Author Topic: Short Question Thread 2.0  (Read 5704 times)

Vesp

  • Administrator
  • Foundress Queen
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,130
Short Question Thread 2.0
« on: March 13, 2012, 06:26:14 AM »
This is the second short questions thread since the other one was nearly 60 pages long.
This is for questions not worthy of an entire thread, but still a bit difficult to answer on your own or if you just simply want a break, a second opinion, etc... Much like sciencemadness's short question threads.

The Short Questions Thread allows you to ask questions and get an answer back relatively fast.  Please UTFSE before hand, but if you can't find a simple answer, come here!

1. No friendly chit chat! Only ask and answer questions.
2. Try to clearly state both questions and answers to the best of your ability
3. Try to demonstrate you have researched the topic, provide references if applicable/possible.
Bitcoin address: 1FVrHdXJBr6Z9uhtiQKy4g7c7yHtGKjyLy

Vesp

  • Administrator
  • Foundress Queen
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,130
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #1 on: March 13, 2012, 06:37:20 AM »
Also - this is not just chemistry questions, it is any sort of questions - except for ones related to this sites operation, Me, mods, etc... post those in the Site section of this site or just PM me - whatever you prefer.
Bitcoin address: 1FVrHdXJBr6Z9uhtiQKy4g7c7yHtGKjyLy

fresh1

  • conspirator
  • Dominant Queen
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #2 on: March 13, 2012, 11:03:53 AM »
   so this could be the "Short 'Dumb' Questions"   tooo?  :D  coool  8)  or do you mean as in general science questions or?  ???
« Last Edit: March 13, 2012, 11:05:47 AM by fresh1 »
"Curiosity is a gift"

newbiechem

  • Pupae
  • **
  • Posts: 62
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #3 on: March 13, 2012, 08:05:30 PM »
here i will try again hehehe

at bright star paper, when we makes methylamine hcl, he add 350ml of water with the paraformaldehide and amonium!
at the other paper at rhodium with picture steps, NO water is mentioned!

is water nedded for reaction? or no?

thanks

Vesp

  • Administrator
  • Foundress Queen
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,130
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #4 on: March 13, 2012, 08:38:01 PM »
   so this could be the "Short 'Dumb' Questions"   tooo?  :D  coool  8)  or do you mean as in general science questions or?  ???

Science questions in general -- I think a dumb question thread exists in the den?
Bitcoin address: 1FVrHdXJBr6Z9uhtiQKy4g7c7yHtGKjyLy

newbiechem

  • Pupae
  • **
  • Posts: 62
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #5 on: March 13, 2012, 10:01:48 PM »
Dumb question thread would probely fell like home hehehe  ;D

fresh1

  • conspirator
  • Dominant Queen
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #6 on: March 15, 2012, 01:58:23 PM »
yep vesp it sure does, and its not such a dumb question, just not scientific!  ::)

newbiechem I'm not sure what you mean by 'just like home' ... what, your home, or something else?

not having a go at you or anything, just wondering

sometimes what appears 'dumb' is actually far from it! remember, "curiosity is a gift"
"Curiosity is a gift"

newbiechem

  • Pupae
  • **
  • Posts: 62
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #7 on: March 15, 2012, 04:48:25 PM »
meant like my home hehehe just playing because i think i make dumb questions sometimes....dumb like obious questions for you guys hehehe but mostly its because the lack of experience with materials, set ups, chem knowladge (since i took my first chem lessons at a foreign school) hehehe but im patience! :)

like asking if the formaldehide and amonium chloride needs water to form methylamine i didnt think was SOO dumb hehehe

peace

fresh1

  • conspirator
  • Dominant Queen
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #8 on: March 16, 2012, 05:44:21 AM »
thanx NBC  it can be tough sometimes to get answers to some questions becoz a) they are often to be found 'somehere' online so UTFSE is the answer given which isnt so helpful b) the people who can answer your questions have probably done so many times in the past and get tired of repeating themselves.

There IS, however, an amazing amout of useful info here and at some other well known sites, it just takes a little practice at learning the 'best' way to UTSE to obtain the answers you are looking for

Asking questions for which have been answered many times is a good way to have folks think you are not trying very hard. Which IMO may not be very fair, esp if you dont speak english as your first language

Good luck with your rxn's and dont worry if someone says its a dumb question, after all "the only failure is the failure to try"
"Curiosity is a gift"

dream0n

  • Subordinate Wasp
  • ***
  • Posts: 204
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #9 on: March 16, 2012, 06:03:46 AM »
If you have "obvious" questions, but want to communicated about it.. try #chemistry over on freenode. They are a helpful lot.
off to bigger and better things - don't worry I will visit from time to time

fresh1

  • conspirator
  • Dominant Queen
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #10 on: March 30, 2012, 09:02:26 AM »
Quote
is water nedded for reaction? or no?

idk if anyone answered your question possibly becoz there IS a lot of data easily available, considering there are lots of refs to this here, you really should try TSE
                  http://127.0.0.1/talk/index.php/topic,1060.msg30200.html#msg30200

 but it seems there are two schools of thought about this....both with and without water work...it seems yields vary for reasons fresh doesnt know

Suffice to say EITHER way will get you some good, which considering the availability of the precusors is usually more than "enough"

Temperature control is most important to avoid the dimers and trimers

good luck with your work, and dont be put of by the lack of response, after all we ALL had to start somewhere ;)
« Last Edit: March 30, 2012, 09:20:41 AM by fresh1 »
"Curiosity is a gift"

Oerlikon

  • Dominant Queen
  • ****
  • Posts: 365
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #11 on: April 02, 2012, 10:46:45 PM »
So...

After successfully nitro/ketone reductive amalgamation to get MDMA I decided to distill most of the MeOH to reuse it next time (It is rich in methylamine!) but i unfortunately scorched a bit of MDMA or what not in that flask and I got very lousy yields from that reaction.
After that MeOH was staying a while in the closed bottle it turned yelowish-green.
This might be doe the slight contamination with Fe and Fe oxides.

But...
Is it possible that MDMA freebase came along the MeOH and methylamine forming aesotrope!?
Welcome to my lab,
where you can choose your own dreams!

antibody2

  • Subordinate Wasp
  • ***
  • Posts: 158
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #12 on: April 02, 2012, 11:11:28 PM »
No, MDMA freebase and MeOH will not form an azeotrope. The only way you would get the freebase coming over with your alcohol is if you had a lot of bumping OR if the temperature got out of hand after all the MeOH had come over.

DopeBee

  • Pupae
  • **
  • Posts: 52
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #13 on: April 05, 2012, 07:15:17 AM »
Would the oxime of methyl cinnamic aldehyde [cas 101-39-3] reduce to methamphetamine in Antibody's acidic Al/Hg reduction?

RoidRage

  • Dominant Queen
  • ****
  • Posts: 386
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #14 on: April 05, 2012, 07:02:38 PM »
Certainly not...Don't know about the double-bond (I suppose it would get reduced), but the aldoxime would get reduced with a primary amine + there is 1 aditionnal carbon than in amphetamines. That means you'll get 2-methyl-3-phenylpropan-1-amine

Bluebottle

  • Subordinate Wasp
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #15 on: April 07, 2012, 03:15:31 AM »
I assume if this worked it would be common practice, so I must be missing something obvious, and I'm curious what.

To summarize: nitration of 1-naphthoic acid and reduction to amine, forms 3-amino-1-naphthoic acid. ( haarp://www.jbc.org/content/130/1/407.full.pdf ) A second nitration of this followed by reduction to the amine and dehydration to the lactam, yields 3-aminonaphthostyril. The skraup synthesis with glycerol yields a quinoline, and reduction with sodium in butanol yields ergoline - this is old stuff. The sodium metal reduction is rather inefficient, in the case of synthesis of dihydrolysergic acid around 8% (but perhaps there's a way to optimize it?)

Also note that 3-aminonaphthostyril, when reduced at ~20% yield with sodium to the b-amino 3,4-trimethyleneindole, probably is a drug in its own right - and would have little risk of the condensation that plagues tryptamines, under attempted Eschweiler Clarke alkylation. Although, "Substituted Naphthofurans as Hallucinogenic Phenethylamine-Ergoline Hybrid Molecules with Unexpected Muscarinic Antagonist Activity" might suggest a similar activity of this aminotrimethyleneindole, and an antimuscarinic psychedelic could be a very dangerous drug.

Instead of the skraup synthesis with glycerol, cyanomalonic dialdehyde - the subject of Uhle's paper cited below, etc. With catalytic hydrogenation of the quinolinium thing, then Na/BuOH, hydrolysis yields 9,10-dihydrolysergic acid, although in somewhat low yield.

Now I must wonder: with NaBH4 under the proper conditions, that same methyl quinolinium salt seems like it might be reduced to the dihydroquinoline. Does it simply not? (If not, there are specific syntheses for dihydroquinolines.) As sodium doesn't seem to reduce alkenes, reduction should yield racemic paspalic acid, which is known to be isomerized to lysergic acid. So what is it I'm missing? Sodium simply reduces it completely?

THE ERGOT ALKALOIDS. XX. THE SYNTHESIS OF DIHYDRO-dl-LYSERGIC ACID. A NEW SYNTHESIS OF 3-SUBSTITUTED QUINOLINES
FREDERICK C. UHLE, WALTER A. JACOBS
J. Org. Chem., 1945, 10 (1), pp 76–86
DOI: 10.1021/jo01177a014
Publication Date: January 1945

Dihydroquinolines. I. The Action of Metal Hydrides on Quaternary Quinolinium Salts
ROBERT C. ELDERFIELD, BRUCE H. WARK
J. Org. Chem., 1962, 27 (2), pp 543–548
DOI: 10.1021/jo01049a048
Publication Date: February 1962

Thanks RoidRage!
« Last Edit: April 09, 2012, 08:28:56 PM by Bluebottle »
"And now we divide both sides by zero..."

RoidRage

  • Dominant Queen
  • ****
  • Posts: 386
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #16 on: April 09, 2012, 08:17:58 PM »
Bluebottle's References Papers

THE ERGOT ALKALOIDS. XX. THE SYNTHESIS OF DIHYDRO-dl-LYSERGIC ACID. A NEW SYNTHESIS OF 3-SUBSTITUTED QUINOLINES
FREDERICK C. UHLE, WALTER A. JACOBS
J. Org. Chem., 1945, 10 (1), pp 76–86
DOI: 10.1021/jo01177a014
Publication Date: January 1945

Dihydroquinolines. I. The Action of Metal Hydrides on Quaternary Quinolinium Salts

ROBERT C. ELDERFIELD, BRUCE H. WARK
J. Org. Chem., 1962, 27 (2), pp 543–548
DOI: 10.1021/jo01049a048
Publication Date: February 1962

gloves

  • Larvae
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #17 on: April 14, 2012, 09:37:47 PM »
Hello,

simple/silly question:

is there anything else other than acetic anhydride or acetyl chloride which could esterify THC to THC-O-acetate?

Thank you

JustDreaming

  • Pupae
  • **
  • Posts: 53
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #18 on: April 15, 2012, 03:28:34 AM »
Those are the most common acetylating reagents. An uncommon example would be acetylsalicyclic acid in the right solvent conditions will work for some N acetylations however not for O acetylations . I'm not an expert but unaware of any other viable options.
This never really happens, but an eye still see's these things. It keeps happening. You just don't see it.

FlaskGenie

  • Larvae
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Short Question Thread 2.0
« Reply #19 on: April 15, 2012, 03:32:49 AM »
Hello all,
My question is in relation to "Reductive Amination of P2P through Catalytic Hydrogenation Using Adams Catalyst” on the Rhodium mirror. Specifically sub-section 4.4.2  "Iron Reduction of 1-phenyl-2-nitropropene to 1-phenyl-2-propanone."

"Pour 15 liters of clean tap water into the vessel. Follow this with 4000g of catalytic iron, 3400g (20mol) of 1-phenyl- 2-nitropropene and 40-50g of ferric chloride. Assemble the top with the condenser in the reflux mode, start the water running through the condenser, begin stirring, and fire up the propane burner. Watch the thermometer and turn off the heat when the temperature reaches 90°C. Slowly add muriatic acid in small doses over a 2-hour period."

My question is about the 40-50 g of ferric chloride.  I’m wondering if the ferric(III)chloride isn't just changed to ferrous(II)chloride as soon as the HCl is introduced.  I am thinking that the Ferric(III)chloride as a catalyst is even needed.  If I am incorrect can someone help me understand the need for it. 

Thanks,

F.G.