10-Year-Old Accidentally Discovers New Explosive Molecule

[oktalist]

So it's more likely that a 10 year old consciously creates a never before seen molecule using basic understanding of valencies?

Yes, that's what I said. Well done for finally comprehending the written word.

There are two things going on here. Firstly, the kid created a viable molecule using the basic rules of atomic valencies that her teacher had explained to her class. That's the non-random part. Secondly, the molecule turns out to be one that's never been discovered before. That's the random part. I already said this the first time I replied to you.

Saying that she made the molecule by just sticking bits together randomly makes no sense. Did the teacher say, "okay kids, just stick these things together randomly for an hour while I go to the toilets to sniff coke"? No, he would've told the kids the basic rules for putting the bits together, so that they might learn something, that's his job.

You know what's far more apparent than this kids intelligence? The fact that people seem to be giving this kid more attention for accidentally creating a new molecule while if it weren't for the professor's brilliance to recognize it as something potentially ground breaking, we wouldn't be here.

People don't seem to be giving more attention to the kid. They seem to be giving more attention to the news story about the kid, because it's a nice human interest story and that makes it more newsworthy than a dry scientific paper about some new miracle molecule, of which there are hundreds.

All the professor did was type the chemical formula into a computer and have some software tell him it was a new, undiscovered molecule. The kid's teacher deserves the most praise out of the three of them, for being an awesome teacher, stimulating his students' minds and taking an interest in what they came up with.

Odds are, if it weren't for this man, none of this would be news.

And if he'd discovered it by himself it wouldn't have been news, as adults are discovering things like this all the time.

there's no reason to shower her with praise.

I don't see anyone showering her with praise here.

 

[Waaghpowa]

Long winded snip filled with more assumptions

This has been going on for almost 3 days and you're still at it? Someone is getting over defensive.

Again, prove that she knew what she was doing beyond playing with atomic models or this whole thing might as well be chance. Until then, ignored because I can't be bother to argue over this inane topic any longer. I'm not going to spend another 3 days on it.

The professor deserves credit for making this find and the girl deserves credit for being the muse.

 

[ckam]

Hmm, if Clara grows up and gets destroyed by her own findings, that will be some irony right there.

 

[samaugsch]

So...does Jeff Foxworthy know about this yet?

 

[The Lugz]

but I would be willing to bet that the next six months of his life will involve little more than fifth-graders storming his desk with nonsensical molecule configurations hoping that they've stumbled onto something. Poor guy.

"I've discovered ice-creamium!"

If it's made into an explosive, she really deserves to have her name on it. Clartex or something.

I'd have called it 'icecreamsandwedge' just to annoy android's developers!

Clartex sounds pretty cool though.

 

[Badassassin]

this thread...

 

[FalloutJack]

Now, why should I feel dumber just because any person reaches higher? I should praise others for their talents and achievements, not grow bitter and evil (Well, MORE evil.) over it. Does the arrival of somebody smarter somehow change my decent level of education? Not at all. I would be pleased to talk to Stephen Hawking, should he randomly appear.

 

[zefiris]

A lot of people don't get science here.

She did not "randomly" put together a molecule that just worked. She did so according to specific rules, which meant she *understood those*. Meaning she already understands more about molecules than most people dissing her, making the dissing pretty hilarious.

Fact: REAL science often is done exactly like this. And I think that's why you get so many people trying to take a shot at her: They fully well know she did something they couldn't, is much more of a real scientists than they will ever be, and that she gets a deserved moment of fame, instead of the dissers. Which is why they are so jealous.

After all, she's just a girl. EWW! Every whiny guy knows girls can't do science because they're stuuuupid! So obviously she can't have done it!!!!!

All the professor did was type the chemical formula into a computer and have some software tell him it was a new, undiscovered molecule. The kid's teacher deserves the most praise out of the three of them, for being an awesome teacher, stimulating his students' minds and taking an interest in what they came up with.

Absolutely. The man is how a teacher SHOULD be. He clearly inspired interest, made his students actuallly understand the issues, AND took them seriously.

This man is a good teacher. If we would have more people like him, our current education wouldn't be as bad as it is right now.

 

[quhouv vhqwiufv qwiu]

I've already forgotten the child's name. She randomly put together some objects and by chance it was a viable synthetic molecule. Big deal. Out of the millions of students who have ever used these sets and made random things, at least one of them had to eventually make something which can be synthesised. It's just probability, nothing more.

 

[trophykiller]

:brilliant:

Well played, Claire.

 

[IronicBeet]

So did the child just put together a model for the craic or did she intentionally put it together with full knowledge of what she is doing.

If it's the former then I really don't care. If it's the latter then "Good for you".

EDIT I was right

"But that?s what happened when Clara Lazen, 10, randomly arranged a unique combination of oxygen, nitrogen and carbon atoms."

http://now.humboldt.edu/news/not-your-average-fifth-grade-assignment/

Randomly

It was pure chance and she isn't going to be the one researching its uses so well done little girl, you discovered something by accident and will have no involvement in making it useful.

Right, and that is absolutely a good reason to be a huge debbie downer about it.

 

[joe-h2o]

*Snip

I agree with this guy 100%
She really hasn't done anything special, this is what she was playing with:

Spoiler

At a basic level.. all the 'holes' must be filled and joined to another 'ball'.
She made a pretty pattern, that is all.
The fact that it 'could' potentially be something useful is worthless.
If this had any impact on Science, real scientists would be sat in fancy labs playing with their Molymods.

The hard part is finding how to make this molecule and what it even does.

Give me that molecule and i will replace all of those Oxygen atoms with Sulphur.
I have just made a new molecule, and yes its probably just as valid as the little girls.

Oxygen and sulfur are in the same group, but that does not make them automatically interchangeable. They are in many cases, but not always and not always with the same valency. Who knows if the sulfur analogue of this compound is even theoretically stable? Not you I suspect.

If I gave you a molecule of phosphorous pentoxide (P4O10) and you replaced all the oxygens with sulfur atoms, what would you get?

If the girl's molecule has been through some comp chem and come out as theoretically stable then that's a step above your sulfur analogue being "just as valid" just because you have seen a periodic table before.

And who says chemists don't mess around with molymods and make discoveries? The existence of the fullerenes was predicted due to just this sort of thing (later discovered by accident during experiments looking for something entirely different).

 

[Mozza444]

Who knows if the sulfur analogue of this compound is even theoretically stable? Not you I suspect.

And neither does the girl, that is what point i am making.

If I gave you a molecule of phosphorous pentoxide (P4O10) and you replaced all the oxygens with sulfur atoms, what would you get?

Phosphorous Pentasulfide.

If the girl's molecule has been through some comp chem and come out as theoretically stable then that's a step above your sulfur analogue being "just as valid" just because you have seen a periodic table before.

Put mine through some "comp chem" then.
Did she figure out by herself it was valid? No.
Then why should i have to?

And who says chemists don't mess around with molymods and make discoveries? The existence of the fullerenes was predicted due to just this sort of thing (later discovered by accident during experiments looking for something entirely different).

Its the discovery of the actual molecule that matters, there is no point putting millions into trying to get this molecule when most likely it will be "(later discovered by accident during experiments looking for something entirely different)"
Also they might.
However i am saying.. That is not how great discoveries are made.
For instance:
Penicillin - The mold contained a certain chemical group that was found to kill bacteria. That was manipulated to what is used today.
Aspirin - Came from salicylic acid came from the bark of a willow tree. This was then manipulated to make todays aspirin.

All major discoveries come from actually obtaining the substance.

I am happy that she 'discovered' a molecule. Name it after her.
But my point is she is not a child prodigy.

 

[Guffe]

NICE!
I mean accidentally doing something is cool (especially when you're drunk!)
I hope they name the first thing they make something after her.
Maybe two HUGE explosions called Clara and Lazen xD
Then they must blow up something really cool...

 

[Yureina]

Even if it was random... that's really cool! Accidental discoveries are cool to me. XD

 

[Sansha]

So did the child just put together a model for the craic or did she intentionally put it together with full knowledge of what she is doing.

If it's the former then I really don't care. If it's the latter then "Good for you".

EDIT I was right

"But that?s what happened when Clara Lazen, 10, randomly arranged a unique combination of oxygen, nitrogen and carbon atoms."

http://now.humboldt.edu/news/not-your-average-fifth-grade-assignment/

Randomly

It was pure chance and she isn't going to be the one researching its uses so well done little girl, you discovered something by accident and will have no involvement in making it useful.

Bollocks. Real adult scientists with coats and degrees and labs and everything discover shit by accident all the time, sometimes while making stupid mistakes, and they still take full credit for it. Lil' Clara deserves just as much. Granted she's not a child prodigy for this 'discovery', but plenty of non-qualified people have discovered and created stuff, so. Credit due.

And good on the teacher for recognizing the potential here, embracing a child's desire to learn rather than waving it off because she's 'just a kid with a toy'.
All teachers need to be this attentive and encouraging.

 

[Sansha]

So did the child just put together a model for the craic or did she intentionally put it together with full knowledge of what she is doing.

If it's the former then I really don't care. If it's the latter then "Good for you".

EDIT I was right

"But that?s what happened when Clara Lazen, 10, randomly arranged a unique combination of oxygen, nitrogen and carbon atoms."

http://now.humboldt.edu/news/not-your-average-fifth-grade-assignment/

Randomly

It was pure chance and she isn't going to be the one researching its uses so well done little girl, you discovered something by accident and will have no involvement in making it useful.

Bollocks. Real adult scientists with coats and degrees and labs and everything discover shit by accident all the time, sometimes while making stupid mistakes, and they still take full credit for it. Lil' Clara deserves just as much. Granted she's not a child prodigy for this 'discovery', but plenty of non-qualified people have discovered and created stuff, so. Credit due.

And good on the teacher for recognizing the potential here, embracing a child's desire to learn rather than waving it off because she's 'just a kid with a toy'.
All teachers need to be this attentive and encouraging.

You bumped this thread from february to tell me that?

Anyway, if you want to know my response just read the thread, I'm sure youll find a few similar posts to yours that I answered.

Oh shhhhiiiifiwefiwuhe bollocks I didn't see the date. I saw the thread linked under 'most popular' and just got my post on.

I feel a right arse.

 

[TAGM]

I don't care that much, I just made a comment showing my utter apathy for her which has "offended" many people as we aren't showering this child with praise.

Every week scientists make great discoveries but barely anyone cares, a child randomly does it and suddenly it's news?

Yes. Yes it is.
Think about it this way - What do scientists do for a living? They try and discover things. So, logically, what do you expect them to do? Discover things. It's the expected result.
Now, random kid playing around with a bunch of molecule models. What do you expect? Not for them to find a new theoretical element, that's for sure. It's unexpected, ergo, news.
And yes, you could say that throwing about a bunch of kids and molecule models would end up getting this again through random chance, (Though the probability may not actually work out like that seeing as how it's not a truly random result.) But the fact is that the probability is low enough that when it happens, we can all say "well, didn't see that coming! Talk about a news story!"

So, yeah, maybe the girl doesn't deserve the attention for randomly finding an element by accident. The story deserves sharing, though. It's a new theoretical element, and if it works or not, it's still a semi-big discovery.

 

[TAGM]

I don't care that much, I just made a comment showing my utter apathy for her which has "offended" many people as we aren't showering this child with praise.

Every week scientists make great discoveries but barely anyone cares, a child randomly does it and suddenly it's news?

Yes. Yes it is.
Think about it this way - What do scientists do for a living? They try and discover things. So, logically, what do you expect them to do? Discover things. It's the expected result.
Now, random kid playing around with a bunch of molecule models. What do you expect? Not for them to find a new theoretical element, that's for sure. It's unexpected, ergo, news.
And yes, you could say that throwing about a bunch of kids and molecule models would end up getting this again through random chance, (Though the probability may not actually work out like that seeing as how it's not a truly random result.) But the fact is that the probability is low enough that when it happens, we can all say "well, didn't see that coming! Talk about a news story!"

So, yeah, maybe the girl doesn't deserve the attention for randomly finding an element by accident. The story deserves sharing, though. It's a new theoretical element, and if it works or not, it's still a semi-big discovery.

Again, read the thread. I have most likely answered your "insightful" post multiple times when this thread was ongoing in February.

I didn't even read your post as I know it won't be original in any shape or form.

Seem to have made the same mistake as the last bloke that "got his thread on"... I did actually read through the responses, and honestly, I did see a few that addressed my thing eventually.
Then I looked for your response to those.
I. Found. Nothing.
So, yes, unoriginal, but then again, maybe it deserves to be brought to your attention one more time, seeing as how it slipped by you the last 5 or 6 times, because it seems you just started to dismiss everything as "U'r a bigg meanie for being mean to girl waaah."

Spoiler: TL,DR for your pleasure

I'm not saying the girl deserves praise. Not at all. I'm just saying, accidental or no, it's still big enough for news. That's my point.

 

[TAGM]

I never said it wasn't big enough for news, thanks to the net anything can be news.

When I said "suddenly it's news" I meant news that someone cared about. You rarely see the escapist posting a science related article but this somehow warrants attention compared to the work other people do all the time, I find that to be bullshit and that's what I meant.

Also, it's not semi big at all. It's small, it's just yet another carbon chain that we will likely never hear about ever again.

Good point. Personally, I think it's less about the fact that a new probably-not-very-useful-but-who-knows element (And seeing as how no new developments have yet cropped up, it's starting to look like it might be either only theoretical or just not very useful.) And more the fact that it was randomly discovered by a ten year old.

It's sort of like the planets aligning or something - it's random chance, it's pretty much going to happen after a length of time, (Though, the planets aligning is more a set period of time then just random chance.) and it doesn't do shit for us, but people still get a little excited because "Hey, this rare/timed/something event happened in MY lifetime! I saw it! Cool!" Or something along those lines, at least.