Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Chemist_Geek
"...magnetic moment measurements would be conclusive."

I would think that some type of mass spectrographic process would be useful, as well. After separating the buckyballs through filtration, or chemically, using the differential weight of caged versus uncaged buckyballs would provide a fine discrimination between the molecules.

If standard mass spectroscopy is too high energy, chromatographic techniques should suffice.

A clear banding should be apparent for "rustyballs" and the spectral analysis would be definitive.

71 posted on 09/01/2004 8:38:01 AM PDT by NicknamedBob (I can see why he thought it'd be cool, but Kerry should have applied for the "Not-So-Swift" boats...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]


To: NicknamedBob
At the time, we didn't have a standalone MS, just a GCMS. I had thought of trying to talk the profs into putting together a LCMS, but I graduated before we could even do the synthesis.

The biggest problem is to characterize the location of the Fe; sure, you might have a mass of 776.46 daltons, but where is that Fe? Magnetic moment would show the presence of Fe0; 13C NMR would show a shift - if the iron is on the inside, rattling around, then the shift would be uniform for all the C in the buckyball itself, but different than that of C60.

84 posted on 09/01/2004 9:06:40 AM PDT by Chemist_Geek ("Drill, R&D, and conserve" should be our watchwords! Energy independence for America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson