3 ms·
I thought it was an odd choice of titles for the paper until I read "however, instead of using expensive and toxic chemicals such as ammonia, fluorine, chlorine
by eloff 7y ago
I thought it was an odd choice of titles for the paper until I read "however, instead of using expensive and toxic chemicals such as ammonia, fluorine, chlorine, boranes, etc., we took a page from the pre-Haber–Bosch era and sought natural materials for the fertilization of graphene and used guano as a dopant".
They're literally doping graphene with crap to see if it increases the Electrocatalytic Effect. Hilarious! A great way to point out that the plethora of graphene doping papers is not well justified.
- k__ 7y ago"It seems that whatever “crap” we put into graphene, electrocatalysis increases. One may exaggerate only a little by saying that if we spit on graphene it becomes a better electrocatalyst." lol
- hinkley 7y agoI think I know what the next paper will be on... Be sure to test dog slobber while you're at it.
- GauntletWizard 7y agoI think what they've shown is that there's a lot of value in doing this basic research. Even their literally crappy additive created "much better electrocatalytic properties" than nondoped graphene. The plethora of research papers, with a large amount of information non-collated and hard to search through, seems to be the problem. It's clear that there's a lot of problem space to search through. Many teams have created "Positive" results, but because each is it's own research paper, it is challenging to determine which result is the "best", and which results are deserving of further study. What I would take from this is that there's a need for a "standard" experiment in this space, and for many formulations and differences to be mapped, graphed, and compared. One paper encompassing a few hundred formulations, chosen in advance to explore the problem space and find directions, would be more useful. Follow-up papers would employ a search-pattern, increasing and decreasing the concentrations of dopants and hill climbing until optimal points are found or property-curves can be established.
- SiempreViernes 7y agoNo, they illustrate that what is needed is a proper theory to guide investigations, and that meanwhile some experimentalists mostly behave as if they found a "free paper" button and are abusing the hell out of it. If you can put anything into graphene and get better electrocatalytic properties, then it doesn't make sense to publish any individual result about doping with "x" since that's just a subset of "anything". But if you do get a paper to put on the CV for a few weeks work, why would the fact that you are just doing redundant confirmation stop you?
- Severian 7y agoIt would have been doubly funny if they instead used B. taurus excrement. Specifically male. Also a little disappointed it wasn't Chiroptera guano, because that'd be crazy.
- contravariant 7y agoThey missed an excellent opportunity to call it BS doping as well.