When I first saw compounds 22 and 23 (reference in Figure 2), I associated them with hieroglyphs, but as I carried on they struck me more as typical results of draw-a-person tests that they give four-year-olds (Figure 1).

Figure 1

Figure 1. a) Hieroglyphs b) Combined head and body, age 4½

Upon reading and re-reading this paper, however, I have finally come to the conclusion that 22 and 23 must be classified as nanoputians, see JOC 2003, 68, 8750–8766. (DOI: 10.1021/jo0349227)

Or, shall we say fluoro-nanoputians? First of their kind. I love them! Nice one, Olah.

Figure 2

Figure 2. From Org. Lett., Article ASAP (DOI: 10.1021/ol300076y)

Figure 3

Figure 3. In my head.

Seriously, I like this paper a lot. I have no idea why we need trifluoromethyl-styrenes – yet, but I am sure that we can think of something – eventually.

If that came out condescending, you misunderstand me completely. I am very much in favor of this way of conducting science: We work hard and we uncover new things. Most of the time, we have no idea what our discoveries could be used for.

This worked for Einstein. Yeah, this is how all real science is done.

You hear me, Britain? Do not ask us what our discoveries today will take us in fifty years. We have no idea, really. Other than a gut feeling that stuff like this one day will lead to something we cannot even imagine here and now, and that it is gonna be totally awesome.

Buy Me A Coffee :) @ ko-fi.com
 

One Response to Are those nanoputians, Olah?

  1. Milkman says:

    This is my favourite post yet! It reminds me of how lucky we are to be, (in my case) in some small way, a part of all this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current ye@r *