You've admitted to changing one variable and have the nerve to post a thread asking why you got tar    The author of that procedure was responsible for many procedures in wide use, obviously you' don't have the same skills and experience    You're going to have to study this route a lot more thoroughly, and expect a very bumpy road on the way to what you seek    There's some information about polymerization on that web page you linked to, perhaps you should read it again  The end results do really come from the effort applied 

Quote from: antibody2 on May 21, 2013, 12:16:58 AM

Quote from: reckless on May 19, 2013, 11:33:31 AM

Urushibara is not active enough to reduce aliphatic nitro compounds. There are no mentions of such reductions in scientific literature.

Not true, Ritter reduced P2NP to amphetamine, and Antibody reduced TMP2NP to TMA2 in similar yields.
http://www.erowid.org/archive/rhodium/chemistry/tmp2np-red.html

However, that reaction is notoriously difficult to get reproducible yields from. You would be better off using the Al/Hg/GAA reduction, it is more consistent.

No references, no pictures, and no bioassays.

Pictures are a lot like training wheels on a toddler's bicycle, and thus unnecessary  They pose a security threat to the member :

http://127.0.0.1/talk/index.php/topic,2618.0.html

Published science has progressed for many centuries without such technology    The reduction of Phenyl-2-nitropropene to amphetamine isn't strictly aliphatic due to resonance involving the aromatic ring      There were many novel procedures posted and checked on the Hive, and with the demise of that web site where it was originally posted it's rather disingenuous to make those statements    This procedure hasn't been completely reduced to practice, and the fact that this thread was posted is yet more evidence that the database must bee returned to be publicly available for the same reasons the web site came into existence in the first place    Antibody was and still is a contributor of very useful information to the swarm    As Jacked signature stated on the Hive, the end results from the effort applied 

Quote from: lugh

  There were many novel procedures posted and checked on the Hive, and with the demise of that web site where it was originally posted it's rather disingenuous to make those statements 

  I am aware of Millgram's experiment so trusting to authority is not an argument.

Quote from: atara

With that said, I haven't searched the literature (and don't plan to).

Very nice and professional. Keep going.

Quote from: J.March, Advanced organic chemistry (Sixth edition), p1268

The reaction of Al-NiCl2*6H2O-THF converted a,b-unsaturated nitro compounds to the corresponding aldehyde

Bezbaraua, M.S.;Bez, G; Barua N.C. Chem. Lett. 1999, 325
With p2np, that procedure would give p2p with lower yeilds.

Ritter and Antibody were both highly respected members of the Hive who helped provide many of the procedures still in wide use by the swarm    Checking a proposed procedure before publication is what is called peer review, which was practiced on the Hive and Rhodium's web site when possible since it's how published science is best done    The Hive was unique and the old saw that says "You would have to have been there to understand it" certainly applies    The end really does result from the effort applied 

Quote from: Impossible on May 19, 2013, 04:02:44 AM

substituting Al powder for foil

Never substitute some Aluminum with foil in a preparation, that is the worst source of Al in the home lab, it has no fresh surfaces means it must be one of the most Al2O3 containing aluminum preparations anyway, and it is also very impure Al containing only like 98 or 99% due to being greased.
Use very fresh milled powder instead for most thinnest oxide layer.

Quote from: reckless on May 23, 2013, 03:17:57 PM

There are no mentions of such reductions in scientific literature.

US Patent 3458576 is attached

I believe I mistyped in that post.  I used Al powder rather than the Al foil that Ritter used in the procedure.