Tbf sometimes it’s hard even for organic chemists because the authors will just put an abbreviation of a non-standard variation of the name of some named reaction over the reaction arrow and then proceed to draw the product in a completely different conformation from the starting material, leaving you trying to work out which carbon is which in the world’s most annoying game of spot-the-difference (or in many cases spot-the-similarity).

rip dubna, miratum got you beat

Ya but the moon covers at best only about 10 ppm of the sky’s area so given a random direction within the hemisphere defined by the sky in which the moon is visible and traveling in a straight line you have a roughly 99.9990% chance of missing so that’s understandable really.

I mean, sure, the choice of the “nice” numbers here is eccentric, but this is essentially the way math is taught nowadays. Only, instead of making 8 in this special case, the goal is usually to make 10 + leftovers because adding to 10 is always easy.

Here’s my (upper midwest) spicy mental math take: it should be big-endian and solved with backtracking for ripple carry/borrow. None of this starting-from-the-1’s-place-and-successively-incorporating-higher-order-digits nonsense. Extended carry/borrow is rare, and if you start with the most significant digits and give up/get bored part way through, the intermediate answer is in the ballpark of the real answer.

What’s the point of math if you can’t verify it empirically?

Meanwhile, my advisor: you will buy endnote and you will like it because that’s what I use.

OSHA. Not supposed to touch what I make.

You’re missing the fuckton of heat that is generated during neutralization. I’ve had a few lab volcanoes because of it (LOC due to the low-boiling organics flash boiling).

Those flasks can actually be really nice compared to normal RBFs for real reasons and not just memes. They are a lot easier to e.g. pipette out of because the taper gives small volumes of liquid more height than a typical round bottom, so less material is lost as skin on the glass. Same issue with stirring; it’s a lot easier to get better stirring when the liquid actually covers the stirbar. “Just use a smaller container”, you say, and yes, do so if you start with a small volume. But a lot of times in organic chemistry, you need to isolate the compound from solution by evaporating the solvent. Depending on the concentration, the volume can start large and end much smaller. These flasks can help recover a larger amount of precious material.

Completely rewrite the curriculum and problem sets for my advisor’s grad-level course for flipped-classroom virtual teaching as opposed to in-person lectures. It was the pits for many reasons, not the least of which was that his attitude became “everyone is at home doing nothing, so I can ramble into a recording for 3 h instead of giving 1 h lectures and we can have a full problem set every week instead of 4 in a semester and the scheduled class time is now a problem session amd to answer students’ questions :)”.

And a fuckton of DFT calculations, so honestly, fair.

And calculating far too many digits of π by hand

I think oxenium hydride would be more appropriate than hydroxyl taking into account the polarity of the two fragments (HO+ and H-), though AFAIK there is no standardized name for HO+.

Some Pu solutions for your viewing pleasure:

I don’t know much about this, but I can’t help but think that “complete” and “consistent” are doing a lot more work in that sentence than my current understanding of the terms would lead me to believe.

I know that this is partially a joke, but I was trying to figure out what kind of lab would be done to produce chloroform that would be appropriate for students (recent OSHA crackdown on chloromethanes notwithstanding)… haloform reaction I suppose? Is that a common teaching lab experiment?