Category Archives: Uncategorized

Flying Links

While I try not to operate this blog like a directory, on occasion there are links so compelling that I just have to do it.  The blog Growabrain always has great links and that was my entry point into these links. 

Apparently, someone much braver than I flew their airplane through a hole or gap in a mountain ridge. Check it out. Must be a homebuilt and must have been a calm day.  A bit of wind shear on either side of this could have ruined his/her entire day. 

In another video, a Swiss pilot flys a jet fighter through the Swiss Alps.  Pretty impressive. At about the 3 minute mark he flys up the Matterhorn.  Amazing.  This is quite skillful flying.  Any hiccup in the powerplant and you’re on the ground straight away in flaming, crumpled aluminum.

Finally, if you are not compelled to strap a single engine delta wing fighter to your backside after viewing this one, then quite possibly you are dead. Consult your physician.

Solar System Simulator

NASA has a great website with a solar system simulator in it.  For instance, it will simulate the positions of the various satellites of the planets.  It also gives the user a choice of sites from which to take in the view.  So, if you are going to look at Jupiter some evening through your backyard telescope, you should be able to identify the 4 brighter moons.

Howard be thy name

A few posts ago I wrote about buying chemicals from Asia. I mentioned the weakness with shipping. But there are other snags in the system to contend with.  Recently I received a parcel of non-hazardous material that I bought from China. I have been trying to source this stuff for years and I finally found a candidate vendor. We already make the stuff, but we’re short on capacity.  The qual sample was a white granular product and was packed in thin plastic zip-lock sandwich baggies jammed into a used stereo speaker box (!!@#*!). Hell, the foam part for protecting the speaker was still in the box. OK, not smart. And it was mislabeled as some other product. That was the really dumb part.

Torqued about this, I fired off a grim and terse torpedo-gram expressing my shock and dismay at their poor judgement in these matters.  The vendor rapidly replied, exclaiming in much poorer English this time, that since it was a colorless solid product, they believed there would be “problems” shipping it to the USA.  Well, let’s see … hmmm.  It is TSCA listed, it is non-hazardous, no conceivable abuse issues, it is a salt so it won’t burn, but if you dropped a 200 kg drum of it on a cockroach, the cockroach might die.  Yeah, they thought it would be suspected as an illegal substance so they would be clever and ship it under another name. But it is ACS grade material completely innocent of any conceivable abuse potential.  So by being “clever” about it, they revealed their facility with underhandedness.  How can I go forward with a vendor willing to do this crap?

So, you might be tempted to think “Golly, they’re some pretty dishonest chaps”. Well, I’m not sure yet. They may be redeemable. Thank Howard, I myself have been given many second chances. It’s a karma thing. So we’ll inch along and see how they do on the next round. I suspect they’re just naieve in these matters.  Never attribute to malice what you can first explain by ignorance.

Moral of the story- just be honest and above board in all of your business dealings. Ya can’t fall off the floor.

Update:  It was suggested that this is actually a ploy by the exporter to get around import duties.  Well, I’ll happily pay the duties rather than monkey with this sort of thing. Crimony.

Greener Chemistry Through Catalysis

Recently a colleague and I were debating the reality of a fuzzy concept referred to as “green chemistry”. Being in the specialty chemical business, as opposed to the commodity chemical business, our discussion was naturally biased to the medium batch reactor scale.  This is no trivial distinction.  Raw material consumption and side product streams from commodity continuous-process trains can be astronomical in comparison to batch reaction operations.

There was the suggestion that the whole concept was absurd and was just the latest incarnation of a tree hugging export from CA.  I’m a little bit more circumspect about it, but one thing is obvious- economics will be the driver of any green process changeover.

I’m not an expert in the green chemistry field, but some of the concepts seem clear and highly desirable.  The goal is to minimize the total chemical insult to the environment. To achieve this, a green process has to be as atom efficient as possible in the assembly of the target product, recycle solvents to the greatest extent possible, avoid all toxic metals (Pb, Hg, Cd, Cr(VI), etc., metals are forever), eliminate fugitive emissions, and probably 6 or 8 other things I can’t think of right now.

As far as I know, certain metals are already on the path to extinction as reagents in chemcial processing- mercury and lead are the obvious ones. The battery industry still uses some unfortunate metals, mostly because of the reality of the electromotive series. There are only so many electrode combinations that are feasble for commercial batteries.

One of the obvious approaches that will get us to a greener chemistry is the continued adoption of catalyzed processes. I’m not thinking about acid protons, I’m thinking of highly selective transition metal catalysts.  Synthesis chemistry is about managing reactivity through the choice of appropriate functional groups and the sequence in which they appear. The chemist has to contend with the inverse relationship of reactivity and selectivity. Catalytic reactions form reactive intermediates from otherwise docile functional groups (olefins, boronic acids, or aryl halides, for example) and bring them together into close proximity in the coordination sphere of the metal. This is a kind of tuned reactivity management that reacts functional groups that, absent the catalyst, are relatively inert. All kinds of coupling reactions come to mind- the Suzuki coupling, etc. 

Now, to be fair, to get a substrate suitably functionalized for a green transformation might require some brutish and not-so-green chemistry- preparation of specialty aryls, acetylenes, and olefins; borylation reactions; the chemistry needed to make these whizbang ligands for Pd; and, well you get the point. The final greenness has to be measured as the sum of all the green steps from some common level, if not the oil well in Kuwait itself. 

Catalysis has the benefit of allowing the activation of relatively inert functionalities for subsequent transformations. Rather than making bulk quantities of highly reactive species, a catalyst can generate it in situ and do the deed straight away.  That is certainly in the direction of green.

Fear and Loathing

One of my favorite writers is Hunter S. Thompson.  His trademark acid-trip style of writing always dazzles.  Here is a piece from the Nixon years, 1973-

 “What we are looking at on all our TV sets is a man who finally, after 24 years of frenzied effort, became the President of the United States with a personal salary of $200,000 a year and an unlimited expense account including a fleet of private helicopters, jetliners, armored cars, personal mansions and estates on both coasts and control over a budget beyond the wildest dream of King Midas . . . and all the dumb bastard can show us, after five years of total freedom to do anything he wants with all this power, is a shattered national economy, disastrous defeat in a war we could have ended four years ago on far better terms than he finally came around to, and a hand-picked personal staff put together through five years of screening, whose collective criminal record will blow the minds of high-school American History students for the next 100 years. “

  • Rolling Stone #144 (September 27, 1973)

Clearly, HST despised Nixon.  But in his last years he would have preferred Nixon to Bush II.

“This is going to be a very expensive war, and Victory is not guaranteed— for anyone, and certainly not for anyone as baffled as George W. Bush. All he knows is that his father started the war a long time ago, and that he, the goofy child-President, has been chosen by Fate and the global Oil industry to finish it Now. “

  • “When War Drums Roll” (September 17, 2001)

That was the political side of HST.  What I most appreciate are the outrageous  and surrealistic descriptions, seemingly jotted down while in a lysergic mania.  From Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1971)-

 “The sporting editors had also given me $300 in cash, most of which was already spent on extremely dangerous drugs. The trunk of the car looked like a mobile police narcotics lab. We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, and a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers and also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of Budweiser, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls. All this had been rounded up the night before, in a frenzy of high-speed driving all over Los Angeles County — from Topanga to Watts, we picked up everything we could get our hands on. Not that we needed all that for the trip, but once you get locked into a serious drug-collection, the tendency is to push it as far as you can.
The only thing that really worried me was the ether. There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. And I knew we’d get into that rotten stuff pretty soon.”

It is hard to tell if HST’s perceptions were shaped by the psychedelic experience or sharpened by it.  I suspect the latter. 

S. 3930, CYA, and the security state

If you visit the blogs of thinking people, you cannot help but notice the repressed political frustration of liberal-minded folk.  Over at Cosmic Variance, Mark comments on the appalling status of S. 3930.  Decide for yourself. Have a look at Section VII of the Military Commissions Act of 2006. 

    (a) In General- Section 2241 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by striking both the subsection (e) added by section 1005(e)(1) of Public Law 109-148 (119 Stat. 2742) and the subsection (e) added by added by section 1405(e)(1) of Public Law 109-163 (119 Stat. 3477) and inserting the following new subsection (e):
    `(e)(1) No court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the United States who has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination. [Bold typeface by Gaussling]
    `(2) Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 1005(e) of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (10 U.S.C. 801 note), no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider any other action against the United States or its agents relating to any aspect of the detention, transfer, treatment, trial, or conditions of confinement of an alien who is or was detained by the United States and has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination.’.
    (b) Effective Date- The amendment made by subsection (a) shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply to all cases, without exception, pending on or after the date of the enactment of this Act which relate to any aspect of the detention, transfer, treatment, trial, or conditions of detention of an alien detained by the United States since September 11, 2001. [Italics by Gaussling]
    In particular, note the words that I have italicized at the end.  Basically, the sponsors  of Senate Bill S. 3930 are shoveling dirt over what may be a portfolio of sins or crimes committed by the Bush Administration back to September 11, 2001. If you aren’t outraged, you’re not paying attention.
    This is not the America that I have pledged allegance to these many years.  This is some new country that I do not understand.  A corner stone of our American civilization is Habeas Corpus.  A writ of habeas corpus is issued by a judge and requires that the state produce a detained person and justify the detainment of that person.  Look at section in bold, the proposed new subsection (e)(1).  This statute will bar any court or judge from issuing a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of an alien detainee.  The other population barred from habeas corpus in this country are barnyard animals. 

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, —

    All right, this is just the declaration of independence. It does not enjoy any statutory weight.  The executive & judicial branches aren’t obligated to promulgate its principles. But Americans do look to this document for guidance in directing the moral rudder of our country. These words do set forth guiding principles for the governance of our country, but they do not provide for statutory bite.
    So we cannot look to the Declaration for any statutory safe harbor in regard to  “inalienable rights”.

    The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

    However, it pertains to US citizens and contains the “Invasion” exception.  These constraints no doubt serve as the rationale for the acceptability of this bill. Listening on NPR, I have heard an interview of a senator stating that he considers the 9/11 attack to be an invasion and how that meets the constitutional criterion for the denial of habeas corpus to enemy combatants.
    How did the conservative party, a group that makes every effort to venerate themselves as the party of “values”, come to propose statutory backing to the notion that there are people who are unworthy or unqualified to enjoy certain inalienable rights that are ordinary to US citizens? How can the conservatives justify the loss of habeas corpus rights by an individual who is being held by the state?
    One of the rhetorical tools in common use is demonization. A hallmark of conservative mentality is the ability to partition people into the worthy and the unworthy, the saved and the unsaved, the good guys and the bad guys.  George Bush has framed our conflict with terrorists as a battle between good and evil. When your opponent is defined on a moral plane with the dark forces of evil, it is easier to justify all sorts of responses that we would ordinarily shun. Such as locking them up and throwing away the key. 
    Obviously, terrorists are criminals. And obviously they need to be incarcerated when convicted of their crimes.
    If America is to retain its status as the shining example of how to conduct civilization, then we must speak out against the official dehumanizing of any person. Terrorists may be savage, murderous, and reprehensible, but the manner in which we treat such persons ultimately defines who we are.  If the notion is that we Americans are possessing of inalienable rights, then it has to apply to everyone. 

Heart of Darkness

In the words of Colonel Kurtz- The horror! The horror!

I spent Labor Day studying patents in order to build an IP map. Everytime I do this I conclude that some people should be spanked for the kinds of patents they submit. No. A whole line of people should be severely beaten spanked- research directors, reseachers, patent attorneys, and examiners. Layers of obfuscation heaped upon a linguistic topography of sinuous channels and ridges. Cures in search of a disease. Water-logged IP rafts wallowing without crew in the statutory safe harbor of Patentstan. 

Bad patents, yes. But they are bestowed with the presumption of validity. Apply a known transformation to a new substrate- Kaboom! A patent! Redefine diethyl ether as a “Lewis Basic dispersant“! Bang! Novelty! Game the system to the (n+1)th degree- swamp the PTO with minutae and obfuscation and get yerself a patent! If gaming the system is possible, then it is obligatory.

A year ago I visited the USPTO in Alexandria with the intent of getting a tour of the place. Maybe get some insight into the process and the people of the institution. I called ahead and was told that we would be met at the gift shop/museum.  When we arrived we were told that 2 people didn’t warrant a tour, but the rep would be glad to show us the cafeteria (!) and the library. So, that is what we did. We saw the cafeteria and the library. Oh, I forgot to mention, we stood in the foyer next to an auditorium downstairs where, gulp, actual examiners met for important meetings. Jeepers.

The patent game on the application side is almost completely run by attorneys and the occasional agent. That’s fine. It is truly a specialty and such specialists are sorely needed. But in a sense society has abandoned it to this league of office action jockeys who naturally fill in the vacuum left by the rest of us. Should we be surprised? Of course not. But given the MM$’s thrown at the development of IP, R&D managers and business leaders should be paying more attention.

And thanks to the Dole-Bayh Act, professors can jump on the IP train and tie up their developments in a 20 year monopoly too. Why pay for university research just once? Pay again to access it in SciFinder or Crossfire. Pay to see it in a journal subscription. And, then pay yet again to get a license to use it! Hey, the folks in accounting just love to be audited by pencil-necked university IP auditors looking to find a stray rupee.

OK. I’m being sarcastic.

Bigger Glass

One of my other interests involves an astronomical observatory. I and many others volunteer at a completely volunteer-based operation. We recently obtained a telescope via Telescopes in Education. The deal is that we have to put the scope to use educating the public, especially K-12 kids. Sounds easy enough. That is what we do with the 18″ Cassegrain we already have. But the catch is that we have bigger plans for this scope than just serving the locals. The idea is to put the scope to use over the internet. Why not make it available to any teacher over the internet who wants to have an astronomy lab session? That is the plan. Fortunately, we have a telescope guidance engineer, an astronomer, an aerospace engineer, as well as several other resourceful folks on the board of directors. I think it’ll work.

Mt. Wilson 100 Inch Telescope24

Gil and Meinte

We drove to Mt. Wilson Observatory in July of 2006 to retrieve the Cole 24″ telescope, which was taken out of service in 2004 due to loss of funding. We estimated it weighed about one ton. We bolted it down to the trailer and drove it back to the front range of Colorado. We estimate that it’ll be up and running in 12-18 months. We’ll install an upgraded drive system and attach a weather station input to allow for automated weather sensing for the dome controls. The ideal configuration is to have a system that can be operated remotely without having a staff member in the dome. 

Putting together a Telescopes in Education equipment installation requires the overlap of some unusual characters. Gil Clark, the founder of TIE, and Meinte Veldhuis, President of the Little Thompson Observatory (see photo) are exactly the sort of people who are able to pull off such a thing. Gil’s (left) background is in computer science and he spent much of his career at JPL in Pasadena. Meinte (right) is a Dutch-born mechanical engineer and develops satellite payloads for an aerospace company. They are both one-in-a-million sort of guys and have the means and the vision to bring this scientific capability to a younger crowd. I tip my hat to them and the dozens of others who quietly go about this business.

What next for organic chemistry?

Due to a festering project at work I had to miss the Gordon Conference in Newport, RI, this year. I attended the organometallic session last year for the first time and found it to be a very stimulating experience.  Some background for context- My graduate & post-doc training is in organic synthesis. I did my graduate work in a group well known for asymmetric C-C bond forming chemistry in the 80’s. My post-doc was in catalytic asymmetric C-C synthesis with rhodium carbenoids.  It is with this background that I have noticed a bit of a sea change in the big ocean of Organic Chemistry.

Salve Regina and the Gordon Conference

At ACS meetings lately it seems that most of the excitement is at the INORG sessions. I’ll qualify that. The excitement for me seems to be at the organometallic sessions. Some pretty stunning work continues to pour out of the labs of the usual rock stars of academia- Bergman, Fu, Grubbs, etc. If you go to INORG talks you could see Harry B. Gray give a rousing account of electron quantum tunneling in enzymes before a packed house. It really is quite a thing to see.

Organic talks at the national meetings seem to be fewer in number than in years past. I don’t have hard numbers, but qualitatively it seems so. Since my grad school time in the 80’s we’ve seen asymmetric synthesis bloom and then go to seed as mechanisms were elucidated and high % ee’s became fairly commonplace. We’ve seen an almost fractal-like growth in catalysts come along to make transformations more efficient. We’ve seen combichem and cheminformatics multiply the efficiency of discovery.

A cryptozoology of hyphenated analytical devices have come along. They can be quite invaluable, but they can choke the budgets of anayltical departments in academia and industry alike, filling disc drives with galaxies of data and graphic user interfaces with an explosion of windows and settings. 

Have I become a Luddite?  No, but I am fussier about commiting hours and hours to learning new software and having to adapt to the machine’s “requirements”.

Obviously, the past 20 years of organic chemistry have been very fruitful. But, the Organometallic people are coming up with the really interesting new examples of organic transformations. Why the lull, why the lack of buzz at ACS meetings in the ORGN sessions? Will the upcoming San Francisco meeting be alight with some new excitement, or will it be a pageant of variations on a theme? I’ll be there to have a look.