Sciencemadness Discussion Board

How hard is organic chemistry?

Hey There - 7-4-2014 at 17:24

So yeah, basically what i asked, and any tips/tricks? When does it become easier if it is really that hard? And how much math is involved (percentage wise would be nice cause I know very little is involved), and how hard is the math? (I suck at math)


[Edited on 8-4-2014 by Hey There]

zed - 7-4-2014 at 17:57

Organic Chemistry? Not hard. Not hard at all. After a few years of constant study, it starts to make sense. Sort of. It's a little like eating an elephant. Just take one bite at a time.

Take a few classes. Mine the archives.

Bert - 7-4-2014 at 19:48

Organic chemistry just now is enough to drive one mad. It gives me the impression of a primeval forest full of the most remarkable things, a monstrous and boundless thicket, with no way of escape, into which one may well dread to enter.
-Friedrich Wöhler

Hi Jennifer-

A very interesting series of posts so far.

A couple of moderately advanced drug synthesis questions, first an obvious illicit then a borderline one, and then THIS thread? Your two what is the coolest/scariest thing ever threads (boys do love to brag, don't they)? And you've dropped the information that you're a lady fascinated by chemistry and of nubile years (UNICORN!), in "hippy heaven"...


I'm an absolutely rotten, suspicious and nasty person, with nothing of decency or chivalry about me.


You look like a social engineering exploit... Aimed at a male nerd drug chemist in the pacific northwest.

Metacelsus - 8-4-2014 at 05:01

In organic chemistry, there are areas that require more math (like reaction kinetics) and areas that require less math (like retrosynthesis).

Hey There - 8-4-2014 at 05:35

ZED: Ooh, did you learn from college? If so how did they treat it? (Did they cram it all in? Did they give tons of work? Was the professor good at teaching or was it a strain to pay attention to lecture's? etc.)

BERT: Well I find drugs interesting since there's a lot more natural precursor's for them than people expect, I wouldn't ever mess with them. I read about poison's or corrosive chemicals all the time, but I'm not going to mess with them either. Overall I'm not going to manipulate anybody for any reason, I'm just curious and would like some open forum mentoring from people on here who are already experienced.

CHEDDITE CHEESE: Ooh I see, is it math strictly revolved around formula's? And when do you learn this in college (if that's where you learned it)?

Metacelsus - 8-4-2014 at 05:54

I am currently taking my second semester of college organic chemistry. It is a lot of work, but is manageable. Most of the other students in the class are sophomores in college. Overall, knowledge of math beyond algebra is rarely required. However, knowing more advanced math is helpful, and I would recommend it.

@Bert: Let's give her the benefit of the doubt for now.

Chemosynthesis - 8-4-2014 at 08:58

Organic chemistry is generally taught with what I consider almost no math involved. I can only think of optical activity and rate laws being touched on, and they can be solved using very simple algebra in most cases. The content is generally far too expansive to hope to cover nearly all the ACS material in two semesters even if you exclude math entirely. Math is far more helpful for things including p-chem, group symmetry theory, spectroscopy, etc.

Organic chemistry, for me, was a lot of memorization until you really familiarize yourself with a methodology for mechanistic or retrosynthetic analysis, when it becomes a lot easier. I started with lots of bits and pieces that I had the most difficult time piecing together on my own accord. If you asked me a direct question, I could answer it, but then requiring me to utilize the information in another problem without sequentially causing me to consider that information was where I broke down.

Some people really fixate on learning one concept and letting that guide you through a semester. I know a professor who really feels pKa charts basically allow students to solve any problem. That doesn't speak to me personally, but the utility is inarguable.

I recommend starting with a good text as early as you can (Clayden was a favorite of mine, but I've probably owned at least 5 for comparison). Daley and Daley has a free textbook available if you register at their site, and it seemed fine from what I saw. Textbooks are huge... because I don't think most students bother reading them with their courseloads. This is a mistake, in my mind. There are tons of texts, so find one you kind of enjoy.

If you have trouble, I recommend trying additional practice problems and getting a good tutor. This is where having another textbook to take a peak at can help. Having someone to explain things one-on-one is absolutely invaluable. I cannot tell you how many times I would not understand that I knew an answer, but wasn't connecting it to the problem until prompted by a teacher, tutor, or classmate, and had to ask "how do I remember this without a prompt, say on the exam?" Not everyone does well the first time, and some retake. Some of my best teachers failed o-chem, and decided to become organic chemists.
Quote: Originally posted by Bert  
Hi Jennifer-
A couple of moderately advanced drug synthesis questions, first an obvious illicit then a borderline one, and then THIS thread?

While I do find the OP's subject matter (and post order) suspicious, the only real potential illicit procedure I see asked is the safrole synthesis, and only if not properly documented with the DEA as a list 1 precursor manufacturer.

If this person truly has an interest in med/pharm chem, I can understand why some of the subject matter. It's a lot easier for someone not occupationally versed in med/pharm chem, or even pharmtox, to look at substances of historical recreational abuse potential due to the abundance of material on them without having to familiarize oneself with Burger's or the like. Additionally, without the benefit of more advanced undergraduate or graduate organic theory courses, a lot of med/pharm chem syntheses can be someone's first introduction to reactions their class didn't get to, or never show up on the ACS exams.

[Edited on 8-4-2014 by Chemosynthesis]

Bert - 8-4-2014 at 09:24

There is nothing wrong with discussing organic chemistry that may be related to psychoactive drug synthesis.

As in the energetic materials section, a discussion of chemistry with an intelligent question, documentation of where the information or procedure that led to the question arose, ideally with links, referance or patent material cited is FINE.

Coming in out of the blue for a first post with "How do I make a 55 gallon drum of methylamine" or "How do I extract/synthesize safrole" without any background? Not going to fly. If there had been documentation of sources and thoughts leading up to those 2 organic chemistry questions, you would not have seen any challenge from me, and likely would have seen more members engage the questions as well.


As mentioned, I am a bitter, suspicious old bastard. Someone who starts by asking a question on chemistry of a popular (and controlled) ilicit drug precursors and then asks "is organic chemistry hard?" seems a bit off.

I've also known (face to face) a number of actual persons of the female persuasion on technical forums.

They tend to not mention their sex, being there for other than social reasons. Some have stated it to be liberating to be treated as "one of the guys", rather than face the subconscious attitudes vs. women of the majority of the tech crowd- Males.

I've also known a number of med students. Chemistry and math requirements in pre-med being such as they are, "sucks at math" is a rather low bar.

I'm going to sit and watch,  silently judging you as is the way of my people-

Sent from my iPhone

Chemosynthesis - 8-4-2014 at 10:10

Quote: Originally posted by Bert  
There is nothing wrong with discussing organic chemistry that may be related to psychoactive drug synthesis.

I am just pointing out that I don't see what the decidedly illicit question is. Suspicious? Absolutely. But illicit?
I work with people of both genders who are clinicians and scientists, know students as well, and knew plenty of people of who claimed they would attend medical/dental/pharmacy/vet school and never made it. That part doesn't bother me, and sounds par for most pre-health people I ever met in school. If anything, I just consider it coming across as a little ignorant or conflicted since a non-MD/PhD dual graduate would be hard pressed to perform any research after medical school. Whether that is just enjoying prereq courses, an act, or a misunderstanding is debatable.

As to the OP's gender, I have the same anecdotal experiences you do, but find it interesting that she stopped signing posts not long after people had talked about her proclaimed gender. I've also known transexuals to portray themselves as their identified gender very openly, or people to assume different gender identities online in the hope of more attention for otherwise non-deceptive reasons. I agree that it strikes me as unusual or suspicious behavior, but I don't really see what anyone would gain by asking the questions the OP posed unless someone went out of their to post a step-by-step synthetic procedure in response. At least the piperazine question showed an understanding of metabolic relevance in an unrelated xenobiotic.

If the OP were trying to exploit a poster here, I don't really see it working well. Most of my experiences with "kewls" and energetic materials led to them learning some chemistry and losing interest, and the lack of spoonfeeding is part of what convinced me to sign on the site instead of lurk. If this person does want to engage in illicit activities (the only real indication I see being a question about safrole), as unfortunate as that may be, they will have to learn some chemistry to do it.

What I find most suspicious is that when asked about anything pertaining to posts (biochemical in vivo vs. chemical in vitro, why an interest in a precursor, etc.), no more posts have been made. That part seems incongruent to me.

aga - 8-4-2014 at 12:59

Quote: Originally posted by Bert  
I am a bitter, suspicious old bastard.


Brother ! Where have you been all these years ?

I see you have not forgotten the Pratchett wars.

[Edited on 8-4-2014 by aga]

BromicAcid - 8-4-2014 at 13:18

Some people are horrible at organic chemistry, some are good. I think you're either made for it or you struggle the whole way. One of my early orgo classes had about 250 students, a lot of pre-med students. They were cheating like crazy complaining that they had never had a class that hard, many of them were caught and expelled. My hiccup in my chemistry degree came in physical chemistry, some heavy duty calculus involved at some times took me to a new level of irritation. I was never good at math, but I had to get good at math to get my chemistry degree.

zed - 8-4-2014 at 18:23

Oh, fill out that little self programed workbook of Organic Chemistry nomenclature. Learn what the various functional groups are, and how they react. Be cognizant that most organic chemical reactions are simple reactions....Certain functional group "like" to react with each other, usually they combine to create a more complex product, and they eject a small, stable molecule like water (as a byproduct)...though the reverse can also be true. Reactions are often driven to completion by removing that small molecule byproduct from the reaction mix.

Example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethyl_acetate

Various stratagems may be employed to get to the desired end product.

The reversible reaction between a Ketone and an Amine, is utilized in the manufacture of methamphetamines. A molecule of water is ejected as the imine is formed, and the reaction is made irreversible (driven to completion) by the addition of a molecule of hydrogen across the imine's double bond.

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

The formation of small stable molecules other than water may be utilized.
HCl, NaCl, CO2, N2, Etc....are also common byproducts.

OK. Now you know everything.








[Edited on 9-4-2014 by zed]

very very very very hard

quantumchromodynamics - 8-4-2014 at 23:28

After a year of studying inorganic chemistry, and about half a year studying organic chemistry, in my opinion, there is just too much to know. Every time I turn a page, there is a new page of interesting science to learn and to digest It seems organic chemistry is a huge science with lots and lots of classifications. The raw information is so vast I have yet to recognize patterns enough to integrate it down to a simple comprehension. The sheer volume of organic chemistry is overwhelming. As was recommended by this board, I bought some older organic chemistry books, and they are much more interesting to read. Organic chemistry is very damn tricky too. Even when I am reasonably sure I understand the material, I still get the problems wrong. Certainly this is just my perception, and I have terrible OCD, and dyslexia, and I have no business ruining perfectly good chemicals, but for some reason, I am so compelled.

Hey There - 9-4-2014 at 06:10

CHEDDITE CHEESE: Thank you. Give's some hope, understanding reactions is easy, I just make mathematics harder than it is, so I feel a bit more hopeful now :D

CHEMOSYNTHESIS: Are you referring to Jonathon Clayden? Any other recommended (preferably interactive) books on orgo? Oooh you caught me I'm a transexual.

BERT: I know my post's are odd, but you're over thinking it.

BROMIC ACID: Ooh that's good at least you made it! Hopefully i can.

ZED: Thanks but I'm guessing you're mostly referring to clandestine chemistry?

QUANTUMCHROMODYNAMICS: Ooh thats too bad, keep trying


Bert - 9-4-2014 at 10:39

Quote: Originally posted by Hey There  
BERT: I know my post's are odd, but you're over thinking it.

It's called "paranoia" when you're young, "survival instinct" when you get old enough.


zed - 9-4-2014 at 11:56

I'm referring to all organic chemistry. Most reactions proceed by the ejection of a small stable molecule as a byproduct. Though sometimes other things can happen.

When you hear hoofbeats, think horses...not zebras.

[Edited on 9-4-2014 by zed]

Chemosynthesis - 9-4-2014 at 12:20

Quote: Originally posted by Hey There  

CHEMOSYNTHESIS: Are you referring to Jonathon Clayden? Any other recommended (preferably interactive) books on orgo? Oooh you caught me I'm a transexual.

Yes. _March's Advanced Organic Chemistry_ is a great book, but probably overkill. March's and Clayden are probably my favorite texts.

For lab, Zubrick's _Organic Chem Lab Survival Manual_ is a decent primer. I just got _Understanding the Principles of Organic Chemistry: A Laboratory Course_ to peruse the other day, and another couple additional classics are _Organic Chemistry as a Second Language 1&2_. The Second Language books are short, ubiquitous, cheap on Amazon, and maybe worth reading first, with Zubrick.

There are also great books in the library here, but I think they are more advanced and not as geared towards school.

Concepts are definitely key at first, rather than details. If you can understand mechanisms and resonance, you can probably answer most undergrad o-chem questions in enough time. Knowing pKa's and applying them in those cases will help tell you if a reaction is favorable or not happening. I would argue the rest is mostly details, like reagents and some classic mechanisms/odd ACS favorites.

Hey There - 9-4-2014 at 13:24

BERT: I'm not trying to offend you but I think you're sadly mistaken, through out life, old or young, it's called "cynicism". At least it appears that way to me because I'm cynical too, I'm constantly scrutinizing everything/one, and I'm sure you do too.. but then again maybe it's just me.

ZED: Okay, well thank's!

CHEMOSYNTHESIS: Yes I've read Zubrik's, it's very helpful, which edition do you think is best? I've only read the 8th. Ooh yeah I've heard of David Klein's books, haven't heard of 'Understanding the Principles of Organic Chemistry: A Laboratory Course', I'll check them out :)

Chemosynthesis - 9-4-2014 at 13:34

Quote: Originally posted by Hey There  

CHEMOSYNTHESIS: Yes I've read Zubrik's, it's very helpful, which edition do you think is best? I've only read the 8th. Ooh yeah I've heard of David Klein's books, haven't heard of 'Understanding the Principles of Organic Chemistry: A Laboratory Course', I'll check them out :)


Good question. I'm not sure what my original volume was, but I doubt even the latest copy I found has been the newest.

And definitely do. It's mostly a microscale text, but it seems entirely applicable, and it is pretty enjoyable so far. Microscale has a downside because it increases the risk of yield loss (often a portion of the grade) until students are comfortable with other methods. The plus side is that is cheap and can be more demanding.While undoubtedly useful, they get implemented to save costs on reagents.

Hey There - 9-4-2014 at 14:18

Yea make's sense, microscale seems a lot more challenging/demanding with precision (it makes sense though), thanks :)

Chemosynthesis - 9-4-2014 at 14:45

No problem! I've actually seen quite a few organic chem threads recently, so hopefully we can pool resources to more people.

Hey There - 9-4-2014 at 19:27

Yea hopefully :)

aga - 11-4-2014 at 12:55

I'm an OC beginner too.

Starting here : http://www.chem.ox.ac.uk/
and here
http://www.chemguide.co.uk/basicorg/bonding/orbitals.html#to...

All making lots of sense now.

Really?

weeksie98 - 12-4-2014 at 08:37

'BERT: I know my post's are odd, but you're over thinking it.'

Really? I know it is not my place to say, not being a moderator. You have popped up on this forum out of the blue, and Burt couldn't be more right. Regardless of whether it is a matter of interest or not, asking about routes to m-chlorophenylpiperazine AND Safrole as your first posts is generally considered off. You can try to talk it off saying you 'find drugs interesting' but the fact of the matter is that it just won't float, especially when you clearly don't have a chemical background. Granted, the syntheses involved in drug chemistry, such as reductive amination in amphetamines, make excellent theoretical reading because of the simplicity of the diagrams and ease of understanding the processes involved, but asking these two specific questions as first time posts? No. Doesn't happen.

[Edited on 12-4-2014 by weeksie98]

Etaoin Shrdlu - 12-4-2014 at 09:49

Quote: Originally posted by weeksie98  
...but asking these two specific questions as first time posts? No. Doesn't happen.

Ehhh, keep in mind that given the state of the media, drug syntheses are the only exposure a lot of amateurs have had to organic chemistry. Energetic materials are more likely to be associated with inorganic. But Bert is absolutely right. There's nothing wrong with someone being curious, and I'd still be very wary of giving away personal information.

Hey There, do you prefer Jennifer or Hey There? I'm never sure what to call someone who's posted an alternative nick or name.

AJKOER - 12-4-2014 at 18:36

Quote: Originally posted by quantumchromodynamics  
After a year of studying inorganic chemistry, and about half a year studying organic chemistry, in my opinion, there is just too much to know. Every time I turn a page, there is a new page of interesting science to learn and to digest It seems organic chemistry is a huge science with lots and lots of classifications. The raw information is so vast I have yet to recognize patterns enough to integrate it down to a simple comprehension. The sheer volume of organic chemistry is overwhelming. As was recommended by this board, I bought some older organic chemistry books, and they are much more interesting to read. Organic chemistry is very damn tricky too. Even when I am reasonably sure I understand the material, I still get the problems wrong. Certainly this is just my perception, and I have terrible OCD, and dyslexia, and I have no business ruining perfectly good chemicals, but for some reason, I am so compelled.


I agree and the even bigger issue is the relative easy on actually successfully creating a targeted compound in organic chemistry.

In inorganic chemistry, for many reactions one may even just get away with a visual ascertained excess of one reagent over the other. Precise temperature measurements, sophisticated lab equipment, ...not generally needed for a successful prep.

[Edited on 13-4-2014 by AJKOER]