A Conversation for Carbon60 - Buckminsterfullerene
Bucky Balls
Two Bit Trigger Pumping Moron Started conversation May 1, 2002
Is this what scientists refer to as 'Bucky Balls' after Buckminster Fuller?
Bucky Balls
Peet (the Pedantic Punctuation Policeman, Muse of Lateral Programming Ideas, Eggcups-Spurtle-and-Spoonswinner, BBC Cheese Namer & Zaphodista) Posted May 1, 2002
Yup. I just headed down here to mention that... 
Bucky Balls
26199 Posted May 1, 2002
Hmm... bit of a typo there... 'doing' in the second to last bullet point... and, hmm, shouldn't the entry be called Carbon-60? Although 'm not a chemist...
Nice entry 
Bucky Balls
Sam Posted May 2, 2002
I don't know what that doing was doing there but it's not there now. Thanks for pointing this out.
Bucky Balls
26199 Posted May 2, 2002
No problem, always happy to nitpick
Any thoughts on the entry name?
Bucky Balls
Limey Tank Posted May 2, 2002
It should be Carbon60 as this is the closest to having the "60" in subscript. I'm not a chemist either, I'm a physicist (but that's no excuse )
I'm not sure the title can be in GuideML as I recall a few problems before with things appearing as "Carbon60".
However it's not that important as it's unlikely to be confused with anything else.
How about an article on the IUPAC nomenclature rules? 
Barry
(a man, not a toy)
Bucky Balls
26199 Posted May 2, 2002
Ahh... Carbon-60 would mean Carbon with 60 things in the nucleus, wouldn't it?
So no good.
Bucky Balls
Limey Tank Posted May 2, 2002
Nope, that would be 60Carbon, but that's nonsense in itself because you would never get a carbon atom with 60 nucleons (well you might, but it's highly improbable). Carbon generally has 12 nucleons and some really rare isotopes have 13 or 14......
I've never seen a hyphen used this way (Carbon-60)....but that's not to say it doesn't happen or isn't used.
Barry
(pedantic to the last )
Bucky Balls
26199 Posted May 3, 2002
Yus, I know you wouldn't get Carbon with 60 nucleons
Hmm... pretty sure I've seen it used like that though... as in Uranium-235 or U-235... shrug.
Bucky Balls
Limey Tank Posted May 5, 2002
You are probably right...... but I know plenty of people who would disagree....but then again again it only matters in specific fields. People tend to know what you are talking about when you mention C-60.
IMO a matter only needs clarification if it really needs it, if I were talking about nuclear reactions I would be more specific, but as this is about 60 C atoms (and carbon is famous for its ability to hook up to other carbon atoms) I did not think it needed more definition.
Anyway, it's all academic really .
I've got a few more articles on the way in June, so please keep an eye out and spot the mistakes if you feel so inclined. This is the whole point of peer review after all, and all comments welcome.
Barry
(a man, not a toy)
Bucky Balls
the other omylouse "multiply (1*6) by (6*1+0+3)!" Posted Jun 1, 2002
u cud jus call the entry Bucky Balls after this thred? (or Buckminsterfullerene) thereby sidestepping the -60 problem!
omy 
Bucky Balls
Peet (the Pedantic Punctuation Policeman, Muse of Lateral Programming Ideas, Eggcups-Spurtle-and-Spoonswinner, BBC Cheese Namer & Zaphodista) Posted Jun 5, 2002
Bucky Balls
the other omylouse "multiply (1*6) by (6*1+0+3)!" Posted Jun 5, 2002
its coming home, its coming home, its coming! Buckys coming home...!
omy
Bucky Balls
chemistrylife Posted Jan 22, 2008
no technically it is that carbon has 60 atoms. get your facts right. ask me anymore questions as chemistry is my life.
Key: Complain about this post
Bucky Balls
- 1: Two Bit Trigger Pumping Moron (May 1, 2002)
- 2: Peet (the Pedantic Punctuation Policeman, Muse of Lateral Programming Ideas, Eggcups-Spurtle-and-Spoonswinner, BBC Cheese Namer & Zaphodista) (May 1, 2002)
- 3: 26199 (May 1, 2002)
- 4: Sam (May 2, 2002)
- 5: 26199 (May 2, 2002)
- 6: Limey Tank (May 2, 2002)
- 7: 26199 (May 2, 2002)
- 8: Limey Tank (May 2, 2002)
- 9: 26199 (May 3, 2002)
- 10: Limey Tank (May 5, 2002)
- 11: the other omylouse "multiply (1*6) by (6*1+0+3)!" (Jun 1, 2002)
- 12: Orcus (Jun 5, 2002)
- 13: Peet (the Pedantic Punctuation Policeman, Muse of Lateral Programming Ideas, Eggcups-Spurtle-and-Spoonswinner, BBC Cheese Namer & Zaphodista) (Jun 5, 2002)
- 14: the other omylouse "multiply (1*6) by (6*1+0+3)!" (Jun 5, 2002)
- 15: chemistrylife (Jan 22, 2008)
More Conversations for Carbon60 - Buckminsterfullerene
Write an Entry
"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."