4 ms·

It's a good question. Reminded me of these entertaining columns: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2011/11/11/things_i_wont_work_with_hexanitrohex

It's a good question. Reminded me of these entertaining columns: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2011/11/11/things_i_wont_work_with_hexanitrohexaazaisowurtzitane https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2011/11/11/th... "Say what? I’d call for all the chemists who’ve ever worked with a hexanitro compound to raise their hands, but that might be assuming too much about the limb-to-chemist ratio" They're all educational and very entertaining, even to a non-chemist like myself. Recommended for a chuckle, there are some really awful compounds he covers with wit. Edit 1: original link de-borked. Edit 2: full list of his 'things I won't work with' columns https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/category/things-i-wont-work-with https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/category/thin...

lifeisstillgood 7y ago
Just to give you an idea of why that series of articles was so darn entertaining: a method to make a more stable form of it, by mixing it with TNT. Yes, this is an example of something that becomes less explosive as a one-to-one cocrystal with TNT. Although, as the authors point out, if you heat those crystals up the two components separate out, and you’re left with crystals of pure CL-20 soaking in liquid TNT, a situation that will heighten your awareness of the fleeting nature of life.
- tempguy9999 7y ago
  In a similar vein, https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2010/02/23/things_i_wont_work_with_dioxygen_difluoride https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2010/02/23/th... "At seven hundred freaking degrees, fluorine starts to dissociate into monoatomic radicals, thereby losing its gentle and forgiving nature." further on "The paper goes on to react FOOF [dioxygen difluoride] with everything else you wouldn’t react it with: ammonia (“vigorous”, this at 100K), water ice (explosion, natch), chlorine (“violent explosion”, so he added it more slowly the second time), red phosphorus (not good), bromine fluoride, chlorine trifluoride (say what?), perchloryl fluoride (!), tetrafluorohydrazine (how on Earth...), and on, and on. If the paper weren’t laid out in complete grammatical sentences and published in JACS, you’d swear it was the work of a violent lunatic."
  - EdwardCoffin 7y ago
    And who could forget: "But I have to admit, I’d never thought much about the next analog of hydrogen peroxide. Instead of having two oxygens in there, why not three: HOOOH? Indeed, why not? This is a general principle that can be extended to many other similar situations. Instead of being locked in a self-storage unit with two rabid wolverines, why not three?" [1] [1] https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2014/10/10/things_i_wont_work_with_peroxide_peroxides https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2014/10/10/th...
    - ethbro 7y ago
      A lot of the articles make me wonder if the labs that do highly reactive work are staffed by people who thought EOD jobs were too quiet.

lifeisstillgood 7y ago

Just to give you an idea of why that series of articles was so darn entertaining: a method to make a more stable form of it, by mixing it with TNT. Yes, this is an example of something that becomes less explosive as a one-to-one cocrystal with TNT. Although, as the authors point out, if you heat those crystals up the two components separate out, and you’re left with crystals of pure CL-20 soaking in liquid TNT, a situation that will heighten your awareness of the fleeting nature of life.

tempguy9999 7y ago
In a similar vein, https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2010/02/23/things_i_wont_work_with_dioxygen_difluoride https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2010/02/23/th... "At seven hundred freaking degrees, fluorine starts to dissociate into monoatomic radicals, thereby losing its gentle and forgiving nature." further on "The paper goes on to react FOOF [dioxygen difluoride] with everything else you wouldn’t react it with: ammonia (“vigorous”, this at 100K), water ice (explosion, natch), chlorine (“violent explosion”, so he added it more slowly the second time), red phosphorus (not good), bromine fluoride, chlorine trifluoride (say what?), perchloryl fluoride (!), tetrafluorohydrazine (how on Earth...), and on, and on. If the paper weren’t laid out in complete grammatical sentences and published in JACS, you’d swear it was the work of a violent lunatic."
- EdwardCoffin 7y ago
  And who could forget: "But I have to admit, I’d never thought much about the next analog of hydrogen peroxide. Instead of having two oxygens in there, why not three: HOOOH? Indeed, why not? This is a general principle that can be extended to many other similar situations. Instead of being locked in a self-storage unit with two rabid wolverines, why not three?" [1] [1] https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2014/10/10/things_i_wont_work_with_peroxide_peroxides https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2014/10/10/th...
  - ethbro 7y ago
    A lot of the articles make me wonder if the labs that do highly reactive work are staffed by people who thought EOD jobs were too quiet.