I am acquainted with someone who makes modern, fully stocked reproductions of the wood cased Gilbert sets- For a very adult price!blogfast25 - 21-5-2015 at 13:31
Very nice article, Bert!aga - 21-5-2015 at 14:31
What's an 'Adult Price ' ?
Is it a dodgy thing not involving money ?AvBaeyer - 21-5-2015 at 18:21
I can't afford one (guess I'm not an adult!), desperately wanted to give this to one of my nephews.
j_sum1 - 21-5-2015 at 19:18
Agreed Bert. This is pretty cool.
What is really heartening is seeing that someone recognises a need for kids to explore the sciences properly and to have access to something more than
just coloured alum crystals.
I note Robert Bruce Thompson's book. I have not actually seen a copy but I am led to believe that it is really good.Zephyr - 21-5-2015 at 19:41
I recommend searching your local craigslist's, here is a set from the 1960's which I got, although is isn't in the best shape. I think I might try and
restore it sometime...
[Edited on 5-22-2015 by Pinkhippo11]Praxichys - 22-5-2015 at 05:49
I had a Smithsonian Microchem XM5000 when I was maybe 7 or 8 years old.
I found it to be pretty stupid. All the vials of chems are permanently sealed and designed to be injected with a few ml of distilled water, to be used
as weak solutions.
Of course, I opened the vials anyway. Most the chems in the vials were on some sort of blotter paper. I remember my dissappointment at not being able
to grow CuSO4 crystals like I saw in my Dorling Kindersly Eyewitness book on chemistry.
I learned a lot but I found the kit boring because the most spectacular thing it did was make some colored precipitates and solutions - no smells, no
bangs, no fire, no smoke, no heat. No big foamy volcanoes, no You did everything in this little spot plate with 1 and 5ml wells.
I would have killed for one of those older ones!diggafromdover - 22-5-2015 at 06:06
I had such a set. I took
a degree in chemistry back in the day, but ended up doing software and only now (at 62) have started reading and experimenting again. The current
chemistry sets are useless and insipid. To inculcate the young in the grand spectacle which is chemistry requires the stinks, bangs, and the risks
which accompany them.
One of the steps on Linus Pauling's road to Nobel had 12 year old Linus buying and using Sodium Cyanide. In our age, Linus would have ended up a
diversity trainer.
Mr. Thompson's book is truly awesome. Glove up and get to it.
[Edited on 22-5-2015 by diggafromdover]Molecular Manipulations - 22-5-2015 at 07:13
That's nice...
But I want this one.
A steal if you ask me, just wish the addition funnel was pressure-equalized. Zombie - 22-5-2015 at 09:57
That's a beautiful set. I assume your friend had to jump thru some legal hoops to offer it for market...
Not to distract the topic but did you follow the youtube clip to the next one on auto play? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ArqhY9Tu3I 10 Most Dangerous Kids Toys Ever Sold
In our age, Linus would have ended up a diversity trainer.
Or a personal trainer.
Lame excuses for a jab. Why do people fall into these things... Pet Psychiatrist?
I guess we all can't dig ditches for a living. Eventually we'd run out of dirt.MrHomeScientist - 22-5-2015 at 11:21
Great article. I think the slow decline of quality in chemistry sets is a real shame. The chemistry set that proudly declares "No Chemicals!" really
makes me sad. These sets went from tools to toys, with a corresponding decrease in usefulness and fun.
As I've said before around here, I have Robert Bruce Thompson's book and it's wonderful. Very well laid out and has lots of great experiments and
info. He also gave a talk at the 2008 MakerFaire on chemistry sets that I thought was very good: http://blip.tv/make/robert-bruce-thompson-on-the-demise-of-t...
I also helped fund the HMS Beagle set as a kickstarter project, and received the full compliment of chemicals (but not the luxurious wooden box,
unfortunately). A very wide variety of chemicals in ~25g portions in nice little square glass bottles. It even came with carbon tetrachloride!turd - 22-5-2015 at 11:38
The chemistry set without chemicals is always good for a laugh.
But isn't it simply the equivalent of "batteries not included", i.e. the parents are supposed to pay the local chemist's a visit?MrHomeScientist - 22-5-2015 at 11:41
If only those existed anymore! (At least, where I live, I'm the local chemist!)
I think it's different because electronics that come without batteries don't proudly proclaim so on the front of the box in large print!
[Edited on 5-22-2015 by MrHomeScientist]prof_genius - 23-5-2015 at 07:29
Chemophobic chemistry sets are useless, they probably won't get anyone interested in science, and will probably drive people away from chemistry after
the see the boring color change twice.
