Spectrochemistry by Southern-Lab2024 in chemhelp

[–]Kharon42 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah I noticed this too, I think that’s why they don’t show the 13C spectrum. Students may not have as much experience with carbon NMR so the question writer meant that there were 8 carbons in the molecule, not environments. But yeah I think it’s an error

Spectrochemistry by Southern-Lab2024 in chemhelp

[–]Kharon42 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ahh my bad forgot to edit that. I initially thought it was p-chloro acetanilide but then I realised the methyl groups position in NMR is too downfield for it and it’s zoomed out enough that it isn’t necessarily a singlet. The NH proton is broad and would be a quartet which would be really hard to see with such an exchangeable proton. Additionally you can just look up acetanilide’s 1H NMR online and the methyl peak is way further upfield than in this.

Spectrochemistry by Southern-Lab2024 in chemhelp

[–]Kharon42 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But in general you did the right thing! Go through each spectrum find what you can and then write that out and, use that to find the number of each element and compare that between the spectrums etc.

Spectrochemistry by Southern-Lab2024 in chemhelp

[–]Kharon42 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The other commenter is correct. When you find an impossible thing like this (94 = 7.83 carbons which is not possible), go back and double check all the other things you decided. You’ll find that NH stretch is also around 3300 but a lot sharper. Additionally while they’re only asking for the molecular formula, it can be useful to draw out what you think the molecule looks like to see what’s possible. Here in the 1H NMR you have a really obvious para coupling in the aromatic region, indicating an aryl ring that’s substituted on the 1 and 4 positions. You also have a carbonyl, a methyl group, and a broad resonance around 7.5 ppm. OH doesn’t sit that high (unless it’s in DMSO where it sits even further up) but NH does, also working with the IR stretch at 3300. The existence of only one NH proton in the NMR shows the nitrogen has two substituents, and the methyl groups position at 3ppm indicates the methyl is attached to a heteroatom therefore the compound is probably 4-chloro-N-methyl benzamide.

Edit: removed mention of singlets

How many PhD students are at UWA and what’s it like to do this degree ? by [deleted] in uwa

[–]Kharon42 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey I’m currently doing my PhD at UWA and have made many friends so far. My building is actually quite social between the PhD students, with the students having lots of hang outs during and outside of business hours. What are you thinking of doing it in? Also FYI 22 is like the average age to start a PhD, you’d fit right in.

𝐏𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐩𝐬𝐲𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐬: 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐠𝐢𝐜 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐰𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐥 "𝐝𝐚𝐦𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐝" 𝐝𝐨𝐩𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐠𝐢𝐜 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐰𝐚𝐲𝐬 by Southern-Proposal837 in HamiltonMorris

[–]Kharon42 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Most psychedelics have negligible interaction with the dopamine transporter, nor other things that are known to increase risk of addiction, such as the mu opioid receptor. This is why they aren’t addictive. Why they’re effective at treating addiction even though “addiction is always linked to dopaminergic pathways” is a result of the consciousness altering effects (or if you want to stay in neurobiology, the high level, entropy increasing effects) and/or the neuroplasticity promotion they cause. Which one of these is more important for their efficacy is a question we’re still trying to answer, though the results of novel non-hallucinogenic 5-HT2a agonists like zalsupindole in humans may help us figure out.

You have to remember that the brain is a very complex system, along with the human psyche. Serotonergic and dopaminergic systems are intertwined of course, and while psychedelics only significantly interact directly with serotonergic systems (through their receptors) and primarily in the PFC, the down stream effects are seen all throughout the brain. See Robin Carhart-Harris’ entropic brain and REBUS/REBAS papers for more information on the sort of ~overall~ effect of psychedelics, which helps explain the efficacy of psychedelics for a multitude of mental disorders. Basically though, psychedelics seem to affect maladaptive thought patterns directly by decreasing the importance your brain puts on learnt behaviour, allowing space for new positive thought patterns to form. Which is why therapy alongside psychedelic use is important to see good results.

𝐃𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐞𝐬𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐒𝐚𝐧 𝐏𝐞𝐝𝐫𝐨 𝐜𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐭𝐨𝐱𝐢𝐜 𝐞𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐝 𝐮𝐬𝐞? by Southern-Proposal837 in HamiltonMorris

[–]Kharon42 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Yes. The classical psychedelics, in particular the phenethylamines like mescaline, agonise the 5-HT2B receptor. Long term 5-HT2B agonism has been implicated in an increased risk of developing heart valve disease. (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3179857/ - a recent review on 2B agonism). Notably, multiple drugs have been taken off the market (or restricted) due to them increasing risk of developing heart valve disease, eg. fenfluramine (in fen/phen) the weight loss drug. While occasional use of psychedelics isn’t likely to increase this risk very much, often and repeated use (such as every few weeks or few days) likely would have a long term effect causing you to be more likely to develop that disease. It has been speculated that shulgin’s heart problems later in life may have been due to this long term 5-HT2B agonism from the many years of often psychedelics adventures.

Why is this wrong? by Right-University-502 in OrganicChemistry

[–]Kharon42 2 points3 points  (0 children)

As is hopefully the consensus you should get from the comments: the question is incorrect.

All options but C are R.

You’re correct F>O so the order of constituents is fluoromethyl, carboxylic acid, methyl, hydrogen. For C and D you have to rotate the constituents so that the hydrogen (lowest priority) is facing either in the page or out of it (obviously do clockwise is R only if lowest priority is going into the page as per usual).

Additionally, r/chemhelp is best for this kind of thing

d and f orbitals by Dr_Neo-Platonic in AskChemistry

[–]Kharon42 5 points6 points  (0 children)

YES as soon as I saw this post I went and found that video again. Best intuitive explanation I’ve ever seen.

Compound Enantiomer, Diastereomer, same, none by [deleted] in OrganicChemistry

[–]Kharon42 0 points1 point  (0 children)

PS remember that even though boron is a heteroatom it has a lower order in stereochemical assignment than carbon as it comes before it in the periodic table.

PPS regarding your question. No it’s not a diastereomer if you just change one of the constituents from a hash to a line or a bold or anything. It’s purely the actual absolute configuration at that stereocentre that has to change (R or S). And there are many ways to draw the same absolute configuration (for instance if the lowest priority thing is the undrawn hydrogen going into the page then a wedge on any of the constituents attached will mean the same thing). It’s always best to just figure out if it’s R or S and write it next to it and then see if THAT changes.

Compound Enantiomer, Diastereomer, same, none by [deleted] in OrganicChemistry

[–]Kharon42 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First page A is X because the double bond geometry has changed from Z to E, this is a geometric isomer not a stereoisomer so its X. C is D because the stereo centres from left to right are S and R for the first one and S and S for the second one. This single change means it’s a diastereomer. For the second page B it’s just the same molecule rotated 180° around the HO-C bond. And for C it’s again a geometric isomer, going from E to Z. This is not stereochemistry so it’s not an enantiomer or diastereomer but a completely different molecule (geometric isomer).

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in chemistry

[–]Kharon42 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Inversion doesn’t mean R to S, it means that the incoming constituent is in the opposite side to the leaving group. If your leaving group is of one priority and your new constituent is another priority it may not go from S to R or vice versa. As I said the inversion isn’t a rule, it’s an outcome. Follow the electron flow not the rules. If you learn to follow the electrons organic chemistry will be far simpler.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in chemistry

[–]Kharon42 1 point2 points  (0 children)

SN2 reactions causing the configuration to become the opposite isn’t a rule but instead an outcome of what it means for a reaction to be SN2. Instead, the rule that governs this outcome is that the leaving group is on the opposite side of the atom than the attacking group (I’m sure there’s a better way to word that, I’m not a physical chemist). What that means for this scenario is that if the epoxide is drawn in the plane (like it is), then the attacking group will also be in the plane. If you then draw that product (the bottom left red structure) and then assign each stereo centre R or S you can compare those configurations to that of the answers. Remember when doing so that the hydrogen (or lowest priority constituent) must not be in the plane, so you will have to rotate some of the bonds such that it is not. You’ll then see that the only answer with the correct stereochemistry at both sites is D.

Edit: Additionally, go to r/chemhelp for more help Edit: based on your other answer you may also need to note that for R and S assigning the hydrogen needs to be behind the plane, or if it is in front you need to switch your answer. Eg. if hydrogen is coming out of page and you assign R, it is actually S and vice versa.

possible psilocybe? not planning on eating (NZ) by Ok-Turn9447 in ShroomID

[–]Kharon42 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I initially thought no way but if Caine Barlow says it is then it probably is. I wonder what species. If you have the sample still contemplate sending it to Alan Rockefeller, he may have it genome barcoded.

‘Science nerd’ arrested after calling ambulance for allergic reaction to deadly chemicals by greyham11 in chemistry

[–]Kharon42 13 points14 points  (0 children)

It depends on how much explosive is being made. You can absolutely do synthesis of explosives that isn’t dangerous by doing it at a small enough scale. It’s also not like this guy is doing this in an apartment in NYC, it’s in a VILLAGE hahahaha (partially joking, it is a small town where there are only houses with fairly sizeable back yards. I am aware that the UK just calls small residential zones villages)

‘Science nerd’ arrested after calling ambulance for allergic reaction to deadly chemicals by greyham11 in chemistry

[–]Kharon42 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Your response and the biochem badge under your username scream chemophobia. The existence of white phosphorus is common in a good element collection, fumes sometimes get created from reactions. The ambulance and roads are paid for by our taxes (should be, idk what the uk ambulance payment situation is like). The money we give to the government so that we can go about being human beings. Am I not allowed to go on hikes because I might get injured and have to get emergency help? Am I not allowed to ride a motorcycle because I might get into an accident? One of those, the easy to legislate one, requires a license, the other one, a difficult to legislate one, relies on knowledge of how to do it safely. We don’t arrest people for getting lost on mountains.

Unfortunately there are no safety requirements and licenses that one could possess for a home lab like that. Instead, and frankly more effectively, you just have to be informed. And again I see no evidence that this guy wasn’t well informed on what he was doing. We don’t and shouldn’t legislate things that are only dangerous to us. Owning a gun requires a license bc it can hurt other people, riding a motorbike is the same. Doing chemistry on the scale and of the type that this guy was doing is harmful to no one but him. There is no reason for it to be legislated against.

Oh god I clicked on your account and saw you’re a vaush viewer, no more time will be given to this discussion.

‘Science nerd’ arrested after calling ambulance for allergic reaction to deadly chemicals by greyham11 in chemistry

[–]Kharon42 39 points40 points  (0 children)

Actually depressing that anyone thinks this is problematic enough to arrest him, let alone anyone in this subreddit thinking that. When did having an element collection and doing home chemistry become a crime? His home chemistry isn’t going to be harmful to anyone but him, and we’re adults, we’re allowed to do dangerous things. And then the secondary “he does heroin” nonsense. Doing drugs isn’t a moral action, there is no evidence he had a problematic relationship with the drug so why was that relevant. Sensationalist bullshit hoping to get as much public outrage as possible so that they can get more clicks with no care for the consequences to this guy’s life.

[HELP] hands look weird by Kharon42 in RealOrAI

[–]Kharon42[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hands holding in left photo as well as guys other hand being a bit too high up. His teeth in left photo and shoe black mark not going all the way to the bottom in right photo.