| Pages:
1
2 |
Hunterman2244
Hazard to Others
Posts: 105
Registered: 6-6-2018
Member Is Offline
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Ubya  |
| Quote: |
Phenylalanine is unrelated, it was just an example of the transformation I was describing. Same with the Friedel-Crafts. Just something related.
|
the post is about an idea you had, using glycerin to methoxylate phenylalanine, and you mentioned the Friedel-Crafts reaction to "prove" or
hypothesize the use of glycerin as a viable option, so if all of this unrelated to your question, what was you question??? how to turn something into
mescaline using glycerin? |
I was wondering if glycerin could be cracked(?) and reacted with an Aryl ring. I mentioned that reaction because it is similar in terms of end
product. I used phenylalanine because it is a well known chemical.
Sorry for double posting.
|
|
|
clearly_not_atara
International Hazard
Posts: 2800
Registered: 3-11-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: Big
|
|
| Quote: | | You seem to take me as an idiot. This question has no relevance to my knowledge in chemistry. |
It has huge relevance to your knowledge [of] chemistry. Someone who understands chemistry does not expect the three carbon atoms in glycerol
(which are bonded together) to become the three carbon atoms in mescaline (which are not). The fact that you would ask such a question reveals that
you do not know chemistry.
You really, really, really need to admit that you do not understand these things.
I did not "misunderstand" your point. I responded to the words you wrote. If that was not what you meant, that is your fault at
least as much as it is mine. It's pretty common for people with an unrealistic perception of their own intelligence to claim they've been
"misunderstood". There are a thousand disproofs of quantum mechanics out there by "misunderstood" physicists.
|
|
|
Hunterman2244
Hazard to Others
Posts: 105
Registered: 6-6-2018
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by clearly_not_atara | | Quote: | | You seem to take me as an idiot. This question has no relevance to my knowledge in chemistry. |
It has huge relevance to your knowledge [of] chemistry. Someone who understands chemistry does not expect the three carbon atoms in glycerol
(which are bonded together) to become the three carbon atoms in mescaline (which are not). The fact that you would ask such a question reveals that
you do not know chemistry.
You really, really, really need to admit that you do not understand these things.
I did not "misunderstand" your point. I responded to the words you wrote. If that was not what you meant, that is your fault at
least as much as it is mine. It's pretty common for people with an unrealistic perception of their own intelligence to claim they've been
"misunderstood". There are a thousand disproofs of quantum mechanics out there by "misunderstood" physicists. |
I am not the smartest, and I surely was wrong. If phrasing comes across differently, it is a misunderstanding. Someone who was so smart wouldn't
bother with this. I have admitted was wrong over and over again, and I am what? To high and mighty to admit I was wrong? Albert Einstein said trying
the same thing over and over again is insanity. You really keep making the same point. After all this I really haven't learned much about the
chemistry, or lack thereof. I have no interest in arguing. If you want to argue, join like a flat earth or, even better, alternate history facebook
group or forum. I started this to learn more about this chemistry, not to be degraded and ignored.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
