X-Message-Number: 4749 Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 17:09:12 +0200 (MET DST) From: Eugen Leitl <> Subject: Why Florine is Evil & stuff > CryoNet - Tue 8 Aug 1995 cold start: kinetic inhibition at low temperature is an advantage, not something undesirable. Hence oxygen/hydrogen is a much better system than H_2/F_2. Keith F. Lynch wrote on Mon, 7 Aug 1995: > > What about monatomic oxygen and/or monatomic hydrogen? I'm sure > either substance will react with the other, or with itself, at that > temperature, releasing lots and lots of energy, and nothing toxic. No method of storage of monoatomic species is currently known, apart from argon matrix at 0.1 K, may be. I'd rather be handling solid ozone: enthalpy of formation is _very_ large, at least one order of magnitude higher than any chemical reaction known. In fact, the hydrogen plasmatrone derives some of the heat from metal-catalyzed heat of hydrogen recombination on the metal surface. At such energies heat of combustion is negligeable, as compared to the recombination enthalpy. (This isn't a nuke though, just one small step in the right direction). > What I'm not sure of is whether either substance can be kept stable at > that temperature. Perhaps if the individual atoms were constrained > in a latticework of some relatively inert element such as gold? Using atomic oxygene is the best way to make gold oxide from Au bulk: you can watch surface tarnishing real fast. Argon matrix at about 0 K and massive dilution is probably the only containment possible for free radicals. > (If nanotechnology can use diamonds, why not gold?) Because carbon is ubiquitous, and gold is not. Because carbon is versatile and gold is not. Etc. There might be some limited uses for Au in nanotech, though. Catalysts or 1d metals as columnar complexes, probably. > Alternatively, why not simply use RF heating? A low frequency will > penetrate evenly to all parts of the brain, with no hot spots from > shielding, focussing, reflection, diffraction, or any other mechanism. The problem is power: you'd need several kW RF to heat even a modest organ as Fahy says. I don't think RF is viable for whole-body defrosts, due to extreme power requirements though it may be optimal for neuropatients retrieval. Concerning shockwaves: you might be getting some if you'd use MW or GW RF power. (Consider using the Nova Laser at Livermore for tissue rewarming instead, then you'll sure get shockwaves ;). Concerning F_2 and HF storage: F_2 is stable in dry glass containers, one is making xenone fluoride in quartz containers to allow short wave (from sunlight or UV) in in period of some days. (Hydrolysis to xenone oxide is usually done in teflon capillaries in _small_ quantities. Otherwise you might need some new lab equipment after watching some teflone aerosol and possibly a new operator.. Giant holes.) Steel surfaces undergo oxidation, presenting an inert metal fluoride surface. However, if you make a spot hot enough, the fluoride will melt off, exposing a clean surface, which will react with fluorine... provided, the rate is high enough, you'd get a nice explosion, since the reaction is autocatalytic. For room temperature this storage works good, though. For above reasons, it is highly unsafe transporting (warm) fuming nitric acid in titanium or aluminum container and than scratching the inner surface... don't do that. There isn't any diamond fluoride, but one can substitute hydrogen on diamond surface by fluorine, thus making it much more inert. However, the layer being monoatomic, can be breached with species of high enough energy, exposing a hot (radical) spot on the surface. PTFE (teflone) is essentially a hydrocarbon with all hydrogens substitued by fluorines. Free fluorine, as ozone, ignites any organic substance instanteously (chlorine does this only rarely), free carbon (as carbon black) and HF is released. Warmed water burns in fluorine with a pale flame, oxygene I think, too. Bricks will burn if dripped onto with NF_3, in fact thus the porous membranes for gaseous uranium hexafluoride (which is nasty stuff on its own right) isotope separation by diffusion was achieved in Los Alamos (they used other methods, too). The product of fluorine/hydrogen combustion is HF, which is a (very nasty) fluid at about 18 deg C, gaseous HF is not anything I'd recommend breathing to the average mammal. HF solved in water is hydrofluoric acid, diluted solutions of which are used for glass etchings in art. With concentrated HF solutions, silicates can be converted to thin air (silicon tetrafluoride, SiF_4), if treated repeatedly in a lead crucible (?). Simplest way to make HF is to pour conc. sulfuric acid upon calcium difluoride and heat the mess. (Don't do that at home, either). Toxicity: hydrofluoric acid (especially hot) makes really spectacular burns which don't heal for months, since it grabs calcium ions from tissue. Apart from being corrosive, HF is damn toxic on its own right, so beware. (I hope above passage has convinced you why free fluorine is Evil.) Concerning Will Wares coolin' gizmos proposal: unfortunately there ain't no endothermic reaction which could cool down tissue at such concentrations measurably. Some heat flow and Carnot loss will have to be dealt with, unfortunately. The highest cooling rates for tissue known is based on bringing a tiny slice into direct contact with a copper block at liquid He temperature _very_ rapidly, a relatively recent EM specimen preparation technique (End-80's Nature?). This produces good water glass at a minimum of artefacts real fast (I think they did neurotransmitter vesicle dynamics for a demo, though I might be inventing things here). -- Eugene Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=4749