Jack Dunitz (one of the greatest chemical crystallographers) visited our lab today. I had told people beforehand that I would ask him what the mystery molecule was and prophesied that he would get it immediately. He did.
This gives me a chance to record the enormous personal debt I owe to Jack with whom I spent a year in Zurich. He is deeply loved by the many people who have passed through his lab. He now works almost exclusively with theoretical tools rather than equipment and today told us about Fluorine – or more precisely organofluorine compounds. Substituting hydrogen by fluorine in hydrocarbons (aliphatic or aromatic) makes almost no difference to physical properties (except density), but despite their similar properties the fluorocarbons and hydrocarbons don’t mix. In fact perfluoro butane in butane has one of the highest activity coefficients (10). But even the molecular volume is almost unaltered. In some directions the fluorine is actually smaller than the hydrogen.
So there are still many simple observations in chemistry that we don’t understand. With Gautam Desiraju one of Jack’s most engaging was that over the whole of reported chemical space there are more compounds with an even number of carbon atoms than odd (Nature closed access reference) – see report in New Scientist where he is quoted as:
“It’s much more intriguing if you don’t offer an explanation,”
I’ll leave you with the puzzle he greeted me with when I started in Zurich. “If a golf ball is hit with an infinitely massive golf club moving with velocity V, what will be the velocity of the ball after the collision”. The answer is simple and logical.
-
Recent Posts
-
Recent Comments
- pm286 on ContentMine at IFLA2017: The future of Libraries and Scholarly Communications
- Hiperterminal on ContentMine at IFLA2017: The future of Libraries and Scholarly Communications
- Next steps for Text & Data Mining | Unlocking Research on Text and Data Mining: Overview
- Publishers prioritize “self-plagiarism” detection over allowing new discoveries | Alex Holcombe's blog on Text and Data Mining: Overview
- Kytriya on Let’s get rid of CC-NC and CC-ND NOW! It really matters
-
Archives
- June 2018
- April 2018
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- November 2016
- July 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- September 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
-
Categories
- "virtual communities"
- ahm2007
- berlin5
- blueobelisk
- chemistry
- crystaleye
- cyberscience
- data
- etd2007
- fun
- general
- idcc3
- jisc-theorem
- mkm2007
- nmr
- open issues
- open notebook science
- oscar
- programming for scientists
- publishing
- puzzles
- repositories
- scifoo
- semanticWeb
- theses
- Uncategorized
- www2007
- XML
- xtech2007
-
Meta
If the club is infinitely massive, inelasticity of collision doesn’t matter, so — Vball = Vclub? I feel as though I am missing something.
(1) I should have said that the collision is perfectly elastic. If this doesn’t make sense, then yes you are missing something. It’s not a trick. I didn’t get it first time either.
Caveat: I am an organic chemist, so I dropped physics like a bad habit years ago.
But anyway, my guess is that if the club head is infinitely massive, then it is unable to move, and V must equal zero and therefore it can’t really hit the ball.
Maybe I’m oversimplifying.
(3) Russ, that’s brilliant. But I shall invoke an infinitely powerful superbeing to wield the club. Assume it’s (say) 1000 times more massive than the ball and there is a precise answer (in the ideal physics world at least – I play golf once a year and the velocity of the ball is either zero or has a large crossproduct with the club (i.e. it goes in an unintended direction).
You like tormenting people! If the club is 1000 times more massive than the ball, then can we state that the velocity of the ball would be 1000 times the velocity of the club?
As for the molecule. Is it a monohydrate?
(5) I don’t like tormenting people! I hope the problems generate discussion – I assumed that the crystal would be something that you might ask your crystallographer. If nothing else it is a good way of getting to know her.
You can state that the velocity of the ball would be 1000 times the velocity of the club. You would be wrong!
I was hoping someone would pipe up with the answer, because now it’s kind of bugging me. It would seem the standard high school physics doesn’t apply to infinitely massive golf clubs wielded by superbeings. Or if it does, the golf ball flies off at infinite speed and/or blows up in a blinding flash of energy (amounting to it’s mass times the speed of light squared).
Put a nerd out of his misery here – what’s the answer?
The ball would have infinite velocity?
Momentum must be conserved, and as momentum = mass x velocity,
mass of club x velocity of club = mass of ball x velocity of ball
if the club has infinite mass and the ball doesn’t, then the ball must have infinite velocity.
if something really heavy hits something really light, the light object moves really fast.
If the club has an infinite mass then it also has an infinitely massive gravitational field, the ball would become irretrievably trapped on the club. So its velocity would be the same as the club V.
(9) Chris – that’s lovely – and quite defensible. But these questions date back before the theory of relativity. Questions like “an infinitely smooth elephant which can be approximated to a sphere”. I will pursue the maths on the other post
The ball doesn’t go infinitely faster than the club because kinetic energy must be conserved (in addition to momentum). In fact, the final velocity of the the ball is 2*V. It can be seen intuitively without any algebra by thinking about it from the club’s frame of reference: the club sees a tiny ball approaching it with velocity -V. Since the club doesn’t even move due to it’s infinite mass, the ball must bounce with velocity +V, which is +2V from the original frame of reference. In fact, this is the same that happens when a ball bounces off the Earth. 😉
Oops, I hadn’t noticed that you posted the solution on another post…
(13) Don’t worry – It’s difficult to keep up with multiple postings