History and chemistry

 I think the tagline for my experience with this class should be "If it's not one thing it's another." I finally started to get into a rhythm this week, and then I got sick! Thank goodness for assignment extensions, but I've had some catching up to do the last few days. I think I'm at a pretty good place as I start the week, but we'll see if anything else pops up unexpectedly.

Well, last week I read from chapters 6, 8, and 11 in the textbook, which covered "Chemical Composition," "Quantities in Chemical Reactions" and "Gases," respectively. Chapter 6 was pretty straightforward; mass percent is really easy, and I've never had much trouble with empirical or molecular formulas. Chapter 8 was a bit trickier. Mole-mole and mass-mass conversions weren't too hard, but limiting reactants took some work. Overall, though, I think I understood everything. Chapter 11 covered kinetic molecular theory, pressure, and Boyle's and Charles's Laws. Other than remembering the conversion factors for pressure units I don't think I'll have much trouble with the material that was covered.

The videos this week were short and sweet, just how I like them. I copied all the example problems for "moles-atoms," "atoms-moles," "grams-moles," grams-atoms," "molecules-grams," "mole-mole," "grams-grams," and "mass percent composition" into my notebook for easy reference. I also found that the limiting reactants video was really helpful. I'd gotten through the homework on that topic on ALEKS, but it didn't give any tricks for easily identifying the limiting reactant. I liked that the video showed that you can look for the smallest number and go back to the original formula in that "sequence," and that will be the limiting reactant.

I got to read more of Uncle Tungsten this week; this time I read about "Chemical Language." Sacks essentially covered the development of chemistry as a science. He begins with the investigations of Boyle, who showed that air was a material substance and not some "ethereal, all-pervading medium" (p. 104). He then moves to Lavoisier, who debunked the prevalent theory of phlogiston, and showed that combustion was a chemical process. He also defined elements, demonstrated conservation of mass and "rewrote" the language of chemistry to make it more uniform and scientific. One of my favorite parts had to be footnote number 2, which listed Lavoisier's many accomplishements. Talk about an overachiever! And then to be guillotined in the French Revolution. Wow. I was curious about what happened, so I went to Wikipedia to look it up. According to their article about him, "Lavoisier was convicted with summary justice of having plundered the people and the treasury of France, of having adulterated the nation's tobacco with water, and of having supplied the enemies of France with huge sums of money from the national treasury. Lavoisier, along with 27 of his former colleagues, was guillotined on the same day." It reminded me in some ways of the brilliant young scientists who were killed in WWI; I think it can be easy to overlook the fact that war and revolution have destroyed some of the most brilliant thinkers in the world. This chapter actually related a lot to my life because I had studied Boyle and Lavoisier my sophomore year at college; we read their original works and discussed the exact progression of chemistry as laid out by Sacks. I don't remember many of the particulars, but I do remember reading a copy of an original text by Lavoisier. This was from the day when they printed their "s"'s to look like "f"s. Unfortunately Lavoisier used the word "suck" pretty regularly ("I used such-and-such apparatus to suck the air out of the chamber") so it was quite a scandalous read. I just remember sitting in the dining area with my friends, reading our Lavoisier assignments, and everyone with a "I wish my mind wouldn't go there" look on their faces.

For experiment 8 this week I created "airbags" out of plastic baggies, vinegar and baking soda. I really enjoyed this experiment; it was fun to mix everything in the bag and then throw it a respectable distance away and watch the bag expand. I kind of hoped I'd see a bag explode, but no such luck. Experiment 9 looked really easy, but, of course, turned out to be more of a hassle than I expected. First I thought "Oh, the size of the bottle won't matter, as long as it's close-ish." Wrong. I tried using a Del Taco enchilada sauce packet, a mustard packet, a soy sauce packet, and a ketchup packet with that darn 20-oz bottle, with absolutely no results. After ransacking our "recycle" bottle bags, our plastics drawer and our cupboards, we found a 16 oz vanilla bottle that was commandeered to serve in the name of science. Luckily the ketchup pack worked with the new bottle size. Then I tore the art supplies shelf apart for silly putty. No silly putty. My mom tore the shelf apart ("I KNOW we had some!"). No silly putty. So I googled homemade playdough and mixed up 2 cups of the stuff so I could have a little wad for the experiment. I added playdough to the pencap, subtracted it, stuffed it in the opening, stuck it on the pointed end, wrapped it around the barrel... nope. No matter what I did the pen cap stuck stubbornly to the side of the bottle or sank to the bottom. Eventually I gave up. Luckily part 2 of the experiment went beautifully; I think it was to make up for all the fuss in part 1. I had to use Google Draw again to help demonstrate the results. When it comes to Google Draw I have absolutely no pride. As long as you can sort of tell what's going on, that's all I ask of myself.

I thought it was funny that I used champagne as an example for the sections on gas we read this week, especially Boyle's Law and Charles's Law. You see, we hardly ever have the stuff in the house, but a friend brought a bottle of peach almond champagne for us on the 4th, and we finally broke into it last night. As my dad was opening it I was thinking "The volume of a gas and its pressure are inversely proportional" and "The volume of a gas and its Kelvin temperature are directly proportional." (Introductory Chemistry.)  "The bottle's been in the fridge so according to Charles's Law the volume should be lower... it's going to pop, it's going to pop... *POP* Boyle's law at work!"

I was thinking more about what I wanted to do for my "free space" in this post, and my mind went back to the opening of the Uncle Tungsten reading this week. I also related to the opening of this chapter, where Sacks talked about his love of history and his desire to see chemistry through its historical lens. I too love history; I think the most dry, boring subects (for the record, in my book chemistry doesn't fall in that category!) can come alive if you're able to see the historical side and gain some insight into the people involved. Maybe that's why I love History Channel programming and the live-reenactments that are popular on TV these days, such as the "Killing Lincoln" show I saw recently. It makes all the difference to SEE what happened, rather than just reading about it. It sounds like Lavoisier's life would make a great movie or TV film; he sounded like such a dynamic character. I've been getting to see my family history lately... my sister and I are working on digitizing all of my late grandma's photos and letters. Of course I'd heard about my great-grandparents (her parents), but finding my great-grandmother's photo scrapbooks and my great-grandfather's WWI scrapbook brought them to life in a whole new way. My great-grandfather started the Bloedorn Lumber Company, so it was fascinating seeing the old photos of my grandma in her baby buggy in front of the original "Torrington Lumber Company" when he was just starting out in the early 1920s.

 From a trip to Wyoming a couple of years ago.

We found out that my grandmother had been engaged to a paratrooper who was killed in the Battle of the Bulge. We also discovered the letters my grandparents sent each other when they first met and started dating. I had never heard much about that time of their lives, so it was fascinating seeing how their relationship developed. I also learned from those letters that under my grandpa's quiet, laid-back exterior beat the heart of a true romantic. Some of the things we find raise new questions too; my grandpa was sent to the Pacific Theater during WWII, but he never told us anything about any of his experiences. However, we found a box of WWII ribbons and decorations hidden away in a closet. We researched them and at least a couple looked like they were Japanese. I would give a lot now to be able to ask him how he came across those and to learn more about what he went through. To anyone who thinks history or chemistry is boring, I'd say follow Sacks' example and "understand how these early chemists thought... imagine myself into their worlds." Whether it's your grandparents or Lavoisier, it makes the past come alive.