
Things I Won't Work With: Dioxygen Difluoride - timr
http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/things_i_wont_work_with/
======
megaduck
I've never had much interest in chemistry, but after reading this article, I
found myself digging through the archives. And then I found myself thinking,
"Chlorine Trifluoride is scary stuff! He says that's because it's a damned
impressive oxidizing agent. What exactly does it mean to be an 'oxidizing
agent' anyways? Hmm..." I'm now sorely tempted to spend the remainder of my
day sifting through chemistry stuff online.

This is exactly the kind of writing that the scientific community needs. This
is outreach and recruitment at its finest, and we could use a lot more of it.
People ask, "How do we get kids interested in science?" Prof. Lowe's blog
isn't the entire answer, but it's a hell of a good start.

Correction: As noted below, _Dr._ Lowe is not a professor. My error, but
everything else still stands.

~~~
dalke
Mmmm, he's a corporate pharmaceutical researcher with a PhD and not an
academic, so while you can call him "Dr." he's not a "Prof."

~~~
oconnore
Speaking of things the scientific community needs: less academic snobbery.

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
That's not snobbery, it's simple (but understandable) inaccuracy. Most people
don't know that "Prof" is a job title, "Dr" is a qualification (specifically a
degree). You can be either without the other - I know a Prof without a
doctorate.

It's akin to confusing a linguist with a polyglot, a top-level accountant with
a research mathematician, or someone who writes HTML with someone who programs
in Python. They are simply different. Not getting it right is either a
mistake, or a demonstration of lack of knowledge of the difference.

EDIT: Added the first parenthetical clause.

~~~
megaduck
For the record, it was a simple mistake. I read the article, glanced at his
bio on the left, saw that he led with his academic credentials, and
incorrectly inferred a teaching position.

I'd like to say 'Thank You' to the HN community for brutally enforcing both
clarity and accuracy. You guys are the best proofreaders _ever_.

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
I hope you don't feel too bruised, and my apologies if I contributed to it. I
tried to make it clear that it is, as I said, a common and understandable
mistake.

~~~
megaduck
Not at all, the thanks are sincere. There's enough sloppy thinking out there,
I'd rather not add to it.

------
donw
Flourine is nasty stuff, period.

I'll be reading through the archives of this blog, for the same reasons that I
tracked down a PDF copy of the late John Clark's book 'Ignition', which is a
history of rocket fuel. Note that an actual copy of the book itself is a
collectors' item and sells for around $400; believe you me, if I could pick
one of these up out of the bargain bin at Walgreens, I would.

Here's his description of the lovely Chlorine Triflouride:

”It is, of course, extremely toxic, but that's the least of the problem. It is
hypergolic with every known fuel, and so rapidly hypergolic that no ignition
delay has ever been measured. It is also hypergolic with such things as cloth,
wood, and test engineers, not to mention asbestos, sand, and water-with which
it reacts explosively. It can be kept in some of the ordinary structural
metals-steel, copper, aluminium, etc.-because of the formation of a thin film
of insoluble metal fluoride which protects the bulk of the metal, just as the
invisible coat of oxide on aluminium keeps it from burning up in the
atmosphere. If, however, this coat is melted or scrubbed off, and has no
chance to reform, the operator is confronted with the problem of coping with a
metal-fluorine fire. For dealing with this situation, I have always
recommended a good pair of running shoes.”

~~~
berntb
You got all that from the Wiki page? :-)

------
ableal
There was a time when there were chemistry sets for sale as gifts to kids ...
Mostly rather mild stuff - pretty colors, bad smells, melted plastic.

This is hard core chemistry lab. Choice bit on a particularly explosive paper:

 _If the paper weren't laid out in complete grammatical sentences and
published in JACS, you'd swear it was the work of a violent lunatic._

P.S. the URL posted is not for the exact piece which is currently at the top;
that's
[http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2010/02/23/things_i_won...](http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2010/02/23/things_i_wont_work_with_dioxygen_difluoride.php)

P.P.S. don't miss out on the comments - some are as amusing as the post, and
there's even a call for a web business at #46 ...

------
csytan
Chemists in general are a crazy lot.

I once worked in a lab where my job was to dispose of chemicals and clean out
beakers and glassware (a dishwasher). Sometimes we needed to use concentrated
sulfuric acid to clean out the particularly nasty stuff when regular detergent
wouldn't cut it.

One drop of this stuff will make your skin peel off and fall into the sink;
one splash could blind you.

I was always donned in a lab coat, thick gloves, safety glasses, etc. but my
professor used just his bare hands, rotating the glassware so that the liquid
would touch all surfaces. Meanwhile, I would watch in awe and wonder. Awe,
because he was cocky enough to do this knowing the risks, and wonder, that he
was still alive in once piece.

~~~
berntb
Well, [organic] chemists are "famous" for low average life span.

I heard claims that the life expectancy was much better these days, but the
person making the claim had an obvious interest in selling people on doing
more courses in the subject. (And the subject is fun; if it had been possible
for me, I would have done more org chem.)

------
adw
Well, there's a reason why the founder crew working here at Timetric are all
ex- _theoretical_ chemists...

...ish, anyway. I'm a mineralogist by training, which exposes you to a
different set of scary stuff. X-rays, neutron beams, bandsaws, and in my own
oh-God-close-escape moment, cryogenic gases - a mishap during a calorimetry
experiment leading to a canister of liquid N2 gushing out through a broken
pressure hose.

All kids' play compared to this stuff, though; neutrons will kill you dead but
there are so many safety interconnects and film-badge radiation detectors that
you'd have to actually _want_ to get hurt. Organic chemists are hardcore.

------
sethg
My wife, a chemistry Ph.D. turned stay-at-home-mom, _loves_ the “Things I
Won’t Work With” series. It brings back fond memories of all the bench-top
fires she was responsible for as a grad student.

------
pavel_lishin
My favorite line from his blog is "[Perchloric acid] is a liquid with a
boiling point of around 80 C, and I'd like to shake the hand of whoever
determined that property, assuming he has one left."

[http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2006/05/30/things_i_won...](http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2006/05/30/things_i_wont_work_with_frisky_perchlorates.php)

------
Zak
A quick google search reveals that this stuff reacts with _xenon_. Nasty,
indeed.

------
dmm
I'm so thankful chemical warfare did not become widely practiced. There are
some truly horrible substances out there.

~~~
donw
Many of which are available on the dollar menu at Taco Bell.

~~~
jrockway
So that's what "mustard gas" is.

~~~
anthonyb
No, it reacts and becomes "mustard gas" about 8 hours later...

------
ars
Chlorine trifluoride
[http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2008/02/26/sand_wont_sa...](http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2008/02/26/sand_wont_save_you_this_time.php)
is still my favorite.

That stuff will _burn_ cement and rocks! And I do mean burn, and not dissolve
or anything else.

------
nas
Good stuff. For those who haven't seen them, the Periodic Table of Videos
([http://www.youtube.com/user/periodicvideos#p/u/17/pPdevJTGAY...](http://www.youtube.com/user/periodicvideos#p/u/17/pPdevJTGAYY))
are entertaining.

------
joshu
"satan's kimchi"

~~~
TrevorJ
It is funny that you mention that since I commonly refer to kimchi itself as
"Satan's salad". I've never read a chemistry article that was this
entertaining.

------
sp332
_Hydrogen sulfide, for example, reacts with four molecules of FOOF to give
sulfur hexafluoride, 2 molecules of HF and four oxygens...and 433 kcal_

433 kilocalaries from 5 molecules? Am I reading that right?

~~~
gus_massa
It gives 433 kcal/ _mol_ , i. e. 433 kilocalories from 5 * 6.02E23 molecules.
It is approximately 68g FOOF and 132g HS. (about 2oz and 5oz respectively)

~~~
jules
Is that a lot? The same amount of fat can be burned for more energy?

~~~
eslifka
Yes, but what's important is the rate. Power is the measure of calories per
hour (or joules per second). Fat (and food in general) is extremely energy
dense, but that energy can only be released relatively slowly.

This is the same reason why TNT is used for demolition while gasoline is used
for engines. Gasoline delivers 15 times the energy of an equal weight of TNT,
but TNT's energy release is much more rapid (it can also do so without air,
the other big reason for blowing things up with TNT).

------
jrockway
Tangentially related: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F00f>

------
zaphar
That was a very entertaining read. That blog is going on my reading list for
sure.

------
elblanco
Wow what great science writing. He made it sound incredibly cool, and normal
at the same time. Like somebody talking about car racing.

Now I want to go and look up all this stuff.

------
FlorinAndrei
Ha ha! Nice!

I was a chemistry geek in high school, with a penchant for highly exothermic
reactions if you know what I mean. Thanks for the trip down memory lane.

------
tjmc
Hilarious article. I'm always a bit disappointed by how little overlap there
is between the chemistry and hacker communities though. cf. comments like
this: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1149075>

------
btilly
Quick question. How in the heck can you make a high explosive at 700C that has
a nasty tendency to react with stuff and explode at -180C? Wouldn't it explode
before you've actually made it?

~~~
ars
Keep it away from anything it might react with.

------
pw0ncakes
I wonder how it reacts with Fluoride Divanadium, also known as FDiV.

------
neuroelectronic
I wonder if this Dioxygen Difluoride + Hydrogen Sulfide reaction could be
harnessed as an ultra-dense fuel source for an internal combustion engine.

~~~
pwdfilelocked
\- First the fuel source would need to be kept at -160C or so, which is
difficult, and would be decidedly impressive upon failure. \- Second, one of
the reaction products is HF gas. If this doesn't mean anything to you, note
that HF gas was the -first- substance covered in the "Things I won't work
with" category. "And that soaks into tissue very readily, with the acid part
doing its damage along the way, and the fluoride merrily poisoning enzymes and
wreaking havoc."

~~~
neuroelectronic
Sounds like a win-win

