Why be cyrptic about chemisty?

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
User avatar
hallam
Posts: 39
Joined: October 16th, 2009, 6:04 pm
Location: Philly

Post by hallam »

wanabe wrote:The premise is to allow people to learn one way of leaning to speak chemistry. Before adding a bunch of jive with nomenclature names in a respective language.

the Japanese as a matter of fact use the same chemical symbols as us (the old stereotypical westerners) http://www.jergym.hiedu.cz/~canovm/vyhl ... japan.html ...They had to! learn some English.

I'm sorry you get lost in political correctness before you see the real point.
What a cop out. You want to call this political correctness so that you shove this to some far reach of your brain and not think about it.

Now what we have here is that the Japanese use the symbols language (which I never said they didn't), you wanting them to scrap that usage of the symbols and change their entire spoken language for your laziness. Your point is not to use the symbols because you feel it is a waste of time. I fundamentally disagree with your from a scientific and a practicality standpoint.
User avatar
wanabe
Posts: 3377
Joined: November 24th, 2008, 5:12 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gandhi.
Location: UBIQUITY
Contact:

Post by wanabe »

I really don't want any body to scrap a language. I don't know where your getting that idea from. I think its better if we have more languages.

I also never wanted to scrap the use of symbols.

You should ask questions before you make a bunch of assertions; and personal opinions about some one.
Secret To Eternal Life: Live Life To The Fullest, Help All Others To Do So.Meaning of Life Is Choice. Increase choice through direct perception. Golden rule+universality principal+Promote benefits-harm+logical consistency=morality.BeTheChange.
User avatar
hallam
Posts: 39
Joined: October 16th, 2009, 6:04 pm
Location: Philly

Post by hallam »

wanabe wrote:I really don't want any body to scrap a language. I don't know where your getting that idea from. I think its better if we have more languages.

I also never wanted to scrap the use of symbols.

You should ask questions before you make a bunch of assertions; and personal opinions about some one.
I guess we read this sentence differently.
It seems like a lot of time and energy could be saved by simply calling the elements by their names and adding respective scripts when "translating" chemistry to English. If there is a common name than use it; such as water:H_20.
This to me looks like a suggestion to stop using the symbols.

And this sentence bellow suggests to me that you want other languages to change their written languages so that they will use more English.
Japanese have to learn the western words to communicate in what originally developed as a western language (chemistry).
User avatar
wanabe
Posts: 3377
Joined: November 24th, 2008, 5:12 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gandhi.
Location: UBIQUITY
Contact:

Post by wanabe »

I see how that could be implied, allow me to explain.

wanabe: "It seems like a lot of time and energy could be saved by simply calling the elements by their names[or symbols] and adding respective scripts[just like we do with the symbols] when "translating" chemistry[the symbols] to English[or any other language; ex: carbonate=CO_3^2-. In Japanese carbonate would have a different name, so they would use that one]. If there is a common name than use it; such as water:H_20."

Also in the OP, and in the edition to the OP I added later, I referred constantly to the name of the compound with the symbol. Just in case you think I'm making this up---> ex: the above quote even has this: “such as water:H_20”....Also it's flagrantly obvious that doing chemical equations with hole words would be too space consuming to be practical; my entire goal was to make chemistry easier to learn.

wanabe: “Japanese have to learn the western words to communicate in what originally developed as a western language (chemistry).”

I was stating this as a matter of fact: A Japanese person must learn some amount of English because the periodic table of elements uses English characters.

So you see it was lost in the word translation, and for that I apologize.
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NOW, the above is entirely irrelevant; because some names for substances are shorter and less complicated than their chemical compound; as alun told us. Which is exactly why I started this thread.
Secret To Eternal Life: Live Life To The Fullest, Help All Others To Do So.Meaning of Life Is Choice. Increase choice through direct perception. Golden rule+universality principal+Promote benefits-harm+logical consistency=morality.BeTheChange.
User avatar
Desertwisdom
New Trial Member
Posts: 18
Joined: January 30th, 2016, 3:27 pm

Re: Why be cyrptic about chemisty?

Post by Desertwisdom »

As a graduate student in synthetic organic chemistry, I always felt sorry for the poor undergrads. They did not have the lab experience to know the names (or the formulas) of the most commonly used compounds; which comes only with experience and just being around the chemistry lab. To be very simple in explanation, every chemical compound known to man has an IUPAC (International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry) name, which is governed by various ground rules. But practicing chemists hardly ever use the IUPAC name. They simply use the common names based on traditional usage. As an example, chemists prefer to use the term "phenol" rather than "1-hydroxybenzene". Good luck.
User avatar
TSBU
Posts: 151
Joined: August 17th, 2016, 5:32 pm

Re: Why be cyrptic about chemisty?

Post by TSBU »

wanabe wrote:I am currently taking a chemistry class. The language to me seems quite cryptic; in as far as taking CO_3^2- and calling it carbonate. Or: C_2H_3O_2^2- and calling that acetate. Last one: PbCl_4 and calling that lead(IV) chloride.

It seems like a lot of time and energy could be saved by simply calling the elements by their names and adding respective scripts when "translating" chemistry to English. If there is a common name than use it; such as water:H_20.

If any one is a chemistry buff and wants to elaborate on how this can't work, and maybe even enlighten me as to how to make sense of this better, it would be much appreciated.

Or to simply discuss simple compounds (as that is all I'm able to do so far) just to practice the language that would be nice as well.
~~~~~~EDIT~~~~~~
Ok, let me see if I can make this more clear as people are not understanding what I'm asking, or just want to have an answer.

There is a name that is pure chemistry for something example: CO_3^2-; That is "carbonate". How would one naturally translate CO_3^2- to "carbonate" unless someone told them; they could not! Why not to make things less cryptic; call it "carbon-oxygen_3^2-"(=CO_3^2)-.The meaning of the numbers could be taught in a day, if it takes that long. Based on what I know of chemistry, there is no good reason, other than the historically fallacious: "thats how its done". OR there is the: "its shorter". To that I say: it's shorter to say, but takes 10 times longer to learn. It's difficult enough as it is to memorize the innumerable qualities an element can have, let alone a compound. Why gum it up with some hybrid language that is a class all in it self?

Hope that helps.
Because the carbonate apears enough and has his own propiertis, and it's similar to other things, like sulfate, and things ended in "-ate" (I don't know chemistry in your language, but I guess that's how they saay it). But remember that you are a student, if you work in that, you'll use the shortest name.

And... because only a few people think that and people in general hate changes.

But you should know that there have been different names for the same things over time, new standards, etc. I had to study 3: Traditional, stock, and systematic. The systematic is near to what you say, in my language, this H2SO4 would be "TetraoxoSulfato(IV) de dihidrógeno" instead of the traditional "Ácido sulfúrico". I guess it's similar in your language.

Image
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Why be cyrptic about chemisty?

Post by LuckyR »

Desertwisdom wrote:As a graduate student in synthetic organic chemistry, I always felt sorry for the poor undergrads. They did not have the lab experience to know the names (or the formulas) of the most commonly used compounds; which comes only with experience and just being around the chemistry lab. To be very simple in explanation, every chemical compound known to man has an IUPAC (International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry) name, which is governed by various ground rules. But practicing chemists hardly ever use the IUPAC name. They simply use the common names based on traditional usage. As an example, chemists prefer to use the term "phenol" rather than "1-hydroxybenzene". Good luck.
Hey glad to hear about your academic career path choice. What are you synthesizing?
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Desertwisdom
New Trial Member
Posts: 18
Joined: January 30th, 2016, 3:27 pm

Re: Why be cyrptic about chemisty?

Post by Desertwisdom »

Actually, I worked in the lab only for graduate research. After graduation I became a registered patent agent and did literature and patent research on novel inventions in chemistry and biology; as well as writing patent applications for some big companies like Mobil Oil (before the merger with Exxon), IBM (and individual inventors).

My graduate synthesis project was on making Loganin and also various pterocarpans such as Phaseolin.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Why be cyrptic about chemisty?

Post by LuckyR »

Desertwisdom wrote:Actually, I worked in the lab only for graduate research. After graduation I became a registered patent agent and did literature and patent research on novel inventions in chemistry and biology; as well as writing patent applications for some big companies like Mobil Oil (before the merger with Exxon), IBM (and individual inventors).

My graduate synthesis project was on making Loganin and also various pterocarpans such as Phaseolin.
Very cool. I never did chemistry grad school but worked with grad students when I was doing undergrad research many decades ago. The grad students seemed to have a lot of fun. I worked on a way of cheaply making cyclohexenes so the grad students could make their multicyclic organics in more bulk. I haven't thought of those days for awhile. I had a lot of fun with those guys.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Desertwisdom
New Trial Member
Posts: 18
Joined: January 30th, 2016, 3:27 pm

Re: Why be cyrptic about chemisty?

Post by Desertwisdom »

Yes, I agree that working around the chemistry lab was always fun. However, safety always was number one. We had a bad experience with n-butyl lithium ... an explosive fire caused by storing the material in a refrigerator that was not explosion proof.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Why be cyrptic about chemisty?

Post by LuckyR »

Wow, sounds scary. Were you there when it went off? Was all of your research destroyed?
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Desertwisdom
New Trial Member
Posts: 18
Joined: January 30th, 2016, 3:27 pm

Re: Why be cyrptic about chemisty?

Post by Desertwisdom »

The explosion occurred overnight, so I was not present. We had large containers of solvent (dimethyl ether) near the frig, which the firemen bravely took across the street to a fire academy ... and blew them up. The day before the explosion I had just synthesized about 10 or 20 grams of material in an early stage of a total synthesis project. The firemen removed all chemicals in the lab and destroyed them.
User avatar
Eluhorem
New Trial Member
Posts: 11
Joined: April 16th, 2014, 3:38 pm

Re: Why be cyrptic about chemisty?

Post by Eluhorem »

Like a lot of "cryptic" conventions in science and math, it's just an inconvenience that these words were traditionally used, so they've been taught that way even as new and more comprehensive ideas were uncovered. An example from math is the convention of calling multiples of the constant i (sqrt(-1)) "imaginary", when they're anything but.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Why be cyrptic about chemisty?

Post by Steve3007 »

This thread is unusual in that it is about Chemistry.

The physical sciences are traditionally divided up into three disciplines: Physics, Chemistry and Biology. There seems to be loads of potential for philosophical discussion in Physics (Quantum Mechanics, Thermodynamics, Relativity, the origins of the universe etc) and quite a lot in Biology (Evolution, Life etc) but Chemistry is stuck in the middle. I wonder why.

It seems that the philosophically interesting parts are often at the edges. Chemistry is the meat in the sciencey sandwich.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Why be cyrptic about chemisty?

Post by LuckyR »

Steve3007 wrote:This thread is unusual in that it is about Chemistry.

The physical sciences are traditionally divided up into three disciplines: Physics, Chemistry and Biology. There seems to be loads of potential for philosophical discussion in Physics (Quantum Mechanics, Thermodynamics, Relativity, the origins of the universe etc) and quite a lot in Biology (Evolution, Life etc) but Chemistry is stuck in the middle. I wonder why.

It seems that the philosophically interesting parts are often at the edges. Chemistry is the meat in the sciencey sandwich.
Sounds like things have changed. Back in the day the three Physical sciences were physics, chemistry and mathematics. Biology was considered a semi-soft science and the Social Sciences were very squishy.
"As usual... it depends."
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Science”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021