually, to have a crack at it, but it would have to be done with the utmost care.

Its the unstable primary explosives I don't much care for, I have no real interest in pyro as a hobby, occasionally perhaps, but its just not my sort of thing.

Kman100 - 2-2-2005 at 19:02

Where to draw the line? I'd have to say building a nuclear bomb.

YT2095 - 17-1-2007 at 04:42

I`ve been searching/reading up on HCN all morning and found this.

I have an amount of NaCN coming soon, as for limits, I have to confess this chem is right up to the wire for me, I`m scared of it a little now, because I don`t know all I feel I need to know about this chem just yet, so it will stay safely locked away until I learn more.

Organic toxins are a no no for me with the exception of Glyphosate and X-Methrins.
unstable explosives in any quantity are also out the question.
large unprotected/sheilded amounts of Radioactive materials are also to avoid, although alpha, beta don`t worry me too much, Neutrons and Gamma would require better equipment than I have.

Carcinogens aren`t typically a problem for me, as most all that I have are metal salts and never used in large amounts.

DMSO, although harmless in itself, I don`t want it in the Lab at all (not least because I have no use for it anyway), the concept of that stuff freaks me out on several different levels.

Drugs, esp anything mind altering scares the crap out of me more than anything else on the list, it`s a genuine Phobia, even hospital anaesthetics I won`t accept, it`s local or epidural only, never KO!

Sauron - 17-1-2007 at 05:03

Pertinent to the subject of working with elemental F, about eight years ago I was sitting at my dining table listening to another expat who was into semiprecious (gem)stones, prattle on about hsi researches into the proprietary processes used by Thai and Sri Lankan businesses in such things to improve or alter the color of stones to make them more valuable. I was really only half listening as I was not very interested in the subject, but, at one point it sank in to me that this fellow was actually planning to obtain some sort of pressurized oven to cook these stones in an atmosphere of fluorine gas, at elevated temperature and pressure, and he was going to do it in a residential environment.

At that point I held up my hand and said "You are mad." And I gave him my reasons, which hardly need to be articulated here. He did not seem to be in the slightest concerned with the hazards of fluorine, which is bad enough at STP, but hot angry higher pressure F is something that made me shudder.

Anyway the discussion terminated not long thereafter, which was fine because I was afraid he was trying to tap me for an investment in this hairbrained scheme.

I've done my share of foolish risky chemistry, but this was an occasion when the better part of valor worked in my favor.

NB to above

After some reflection I believe that the fellow's story was that presently and historically the stones were being cooked in molten salt baths containing (ionic) fluorine e.g. simple or complex inorg. fluorides. And that his proposal was to replace that procedure with elemental F gas at elevated pressure and temperature. And basically my reply was "Contained in what?" because Fluorine has this charming tendency to eat everything which is why working with it requires very special equipment and procedures.

For example, if Dupont had not come up with fluorocarbon polymers at the juncture they did, the UF6 process (Oak Ridge) could not have been done. Similarly, the German effort to make (pilot plant scale) F-containing nerve agents was hampered because they were working in silver lined vessels and they weren't even using elemental F, just HF and salts. No fluoropolymers you see. Thus they had a full size production of the non-F containing Tabun but neither Sarin nor Soman despite having invented these.

This guy wanted to work at temperatures above those that PTFE would tolerate. Madness!

[Edited on 18-1-2007 by Sauron]

woelen - 17-1-2007 at 11:53

I'm not really scared of toxic substances, e.g. I work quite comfortably with HCl, HBr, SO2, NH3, Cl2, Br2. What does really scare me are the chems, which have cumulative and/or long-term effects. If a chemical is a 'honest' poison, which lets me know that it is poisonous, then I can work with it.

E.g. working with volatile carcinogenic compounds, which are not bad at their use, but which may do damage in the long run make me feel uncomfortable.

I'm also VERY careful with high explosives. I never make more than tens of mg of such compounds, and I never store them. Also very fast burning mixes I make in miniature amounts. But I do make them.

Jdurg - 17-1-2007 at 14:10

I really don't have a "line" per-se, but if it's a substance that I don't know a whole lot about or don't have any containment materials for, I simply won't use it. If I do enough research to know what I'm working with, then I won't be afraid. Being respectful of what you're working with won't get you hurt. Being afraid of what you're working with will almost ALWAYS get you hurt.

DeAdFX - 17-1-2007 at 14:23

At the moment I draw the line at distillations and simple chemical reactions (double/single displacement and acid bace neutralization). I need a fume hood to do more advanced chemistry. I have a limited resilience towards smelly fumes.

Ozone - 17-1-2007 at 18:13

What I will do depends completely on where I am. If I am at work, with certified hoods, safety equipment, etc. There is really nothing I would not do so long as the practice was well planned and potential mishaps stongly considered. OK, I will *not* do anything that would threaten my career, illicit pharmies or explosives (nuclear or otherwise), for example (unless required for a legit synthesis--I use diazomethane, hydrazine, azides, etc.). Radiotracers and ECD sources are OK (32P, 14C, 3H, 65Zn, 63Ni, 99Mo-99mTc, 137Cs-137mBa) and I am certified to handle them (although the paperwork required puts me off more than the radiological hazards).

At home, I am much more concerned about my wife and my cats than my curiosity. If my cat cannot be around it, it cannot be done (he avoids hot things, so distillation of things like EtOH is OK). It cannot escape my "workshop" (noticable by smell, etc.). You must be very careful to gather little (preferably none) attention to hobby science in N. America; this is a shame and a detriment to the education of future generations

.

Best of wishes to all,

O3

[Edited on 18-1-2007 by Ozone]

Fleaker - 17-1-2007 at 19:01

For me, any nerve agent or drug I will never, ever make. Also, no extreme radioactive materials of any kind like plutonium or polonium. They're fascinating but the toxicity is ridiculous. I am simply not set up for it, neither at home, nor in the professional laboratory.

As far as cyanides and extreme inorganic poisons, all halogens, deflagrators, primaries, extreme corrosives (including HF) are all fine so long as done on moderate scale with thoughtful preparation/safety evaluation/careful disposal. I had wanted to work with HF on a larger scale for a while, so I bought PTFE beakers, bottles, stir rods and other equipment. I think HClO4 is feasible as well, just that I would never try it with less than reagent grade materials and absolutely clean glassware (same of chromyl chloride).

It comes down to common sense and knowing your limits. Preparation and common sense are also paramount. The most important thing is chemical knowledge of what you're trying to do. I've had accidents before: bromine, manganese (VII) oxide, sodium, magnesium, and many more. These misadventures make me more cautious and conservative. Some things are just better to read about.

At the moment I'm just about ready to make cesium and rubidium metal. Oleum is on the horizon when I get a few more fittings for the stainless tubing. Eventually I'd like to make fluorine compounds like XeF2, but that'll have to wait till I have some spare cash to shell out for the xenon. Funny that xenon is several times more expensive than fluorine :\

Misanthropy - 17-1-2007 at 19:05

That stuff above is all well & good etc.. but I'm shooting for Humunculii. Once I achieve that, I'm done with chemistry. :cool:

Edit: Actually, once I clone myself I'll be done. I want to be able to send myself for pizza.

indigofuzzy - 17-1-2007 at 23:34

I draw the line wherever I stop feeling safe. For now, that rules out concentrated acids (until I'm equipped to handle them safely), cyanides, explosives, halogens (once again, until I'm equipped to handle them safely - then I want small amounts to put into gas discharge tubes [ooh pretty plasma!]), any toxic or nasty-smelling gasses, and anything much more radioactive than a smoke detector gives me the heebie-geebies, even though I'd love to see first-hand a sample of radium glowing in the dark.

Maya - 18-1-2007 at 12:12

Fleaker wrote:
At the moment I'm just about ready to make cesium and rubidium metal

Which method are you planning on for making these?
Ca metal, or dichromate or azide method?

Fleaker - 18-1-2007 at 18:04

@ I'm using calcium metal. At the moment, about 100g of RbCl will be reduced using a scaled up version of the method in Brauer's (available in the library). 1250g of CsCl will also be reduced. I'm starting with rubidium first. So far it's all in order sans the glass part. It will all be ampouled and the metal will never see argon, let alone air. I had a vacuum distillation receiver chosen (just like this 250mL http://aceglass.com/page.php?page=6638). But after talking to several people who've actually made and used cesium before and companies that specialize in making glass for high vacuum environments, I've decided to have the glass custom made for higher thickness and of a different type of glass to resist the metal. Apparently, Cs and Rb have no problems with borosilicate at room temperature (assuming there is no hydroxide present), but the vapor is a different story.

pantone159 - 18-1-2007 at 18:31

Distilling Cs metal does sound facinating. I'd expect that you'll end up coating the inside of the glass with a lovely golden colored film, at least until you clean the glassware. Have fun with that part.

dapper - 15-2-2007 at 14:01

I work with Sodium M-Arsenite and HgCl2...

Gotta say, the former scares the piss out of me. I don't breathe massing it.. and I probably wash my skin six or seven times.

MagicJigPipe - 28-9-2007 at 21:16

HF, F and NO/NO2 are really the only things that terrify me. Radioactives, carcinogens, cyanides, lachrymators, nerve agents, drugs. None of those scare me the list bit. I don't know why, maybe I don't fear death. It's kinda weird actually.

Is it even legal to mess with F in a residential area? I could understand small amounts like a couple of liters at a time but any more (especially industrial amounts) is insane in a residential area.

But then again, it being so reactive, how far could it go compared to other less reactive toxins?

woelen - 29-9-2007 at 14:16

Again, are you trolling us? Your list of things is totally irrational. NO/NO2 are not even remotely comparable to F2 and HF. These nitrogen oxides certainly must be handled with respect, but the risk involved with F2 and HF is much larger. In your list, nerve agents and radioactives (except maybe uranyl salts and thorium salts) also are of such great risk, that handling these outside of a well equipped lab really is insane. Do you really think that there are people, playing around with Sarin, VX or mustards in their garage?

Also, your remark about messing with F in a residential area makes no sense. Small amounts are not liters, but milliliters (compressed gas) for compounds like F2.

MagicJigPipe , I have the nasty idea, that you are trolling here with ridiculous posts.