_(cropped).jpg)
1. The strange, alluring mix of part rigor part empiricism
2. Sounds, colors, smells and crystals better than celluloid can deliver. Then there's celluloid itself, a chemical
3. That in its everyday depiction of molecular structures, chemistry comes closer to art than any other science.
4. The constant opportunities to spar with physicists about the limitations of reductionism
5. The pleasure of being able to appreciate Roald Hoffmann, Philip Ball, Sam Kean and others
6. The recurring challenge of striving to explain to the public why not all "chemicals" are bad
7. The unceasing, perpetual sense of astonishment that molecules as simple as serotonin, amphetamines and dopamine can cause profound behavioral changes
8. The fact that chemists can fanatically obsess about the 2-norbornyl cation with an intensity that elicits memories of the Montague-Capulet feud
9. The sheer reach of chemistry- from the innards of a superconductor to those of a supernova
10. The sense of satisfaction (often sadistic) from the constant bickering about the Nobel Prize in chemistry that simply reinforces the astonishing diversity of the discipline
11. The fact that all of life lives and thrives within a 3 kcal/mol window and that we still find it enormously challenging to predict energies within 1 kcal/mol
12. The pleasure of pointing out to biologists that knowing the pKa values of organic compounds can be rather useful
13. The fact that the origin of life is a quintessentially chemical problem that will keep chemists busy until the end of time
14. The smug satisfaction that comes from carrying around a bottle of sodium hydroxide bicarbonate in your pocket, just in case there's that freak acid spill
15. Linus Pauling
16. Robert Burns Woodward
17. The bizarre fact that models in chemistry actually WORK!
Freak acid spills really ought to be dealt with using water or weak alkalis you know.
ReplyDeleteTrue! Wouldn't want to follow up one violent reaction with another.
ReplyDelete"10. The fact that all of life lives and thrives within a 3 kcal/mol window and that we still find it enormously challenging to predict energies within 1 kcal/mol"
ReplyDeleteCould you expand on this one ? I find it very intriguing. Do you mean that the net free energy (not the standard one) of all reactions in biology are within -3/+3 kcal/mol ?
Yes, that is basically what I mean. So for instance, in an equilibrium binding or conformational transition event, a difference of 3 kcal/mol between the major and minor species (bound-unbound drug or two conformers) would mean that the minor species is essentially non-existent.
ReplyDeleteHmm interesting, my partner is a physicist -- what did you mean about "The constant opportunities to spar with physicists about the limitations of reductionism"? What ARE the limitations?
ReplyDelete