Can You Trust Internet Chemistry?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 ก.ค. 2024
- Sam (Chemiolis) claims to have made cubane, but how do we really know that he did? In this video we dive into Sam's cubane & geosmin samples, and we examine their NMR spectra. How should we do chemistry on TH-cam? I discuss all this and more.
Sam was honest and open in the preparation of this video - @Chemiolis
@ExtractionsAndIre will make cubane eventually...
A big thanks to ArgonLover for reviewing some of the research.
Lead Editor/Animator - David
Producer/Host - Joey (TC)
Particle Animator - RobotChicken
Support the Channel on Patreon - / thatchemist
Join the Community Discord! - / discord
Second Discord link if the first one is borked - / discord
Links to the videos where @Chemiolis makes cubane and geosmin:
Cubane part 1 • I Made Cubane First
Cubane part 2 • Making Cubane (without...
Geosmin • Making the Smell of Rain - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![[TH] Esports World Cup : Point Rush Stage](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/eLU-jnYp3Zs/mqdefault.jpg)
Wait until you see the NMR spectra I got of my “cubane”….. mmm yeah that’s good tar
Kurt Cubane making me want to die
When I saw you celebrating the dark sludge left in your filter at the end of the last video, I was wondering if that was really the product you were looking for. Sad to hear that it didn't turn out to be cubane
If you do end up getting a good sample it'll 100% be more impressive then these needs. You're basically some goblin who broke into a shed to do some chemistry
hi tom i knew you'd be here
Now I'm expecting an NMR spectrum that looks like the Lyman Alpha Forest
Oh dear, chemistry drama
lmaoooo
🍿
No youtube community is mature until they've had at least one drama
@@ianirwin9480 To be fair, that is true
All chemistry is drama anyway, chemical reactions are sometimes quite dramatic.
Finally! The Chem-tuber community is becoming more mature and professional, as it should be. Great proposal.
>mature and professional
> pepes on every slide
Actually it’s pogners
@@That_Chemist my apologies
Go back to mailing each other chemical bombs.
like every research paper should have@@pakijetli
The chemistry between all of the chem-tubers is becoming heated, but I'm here to see it. 😂
Imagine making chemistry puns… they’re pretty basic if you ask me. I’m glad I didn’t become the kind of person who makes them. I considered it at one point, but in the end I said “Sodium”
It would be better if someone else shed some light on it...
@@syedramizulkabirThat would be exciting.
releasing al their heat… you could say… exothermic
War only dilutes
I was juat watching his "Should you trust NileRed" video yesterday, glad to see the chemtubers bringing a lot of good discussion to the table on what to believe and how to verify
All that's missing now is for Nigel to do a "Can we trust That Chemist" and the cycle will be complete
Really, he should continue the circle: "Can we trust Explosions&Fire?" And the answer shall, obviously, be a "no." 😂
perfect
Now THIS is what I'm talking about !
Using non-existent Beef as sorta-Ragebait and then actually explaining proper scientific procedures and improving the TH-cam Chemistry Community by making an impossible to deny suggestion, which everyone benefits from.
This is the sort of "Um, Actually" I love.
Word
The first part of the video seems like he is mercilessly ripping into him, only to see him be like super kind and look at his results, and find that the cubane is infact cubane, and is not really that harsh at all when he sees that the Geosmin doesn't seem to be present, at least not in significant concentration.
TH-cam becoming an acceptable source of published literature could be great for the scientific community long-term. Thank you so much for working to standardize systems of practice and providing evidence. You’re both building trust and understanding of science in the public as well as making science literature more freely accessible to everyone
It is crazy to me how research has not yet developed outside of rigid copies of text. We are already seeing AiChats becoming more competent at interpreting research than seasoned researchers, at least at a higher speed.
I believe the way of research presentation will surely change in the coming few years, the current form of research is just not adequate with the current technological capabilities.
I feel like it would be a great boon to science communication and science in general if it became the accepted standard practice to do some kind of videography of research posted in a publicly accessible place online.
All of the chemistry, biology, medicine, metallurgy, robotics, engineering, materials science, anything even remotely filmable.
Rather than only doing research papers and maybe including a few pictures or short videos at best in the paper, and at worst a description of pictures or videos the researchers took but neglected to include.
And for the more adventurous researchers do livestreams of your stuff if you wanted to. Like how that one lab livestreamed themselves trying to recreate the LK-99 process a few months back.
Inb4 youtube punishes/ tries to monetize scientific research on youtube
Should be marked with the no. of likes, or a notice thats it is real information, since youtube likes to disseminate misinformation / look the other way if it gets millions on views.
tbh a detailed paper on top of video i consider is a decent bound of mixed current and wanted.
I'm taking my ochem lab right now, and learning more about 1H NMR is awesome! I was given a supposedly "pure" NMR chart to determine a compound, and I noticed that the CH3 peaks didn't exactly align with the supposed correct structure. Now I know it's because of the impurities!
Pascals triangle
@@VKHSD?
@@LouisTherouxOfficial it helps with splitting and other components that go into NMR analysis, typically they use Pascal's triangle to undergrads to help teach them NMR in chemistry
@@necroversegames cool, ty for explaining
@@necroversegamespascal wasnt even a chemist that makes no sense
I’m just gonna add “this could be it idk tho” at the end of every video so I don’t get flamed either💀Checkmate
Watching this video made me recall my 1st year of PhD. My PI (a postdoc) misassigned the structure because he "made the compound before". I struggled with that project for a whole year. Only when I carefully analyzed the NMR data again, I found that my PI missed one crucial peak in 13C-NMR. Thanks to my senior, I could obtain the XRD and confirmed that my PI was wrong and changed the project's direction. After that, my PI quitted immediately, left me be in deep sh*t. It took me 2 more years (3 years in total) to finish that project which could have been done in much shorter time. I was still mad when I had to include his name in the published manuscript because my advisor want to "recognize his contribution".
So, I am totally agree with you about the importance of characterizing your compounds.
"The powder is off white like in the literature, therefore it is the chemical" meanwhile in the lab half the things synthesized are off white
walter white: you're goddamn right
Calibrated Eyeball Analysis.
@@gcewing It's Ophthalmic VIS-Spectrophotometry, to be precise. The other methods at the analyst's disposal are Olfactory Gas Chromatography and Gustatory Liquid Chromatography.
Oftentimes the results are as follows: off-white substance with a characteristic smell and unpleasant taste.
off white? Everything is either yellowish brown or yellowish brown. That, or yellowish brown.
@@FrenkieWest32You forgot slightly brownish yellow and also tar.
20:04 it looks more like ethyl acetate. You can check by integrating the 3 peaks and they should have the ratio 2:3:3
Ah EA. Aka the biggest bitch to remove on the rotavap.
Love to see the analytical confirmation of the cubane synthesis. But oh god please don't send any more chemical samples to random patreons before proper analysis
Now NileRed should make "Should you trust ThatChemist?" For circle to be complete :p
How did I miss that Nile is an anagram of Neil
@@Deutschebahn Oh, I never noticed that it is Nile - like river, not Neil. Apparently channel name is Nile red - organic dye which is synthesized from Nile blue another dye. It all makes sense now...
@@MrHubert1710we cracked the code!
His real name is Nigel
I had an absolutely horrible AP Chem teacher in high school and i thought that had ruined chem for me, but the youtube chemistry community has been reviving the fascination i had when i was super young. Thank you for explaining things so thoroughly, and prioritizing building community ❤
Okay I literally had this idea a few months back that as institutional science becomes more and more about acquiring grants, the amount of new interesting science that can get done becomes limited. But as individual hobbyist scientists are more supported and motivated by popular audiences it may be the case that eventually interesting research science is partially done in the hobbyist community. But this is a step extra than I expected. It’s very interesting cause it’s very much a return to the pre-institutional era of people inventing chemistry in their home labs. Implementing peer review into this process makes it so real. Maybe that discord server is the beginning of a new academy of sciences 😂
I honestly think it’s a simpler system than relying on the government complexity and invalid expertise during review for grant funding
The establishment keeps most of the most used organic chem basic ingredients list out of the reach of the people. Unis, labs for big pharma, with big lobbying budgets, and "gubmint research facilities"! This is the reason we got Tom. Try to make stuff with otc ingredients, not having to show your papers........😮😊
This has nothing to do with peer review. Whatever criticism you can make about journals, the incentives on youtube are 1000x more perverse. Also, grants are very good. It's a direct funding of fundamental science that wouldn't otherwise happen. It takes a special kind of ignorance to suggest that trivial pop-science could replace that research.
In what world can a hobbyist afford to do the science that supposedly the ''institutes'' are 24/7 needing to acquire research grants for? That makes no sense at all. And which hobbyist is gonna work at this 40h a week?
I'm happy to see these NMR's. Chemiolis sometimes report yields greater than literature, which always makes me suspicous regarding purity/"dryness" of his samples. But it's still cool that he made cubane. It's a molecule that will always fascinate me :D
It’s pretty rare for me to have yields better than literature, but some synths in the cubane did, which I all thoroughly dried unlike many other intermediate products. If the yield is higher and I didn’t dry, I do say that it is still wet.
What do you mean? In Ochem 1 I always got greater yields that then literature. Sometimes even more than the total mass of my starting reagents 🤓
@@Chemiolisyo I don't mean to insult but everytime you say 100+ % yield I burst into laughter😂 great vids btw
@@DJ-jq8ifthat’s not possible, you sure you passed?
@@natetheavali784 it's not a battlefield, no need to get all worked up.
I think reporting like this for "big" results (meme molecules like cubane) is a good idea, but I wouldn't want extra cost, labor, and time to discourage chemtubers from making entertaining content that gets most of the facts right. Like I don't think Tom really needs to be mailing nitrotetrazoles across the ocean to be considered legitimate.
There is no veto power from TC and other pedants.
"I didn't mail samples of stuff that did *this* to a beer can" is a perfectly reasonable excuse.
In this case I feel like as its a fairly tricky molecule to synthesise and the data given was virtually nothing its fair to expect actual analysis if we're to take the results seriously in any way
@@harryparr4879 as long as it tastes the same then you should be fine
Personally i would very much like it if there was more analysis in chem youtube video's to confirm the thing synthesized is the actual thing, would be cool to have a section of the video on the discussion of what went wrong in the synthesis.
I know my chemistry teachers love scrutinizing my work so why not let the viewers do the same?
Tutorials on how to detect simple molecules or groups might be a good start.
New video at 4am? Okay, I’ll take it.
David and I also stayed up so we could finish the video :)
lmao it's 3 pm for me
Lol for my timezone the video came out at 10 am
I’m so glad you said “petrichor.” That made my night.
I love the checks between all of the chemistry channels. Keep up the good work!
I'm all for improving the rigor of chemtuber experiments, however we have to be careful we don't raise the bar so high that it intimidates beginners and new entrants. Last I checked it was $80 for a local lab to run a single 1H-NMR. That expense might be worth it for bigger channels or for big projects like cubane. But most of the time, chemtubers are following well-trodden syntheses, and as long as rough properties and TLC check out, that's probably good enough for most things.
Unless you want to start a That Analyst channel where all you do is analyse samples sent in by other tubers (and playfully trash talk their sample purity)
Yeah. Also don't forget there are chemists from other countries which wouldn't have access to such things (like Ukraine these days).
This "we need analysis for a Yt video" sounds like filtering on the newcomers and the ones don't have money to do such analysis, and the starting of some chemist royal monopoly to me.
@@hyoenmadan
I mean, it's obviously nowhere as necessary for the very well known synthesis routes most novices would use. If something is already proven to work ad nauseam and maybe even rather simple I think everyone is very OK with lesser proof.
Not to forget - A more or less surefire way to confirm the success of a hard/novel/etc synthesis with high level evidence isn't just important in context of the community, but of high importance for the performing chemists themselves after all.
If you don't know if you were successful you don't know you were successful ...
When did it ever discourage anyone to do what they want to do? :J
I think the key is in what you are claiming vs the evidence you have. If you don't have the evidence, you shouldn't make the claim. That doesn't mean you shouldn't try the process, though. Just say, "I tried making substance A according to the recipe from paper D. I did steps K, L, M, and N, and saw X, Y, and Z." I believe I stumbled across Chemiolis' video (though I'm not really into Chemistry and don't care about cubane at all) and it just screamed "unverified claims" to me. It's good to have some confirmation through the test in this video, though it also shows the other synthesis failed, thus emphasizing the need for the confirmation.
@@heinzhaupthaar5590 there is no actual separation between ''easy'' or ''hard'' syntheses and it is often not so clear what you're looking at.
As a pharmacist that's a bit nuts for orgchem and have been through some organic synthesis before, I can say that it's so satisfying to see what I studied and also experienced being revalidated in a video (also can say I'm a big fan of the 3 chemists that were mentioned in this video), and I hope y'all keep up with this great quality work!
Damn this was a whole-ass journal in a video. I agree we should assess the validity, and I appreciate that you were willing to put forth the money to help this creator get it done. I don't even do chemistry, and I barely understand it, but I never thought of the idea that you guys could just completely be bullshitting us and the thought of that makes this video just that much more important.
Also, the entire time I was watching this I was like "so is this all because the guy didn't do it right?" You had me at the edge of my fucking seat, dude. NEVER thought I would see a ChemTuber video that had so much tension and drama. It's almost like watching a Thriller.
Hell yes, i know nothing about chemistry but im here for it
😊
Nice video frfr, also CHEMISTRY DRAMA SERIES WHEN
This is fantastic. While the formal criteria proposed here are expensive for some TH-cam chemists, there are simpler things one can also do, such as melting point for crystalline solids, that are cheap and easy. Even a simple TLC from before and after, showing the starting materials having reacted away is useful. In the end it's about the effort to at least do some validation that is important.
Yeah, I think melting point gets overlooked, but it is cheap and was heavily used before modern instruments.
@@OmegaPaladin144 same with refractive index for liquid products
I used to work in academic and then pharma laboratories, and we had all of these analytic techniques (NMR, Mass-Spec, HPLC) available to us. But what is an amateur chemist to do?
The history of amateur chemistry is rich with people who made great discoveries despite not having access to modern analytical methods. I watch Chemiolis, and applaud him for his attempts even while I know his results are not firm.
Yeah.. With the whole list might just as well publish the vid as an academic paper.
It should really depend on what it is you're claiming you have made and how and if you can demonstrate it reacting like its supposed to.
Say if you make acetone does it do stuff acetone does..
I'm just waiting for Applied Science to release a tutorial vid on how someone can make their own NMR tester at home using off the shelf components and things you can buy from "totally not sketchy" Ebay sellers.
@@theKashConnoisseur There was a project in the April 1959 edition of the Scientific American, "How amateurs can build a simple magnetic-resonance spectrometer". The electronics need an update, of course.
Great way to introduce people to how many steps there are in just proving you made a specific compound. Awesome video!
This was a really good video! Happy i started following both of you and some more chemistry utubers
I think this is very a very important video and that the chemist community on YT should adopt some advices you gave. And I dont think so because of trust issues or for being confident on nature of the product obtain as I’m not an organician chemist and I only watch these videos for entertainment. BUT, as a chemist, I still feel like there is a huge issue on the serious of other chemists at some point. Even for published articles. So, for educational purposes I think adding full analysis spectrum and identification would be great.
I honestly was along for the ride that Explosions&Fire/Extractions&Ire was on to synthesize cubane for the entertainment, I barely have any knowledge in basic chemistry, I just find the process to figure out the steps interesting to listen to. This peer review is also pretty interesting.
Great analysis. Thanks!
Great video. Thank you for taking the time to make this, it was well thought out, and addresses an important point a lot of chem-tubers don't talk about.
I'd love to do amateur chemistry myself, but:
1.) Cost (as stated in the vid): it can be hella expensive. For some reagents, you can't just cheap out on them. Also, some reagents... not that easy to get, and you gotta jump through some hoops.
2.) Space (not sure if stated): You need a little bit more room than a... meth shed to do some good chemistry. I'm kinda tight on space.
I tell ya though, that TLC/CC brought back nightmares when I was doing protein synthesis in college for my degree. It was always a sigh of relief when things worked, but, when they didn't work, it killed your spirit/soul to start over.
And space can be bought, so in the end it all boils down to cost. Such an annoying impurity!
Bruh I'm a physics (engineering/experimental) and the stuff that can be done to verify chemistry is wild.
This is a great video and is great to see the crap we do in class like calcuating mass spectrometry velocities used in practice
But dude they waste so much of your time in university, like 99% of what they teach you won’t be useful or relevant, and often times they are so ignorant that they miss the application for almost every single thing they teach you
You sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.
Actually based.
Not only do you give a five point plan, but you give suggestions for better analyese; NOT ONLY do you go through these well and make suggestions baseed on the techniques, but you also give in indepth evaluation of wich methods validity and when and HOW to get there.
AND THEN YOU EVEN SAY HOW TO DO THIS SPECIFICALLY AN WHAT TO SEE.
11/10 criticaly analysese.
Ah yes, it’s 3am where I live…and there’s a new Chemist Video? Hell yeah!
Nice work on setting up the chemistry youtuber discord. Something like that is just helpful for you guys. And in the end we get more and better videos, so that's a win-win in my books.
Agreed! more brains make videos better
Interesting. I like the idea, especially if colleagues who have access to the resources are willing to help get the analyses done.
Thanks a lot for these efforts ! As much as I like watching your videos, the lack of analysis is always frustrating. Maybe it's the teacher speaking though as I teach synthesis to future lab technicians ! I'm always telling them I won't accept their results if they can't prove that they made what the intended to make. Or at least provide IR, NMR (low res), HPLC, GC or TLC results. Keep up the good work !
I feel like Chemistry TH-cam™ has kind of evolved with this series, there's now like,,, straight-up direct peer review and replication studies being carried out
Great video. Would love to see another one about molecule structure identifieng over the years since ancient times
Bro, I 1000% agree with this. I've always been super enamored by old-school characterization techniques.
One trick I've just learned this year (how did I not get this idea earlier???): before measuring an NMR just evaporate your product several times with the NMR solvent (like chloroform for CDCl3). That way you won't have trace solvent impurities, but just a higher solvent peak.
Great video. Love to see analytical chemistry get its due praise on TH-cam
Nice video! Really enjoyed it
Thanks! I’m glad you enjoyed it
It’s interesting that you bring the topic of analytical chemistry because I have been thinking about the fact that there isn’t a single analytical chemistry channel on TH-cam for some time. I’ve thought about picking up an old HPLC and GC just to test stuff around the house, neighborhood, etc. I spent roughly 20 years doing analytical chemistry (GCMS/MS, LCMS/MS, ToF, amongst technics & technologies) in several regions of the US in several different sectors ranging from environmental remediation & waste characterization to drinking water & waste water characterization. My last position was doing research at a much-hated American “Agriculture” company that was sold to a German company that may be an even more hated (for good reason IMHO) company.
Good luck getting an NMR in someone’s garage though… I don’t think you can find those on LabX. Now a ToF or some other highly selective instrument you could probably find. That said, I was part of a team that purchased new equipment at one the larger companies I worked for. We purchased a used Waters LC-QToF (mid height) in 2014 and it was half a million dollars, so… I wonder what depreciation is like on those things. I could only imagine what a decent NMR would cost…
China is bringing costs waaaay down
There is MooreAnalytical on youtube who has an 82 MHz benchtop nmr and a GCMS. He hasn't posted many videos though. I also know a hackerspace that has an old 60MHz nmr.
You briefly touched on this, but I'll hit it a little harder because it's kinda important: cost.
If you're making 300 Hz NMR available for free to all, that's awesome, and kudos! To accomplish this, you have several instruments staffed and cooled* full time. If you're not, you kinda need to explain how people are going to get access to this at a cost that doesn't dwarf the cost they're already incurring to do the thing.
NMR is the most egregiously costly of the things you named, but the prices of a hyphenated mass spec instruments are also eye-watering, even if their upkeep isn't.
Is this a thing like time on telescopes that astronomers arrange?
* using liquid nitrogen, at a cost per liter about like milk, and liquid helium, at a cost per liter about like good scotch. That's quite a grocery bill, even assuming you got the working instruments for free.
Did I just witness chemist beef in the wild?
I think your points on how chemistry on youtube should validade their claims is even more significant considering that there might actually be new science made through those videos. Like the recent paper talking about calcium cyanimide that referenced a video from Explosions&Fire, just how the said in their conclusion, in the modern technological age we shouldnt ignore developments made in other mediums.
Also susprising to learn how new things can be discovered with help from online videos, like the cyanimide synthesis or the sodium synthesis by NurdRage
The tlc animation is a little cursed, putting the intial spot under the solvent 🧐
we knew you would catch us 😳👉👈
I like you
@@That_Chemist Great video, it often bugged me when people said they made something without evidence. I had a project in my undergrad where I made a fluorescent derivative and was fully convinced that I had the right product, after 1H NMR it turned out that it was just hydrolyzed reagent which had the same color and fluorescence 🥲
15:00 You are a great person for covering the cost of the NMR test!
Thanks for making this video. After following EAI attempting cubane for years then Chemiolis just magically appear it without even purifying between steps felt _very_ suspicious especially because he wasn't a youtuber I was familiar with.
Fantastic video. It's very distressing to me as an engineer to see what passes for acceptable "proof" that something is what people say it is both in peer review and less formal settings. I don't want to trivialize any kind of injury or loss of life, and t's rare but when an early error is not caught then a process is carried to the point of industrialization the results can go from a lab accident to a major disaster. Thank you so much for advocating for good science. It's impossible to be 100% safe or 100% correct but when you make an honest effort to achieve both it is nothing but upside for science imo.
Incidentally on second thought I remembered a lot of history of things like CCl4, DDT, Pb gasoline, PFOAS etc. just now and I guess the errors and foolish decisions aren't so rare :|
yeah, I'm sure industry copies a youtuber's protocol without checking later down the line...
I like all the information your videos provide.
This rules. I would love it if this became standard practice for TH-cam chemistry.
Well done, this is a good thing that TH-cam chemistry is getting a bit more structured with itself. BTW, what are you doing for Halloween? That Alchemist? That would be really cool!
You know what? Subbed! That was a really cool bit of analytical chem geekery.
When you're a TH-camr and "eh, good enough" is all the proof you need
Jokes aside that's the recipe for success... at receiving a Darwin Award in the near unexpected future.
Fun fact: an Aussie may instead receive a Sydney Award, Melbourne Award, Adelaide Award or Perth Award if they don't happen to be from the Northern Territory.
@@GameboygeniusA Perth Award may also be given to someone from Scotland as well as, say, an Edinburgh Award, a Glasgow Award, an Inverness Award, or a Stirling Award.
WOW!!! Well the proposal for some standards for verification is already an awesome peek behind the curtain for viewers who don't know how we do science but I am blown away by the clear and straightforward demonstration you made of showing a result is incorrect. I know it's usually the stuff nobody wants to show off. Hell, I'm five years into a review of a hopefully major discovery; it's brutal but I respect the high standards of evidence we are being held to. But it's also the thing the public needs to see more of in order to regain some trust.
Doing my algorithms homework while watching this. the perks of staying up all night!
QUESTION FOR MR CHEMIST: I was looking into cubane substituted for benzene in various medicinal products. Is cubanes potential benefit overstated or is it really something to be more common place in the future of drug design?
I think we'll have to see tbh
we talk more about cubanes in this video th-cam.com/video/9_vcu93jLL0/w-d-xo.html
I think there are places for cubanes in drug design. If you have a molecule that sucks, swapping a benzene for a cubane is unlikely to give a huge benefit. However, including cubanes in early stages of drug development (i.e. having cubane building blocks in fragment/screening libraries) is where I think the biggest benefit comes from. If you're more interested, I suggest looking up a series of papers called "Escaping Flatland"
One small complaint: HPLC itself is just the separation technique. That doesnt really tell you anything about how the sample was analyzed. Sure HPLC-MS is very common, but it could also be HPLC-UV-vis or HPLC-AAS for all we know.
In 20 years of doing analytical chemistry, I’ve never heard anyone use HPLC to imply merely separation, but I have heard and have used countless times HPLC as a generalization for an array of potential analyses which use a liquid mobile phase. For I ran VOCs by Purge & Trap for many years, but when talking about it I didn’t say Volatile Organic Compounds by Purge and Trap Gas Chromatography Quadrupole or Ion Trap Mass Spectrometry or even P&T GCMS. I would simply say VOCs or Purge & Trap. The rest was implied. That’s because you’re either talking to someone who likely already know or you’re putting someone to sleep (or ruining a date… don’t ask me how I know that one). If you really want to split hairs even quadrupoles or ion traps are simply means of separation, so what then? Do we need to specify the type of multiplier or analyzer or maybe the software? The context with which he used HPLC was fine. The content was obviously more about NMR… Not that I think its at all practical to have TH-camrs spending the kind of money that would be charged to have their characterizations done by NMR… Cool? Yes… Practical? Idk… Maybe just get it run by LCMS/MS or GCMS/MS… The results will be more quantitatively accurate while still providing a reasonably high level of certainty. True characterization gets expensive and somewhat an art form as much as a science.
@@alexjensen990 I did not mean it as a separation technique how a synthesis chemist would see it. All I wanted to point out, that what kind of detector you use with our HPLC system is a very important detail I would not leave out.
@@alexjensen990 I used it in my masters for merely separation.
I'd like to thank you for the effort you are putting into making TH-cam a more serious and reliable source of knowledge for chemistry, I think it would be great if videos included analysis + having a community of creators that can help with it sounds great. Loved the video!
I appreciate your feedback :)
Yeah i’m all for this, it would be a good example of how a group of chemists could review each other’s standardized results; which itself could be more content.
Yeah, you guys should totally form a 'Guild of TH-cam Chemists' of sorts, where everyone of different capability levels can play and help each other, establish paths of assistance for relevant testing/analysis, etc.
This could *really* help you guys elevate each other, give the little guys a leg-up and encouragement; at the very least - get rid of shit-talking or even *assumptions* of shit-talking that seem to have to be regularly dispelled at the moment.
I'm here for this. 😊
Nice video. Improving the scientific rigour of yt chem is a great thing o7
Seeing Dr Cutress in that discord server is wild, I usually just associate him with the IT and tech ends of things, forgetting that semiconductor manufacturing obviously includes a massive chemical component.
I am a stockroom manager at a university. That is, I prepare the experiments for the teaching labs for undergrads. I also order consumables and chemicals for same and for the research labs. The costs of videos definitely add up. For example I've found TLC plates anywhere from $0.25 - $2.25 per plate each. One of our undergrad labs uses minimum 6 plates per student IF they don't repeat the experiment because they messed up. That is a buck fifty on the cheap end to 13.50 on the high end. So, yeah, the lab fees are necessary and add up FAST.
First time I've been so early to one of your videos, I love learning more about chemistry as I'm finishing up college like this
I hope your studies go well :)
I'm taking ochem 1 lab right now and I'm suffering (I'm not great at chemistry or math but need it for my Enviro. Bio major) but watching youtube chemistry makes me actually enjoy chemistry. We've used IR spectroscopy instead of NMR, but it seems similar. Super interesting stuff!
Glad to hear it :)
Should I be studying for my biochem exam on Monday? Yes, but I’d rather watch this video first
As an undergrad my Inorganic professor gave us a minor challenge assignment. I took him upon it. It was a simple chelation of a metal halide with urea. The challenge was to try to make a ring compound.
I chose uranyl hexachloride. Why? Because I knew our stockroom had it .. and I’d get to play with uranium.
I was confident that if the synthesis worked I’d get a thick non polar oil. Unfortunately I had to work with a lab partner. He grabbed the wrong separating solvent.
It took 6 months of rotovapping to finally get a pure enough sample to analyze. But I had succeeded. My professor ended up writing up an article on the synthesis. Apparently no one had ever tried before.
I just thought it would be fun.
I'm happy to see other people care about the quality of science being done on this platform. It's always frustrating when somebody makes a claim for a synthesis and doesn't provide any proof other than "I obtained something." I do think NMR, MS, EA, and XRD are amazingly powerful techniques that should be employed in all peer reviewed synthetic work, as appropriate. For the youtube chemist, I think it may be too cost prohibitive. The cheapest characterization techniques out there are probably TLC, melting point, and boiling point. While these are a bit crude for peer reviewed journal articles, they are immensely useful for the home chemist. You did a really good job of covering TLC, but if you have a reference standard I would also suggest doing a co-spot with a mixture of your material and the reference next to the pure reference and your mixture. This prevents misinterpretation of the plate due to solvent moving asymmetrically through the silica. It also costs zero additional dollars if you're already doing TLC. Melting points of purified material can be compared to literature values and, in addition to TLC, are probably sufficient to assess purity and identity of a reported compound even in the absence of a reference standard.
We need to go full circle. NileRed needs to review That Chemist's work now
I'm fully on board with all of this. I'd love to join your discord for guidance. I finally started posting my projects I've been doing for the past 6yr and I'm just figuring out how to film things properly. Maybe when I get my views over 5k I'll be invited into the club
I believe in your bro, live out your chemist dreams!
The dramatic part is 24k Gold
What a well-thought out analysis on the credibility of chem-content online. It's really great to see some awareness, especially on such an important field of study.
It is definitely cursed to see so many chem youtubers extrapolate godly yields. I've always questioned the credibility of many TH-camrs since a lot of people take the internet at face value.
What a nice video.
Much appreciated!
I normally avoid videos with clickbatey titles ending in question marks. I'm really glad I made an exception here.
you’re like the dungeon master of chemistry
I love that we've entered the peer review era of chemtube
I was watching a video of his called "Can You Trust NileRed" and then saw this one on the recommended videos on the sidebar and I now hope to see a video on my recommended saying "Can we trust The Chemist?" and then it turns into an endless loop of chemistry youtubers verifying random videos of other chemistry youtubers
great educational video. i spose sam will be on board as with most of us products has to be tested properly to be sure if it’s correct 😊
You are a great chemist!
My first paper I followed was wrong... I repeated the synthesis and always got a yield of 120 %... The proton NMR seemed fine though. Even the C13 APT. Turned out that the reaction happened on the other side of a carbonyl group. So the paper was trash and I needed a C13 analysis which also shows quaternary carbons, which C13 APT doesn't. That teached me early to not trust publications without evidence. Because in our times, universities are a joke, just money for a diploma but no knowledge transfer anymore... Which also made the hiring process way more complicated...
You think academia is bad?! LOL! You would believe how much corporate time and money is spent to re-do the re-do, which itself was a re-do… Typically a symptom of a couple of things. Pride, ignorance, stubbornness, laziness, cronyism, or flat out unscrupulousness.
So because some paper was wrong according to you, universities are a joke? That makes very little sense. And it taught you to not trust publications without evidence? The evidence is in the publication, that's the point, unless it is literally fraudulent.
Explosions and Fire synthesis validation: It detonates, great success!
Extractions and Ire synthesis validation: Novel tar nr. 27, never described before...
This is AWESOME!
nile red should post "would you trust explosions & fire?" and its just a 5 second clip of Tom looking coy
Now we need a "should you trust That Chemist" video.
I love this chemistry beef chain reaction
I recently worked in an orgo research lab for the first time over last coop and honestly it’s not something you consider until you’ve worked in one. It would have been impossible to do my job without an NMR (at least confidently) even when I was making starting material I’ve made before I always NMR’d it to make sure nothing went wrong. Chemistry just hates you sometimes and doesn’t want to work lol
Get the popcorn everybody
I would argue about elemental analysis and HRMS, as both give you at the end (after proper calculations) the empirical formula of a compound, so both would be in the first characterization category, not in the purity one. It is just that HRMS is often coupled with some kind of chromatography separation (like HPLC). EA is horrible for purity checks, there was lately paper about it's error when analyzing the same sample multiple times, and it is often bigger than the error threshold given for data by journals.
On TLC animation, the starting line is BELOW the level of eluent, which would destroy any separation. maybe it is just perspective, but it suggests that you do it as such, with is rookie error.
As for TLC analysis, I completely agree! You just forgot to mention that such comparison should be done ON THE SAME PLATE, so separation would be done in ideally the same conditions. Also, the cross spot is important, if standard and unknown compounds are spotted in the same place if they are the same they develop as one, different compounds most often interact on silica together enough that it is visible that something is not right (so-called "snowman" where you have slight shift and it is possible to see those are two spots).
Taking into account how easy is historical version of Elemental Analysis (with is wonderful piece of glassware that is a logo of ACS) I am surprised no one made a video about it yet doing such an analysis, it should be perfectly viable in a home chem environment.
Besides that, great video. I also miss some analytical data in chemistry videos, sometimes boiling point or melting point is given, but boiling point should be given together with atmospheric pressure (for correction). And sometimes even those old-school spot tests would be a great addition to be able to say that yes, we made what we should.
what software did you use to make the 3D model of cubane at 3:28, looks very interesting
Yeahhh, i want to know aswell!!!
The fact that geosmin doesn't even show up in the nmr but you can still smell it just shows the potency of the chemical. (or another chemical that somehow smell the same?)
Shots fired!!! 😂 Nice preemptive move!
Love your discord server channels. I’m imagining you all occasionally consoling one another in the “mean comment” channel. Also I love hilarious youtube comments and have a considerable collection. 😁
Also loving this convergence event of chemtubers. 2024 will be the internet chemistry Renaissance. Cubane abound!
16:58 There is a name for that mechanism. I have seen this being called semi-benzilic acid rearrangement in an organic chemistry book.
My favorite thing was you showing the discord server & I see Explosions & Fire's pfp is upside down.
The begining of this video is like a crash course in analytical chemistry
Nilered needs to make about video "Can you trust The Chemist?"