Synthesis of Aspirin (Acetylsalicylic Acid)

uhm, i found this document while cleaning my hard disk. this was a completion requirement for my Basic Organic Chemistry class some 2 years ago. i thought it sounded smart, but the actual experimentation was a wreck, so just bear with this short discussion of how we produced aspirin, artificially. oh yeah, this is for bragging purposes. HAHAHA

i couldn't believe i was able to write something like this.
was i?

Results and Discussion

       To form acetylsalicylic acid, a mixture of salicylic acid and acetic anhydride is needed. To hasten the reaction, we added 85% phosphoric acid (catalyst) and heated the mixture in a steam bath to increase the solubility of salicylic acid and increase the rate of reaction. Water was added to provide medium for further nucleophilic substitution. Heating the reaction mixture and addition of water ionizes acetic acid in water for the removal of the products to attain equilibrium. Heating favored the forward reaction. The mixture was cooled to complete the recrystallization process. 

       Since the mixture is cold, suction filtration method was carried out to separate the filtrate from the residue which contains the crystallized products. Upon air drying the residue, we separated a small amount of the crude product for melting point determination and recrystallized the rest by dissolving it with diethyl ether then adding petroleum ether dropwise until cloudiness occurs. The mixture was then cooled in an ice bath to complete the recrystallization, then as usual, suction filtration was carried out to separate the recrystallized aspirin from the filtrate.

      We weighed out our recovered aspirin and got 11.9 g. Theoretically, there should only be a maximum of 2.61 g of aspirin recovered, but our data showed 455% yield. This could be accounted for so many errors made during the experiment; one could be incomplete drying, leading to a positive error. Another could be weighing errors, which in our case most probably led us to an enormous positive error. Also, there is a high chance that some impurities were not removed, and most likely it would be salicylic acid that would account for that.

      As for the melting point data, our crude sample got a range of 119-124˚C and our purified sample got a range of                  . Comparing it to the literature value of 134˚C, we can say that our purified sample is nearer the theoretical value, but since we got a range, it is most certain that our purified sample still contains contaminants.

      Since we weren’t able to conduct the characterization tests, here is a theoretical discussion of the differentiation tests:

      The FeCl3 test was positive for salicylic acid because it detected the presence of phenol in it. Ideally, for aspirin, it should be negative because there is no presence of a hydroxyl group attached to a benzene ring in its structure. KMnO4 test is used to detect the presence of 1˚ and 2˚ alcohols and phenols, in which case only salicylic acid garnered a positive result.

      The differentiation of commercially available aspirin from the recrystallized used 1mL of iodine and 2mL water. A brown-black liquid with white precipitate was observed on the commercialized aspirin whereas a red-orange liquid with white precipitate was observed on the other. The reaction of iodine with the commercialized aspirin only confirms the presence of a starch binder which is used in most tablet medicines in order to give its shape, as was characterized by the brown-black color change.

Summary and Conclusion

      Organic synthesis is the preparation of a desired organic compound from commercially available reagents. Its purpose is to produce a pure sample of the desired product in the most efficient and economical way possible.

      In this certain experiment we were able to produce aspirin via acid catalyzed nucleophilic acyl substitution.

      We have computed the theoretical yield of aspirin to be 2.61g only. Any deviation to this value could be accounted as errors and must be improved by further recommendations. The melting point of aspirin is 134˚C. Having a range as a melting point value indicates the presence of impurities. The most common impurity that would be incorporated in the final product would be salicylic acid, that is why there’s a need to differentiate the starting material from the end product, to know whether we’ve produced the desired product and not the starting material.

      This experiment is a good introduction to synthesizing. Through this we have learned the essence of organic synthesis and its importance in our daily lives.

------------
maybe the writing is to brag for. i mean, on the bloody technical level, yes. the intimidating jargon. i don't even remember them. but if you actually read it, you'll see how bad it went. see?


btw. i'm contemplating on which bug annihilation process to employ for this laptop. ther're ants inside. my options are:


1) vacuum/blow dry the damn motherboard. but i need screwdrivers for this
2) spray some crazy bug repellant, just to annoy them and have them scurrying out of my buddy
3) bring it to a technician and let him do the cleaning but i think that's gonna cost more. :(


i could do all three, but hi funds! where are you?
the thought of an ant colony present in this laptop is troubling me. so far there are only red ants. no soldiers and drones yet, hopefully no queen. and no crumb carrying marchers. oh God, help me. i'm not financially fit to replace this thing yet. 

complexity science, major mindfuck!

currently listening to brew rats at 92.30 fm

you know how i love listening to people talking about science, physics, or chemistry, most especially if i'm not in a classroom and is not forced to listen hehehe. i've always been interested in science, reaaaaally. but i've recently figured that science is the most accessible thing that you cannot easily grasp. but the cool thing is that you don't need a lot of brains to appreciate it, like me. >:D (not fishing here)

ok. so Dr. Chris Monterola is still on air so i have to listen first bwahaha

anyway. he talked about the same things that got me glued to the TV the last time i watched nat geo. ASTROPHYSICS. actually, he discussed a lot of things, centering on einstein's theories and experimentations. he mentioned about time and space as two inseparable identities. he talked about how the speed of light is constant in a vacuum. he talked about the megapressure that produces sonic booms in aircrafts. how it is most likely impossible to go back in time. he says you could go to the future, after all, time is designed that way and is unidirectional, but you can't go back (theoretically, at least). he talked about sooooo many mindfucking things about physics that are sooooooo fucking interesting, minus the proving part of course.

i'm a theoretical person. i love theories. ♥ listening to super smart people like that, and actually getting them makes me feel like one heck of a genuis (that i'm not). just don't make me solve things hahaha. Dr. Chris Monterola, i give you my highest respect for being soooo smart and for making a study on how a chalk's teeth pattern can be traced back to the person who used it on the board via artifical intelligence. grabe lang e! grabeeee! magna nung college (UP diliman physics i guess?), most outstanding nung masters! @_@ bow ako sayo serrr.



depressing thing this week. i'm a major fail at data structures now. i didn't nail the recitation. i didn't top the quiz bee. all because sir's quiz now includes NUMERAL LOGIC. and i didn't nail it. i could memorize the entire chapter, but i couldn't solve that fast. [i'm only 2nd on the reci, and 3rd on the quiz (although i got perfect,2 people got 3 points past the perfect score, and i only got 1).] asar yun sobra. if you're in my shoes you'll feel depressed.

alam mo yun? parang nasira yung winning streak ko? hindi ko matanggap. i was always on top (back then).

hindi ko naman pinagmamayabang na matalino ako e. in fact, i know of people in school who are way smarter than i am. nagkakatalo lang sa sipag at effort.

right-brained or left-brained? brain dominance test >:D

here's a really cool brain dominance test i saw earlier at plaridel's blog! >:D all you have to do is look at the image above and tell whether the girl is turning clockwise or counter-clockwise. i'm not sure if blogger supports .gif, but i do hope the image is moving >:]

if it's not moving, just refer to this entry: http://plaridel.wordpress.com/2009/02/15/right-brain-vs-left-brain/

if you see it moving clockwise, you're right-brained; otherwise, left. 

anyways. i've taken brain dominance tests before and i'm always right-brained. they say right-brained people are more intuitive than analytical. left-brained people however, speaks otherwise. right-brained people are more logical and organized and so on... the list goes on... maybe you can check this out: http://painting.about.com/library/blpaint/blrightbraintable.htm

but you see, even though for the most part i think i'm more right-brained, i'd like to think that i'm also left-brained at times. see, i can make the image move from clockwise to counter-clockwise and vice versa which is the funnest thing i've learned today! and also something i think i could benefit from! >:D

it was hard trying to switch brain-sides at first! when i first saw the picture, it's definitely clockwise. i even thought the image is just a joke until i asked my dad and got an opposite answer. then i read the comments and discovered that it's possible to make the girl turn the other way around. so i tried staring at a different part of the screen, with the image still on view and imagined it moving counter-clockwise. i was also drawing counter-clockwise circles with my finger to help me out. and it freaking did. the image turned counter-clockwise as my mind ordered. and when it did, it doesn't change! it took me another minute to switch my brain-side and see the girl turning clockwise as it is orginally (i mean, when i first saw it. it may vary)

and noooow, the more i try switching it. the faster the switch becomes! LOL and if that is of any significance, maybe while studying, i'll look at this image and switch to left-brain. if i need my creative juices flowing, i'll switch to right-brain. it could help. haha! but i'm still more right-brained, because i always switch to it unconsciously... a couple of minutes ago i left the picture moving counter-clockwise... i just went to the bathroom and when i came back, it's back to clockwise. lol

more on my insights about love + the awesome time and space warp feature i saw on nat geo

it's funny how the couples i thought would never break up end up doing so after a couple of months (some, years). some separate for good, remain friends and move on happily. but i can't forgive those who break up and become bitter afterwards, like nothing good ever happened in the span of time they were together. ever heard of gratitude? it's cute how these people tweet and shouts out at FB about how romantic they are with each other, claiming "forever and ever ♥ ♥ ♥". whenever i read posts like that in my live feed, i feel happy for my friend/s. but after a few months, a relationship status changed to "single", and 50++ shocked comments, i ask myself, "huh? but why? they seem to be the happiest couple just yesterday."

i can't help but think how people actually love one another, or if they're really in love in the first place and not just deluded by the misleading emotions they get. i mean, love can be easily confused by infatuation, and even a crush. and putting love in vain is the saddest thing we could ever do to it.

imagine if Love were a person and we keep on mistaking other people for it, doesn't that hurt? like you can't even recognize it when it's what brought you to this world.

Love: hey, that's not me! that's Crush!
Crush: sorry, Love. guess they think you're too shallow they mistook you for me.
Love: :(

Love must've been a sad person, being recognized only by a few people. and Crush, on the other hand must be enjoying all the attention it gets being constantly mistaken for love.

anyway. guys. this must prove how utterly conservative i am when it comes to engaging in relationships, i don't easily admit i'm in love, i take time to realize it first before i say it out, because as i said, i don't want to put my feelings in vain. i don't want to hurt love, i avoid premature confessions (which i gathered, is the main cause for bitterness after breakups).

have i ever been in love? not yet. >:P

moving on...



i watched a super cool nat geo feature awhile ago (in the gym, while walking on a treadmill), i guess it was called Speeding Through the Universe or something... and it explained how speed is the key in studying how time and space works. it also talked about how immensely perilous a black hole can be, that when an object get sucked at it, even if it travels at the speed of light, it can never get out, that's how powerful its pull is. and worm holes, yesss, those time travel tunnels i see in scifi movies that never fail to fascinate me, they explained the concept of a wormhole using an equally cool illustration.

wormholes are tunnels that enable you to transfer from one point to another in a short span of time. sometimes you get transported to a different space, and at some other times at a different space AND time.

imagine the cosmos, the universe, as a 2d rubber mat (scientists refer to this as a cosmic fabric). you plot 2 points on opposite ends, and the goal is to reach point B from point A in the shortest span of time. of course, if you're referring to the universe, that would take lightyears. but if you fold the rubber mat, make the two points meet, and punch a hole in it, you got quite an impressive shortcut there. in the astronomical sense, yes, you've made a freaking worm hole. then again, that's very difficult to do, you literally have to tear parts of the universe in order to create one.

there are many many more things that got me hooked to the feature and i just love nat geo because it's so awesooooome. diba? i mean, i don't fancy reading science books so this was a big big help. and there are fractals everywhere. >8D reminds me of my friend, jec. haha

right. i want cabled TV in my room! :(

the quantum pendant and that freakin scalar energy thing, bogus or what?

after church we did a bit of shopping (not really) then went to commonwealth market to buy a sack of rice. mom called me for this demo thing she wants me to witness. mr demo-er is demonstrating how his product works! cool huh? like, duh? and his product is something like an anting-anting or an agimat --stuff ramon revilla passes on as heirlooms to his children and grandchildren-- only, it's backed up with quite a scientific research and various experimentations. the cost, 9000 pesos.

so the the product is called Quantum Pendant (yes, you can click on it, it's not advertised text) and it claims to energize you (give you super strength!) and reduce health risks using Scalar Energy Field (SEF). well, SEF, as it is now is not a even a fact and many people (well, intelligent sounding forum users) are contesting its being a theory. it claims to get energy from NOTHING, so we're kind of dealing with extreme physical impossibilities here (actually when i read that, i felt oddly stupid. so many fckn scientific jargons i could only think is meant to confuse me and make the article sound smart and credulous), though researches are (probably) ongoing.... but as far as my googling took me, i never read anything saying it has been proven... which sucks because my parents already bought two of them. that's a depressing 18,000 for something that is based on unproven Science. i'm not skeptic about the SEF part (in fact, i am supportive of it -- the people behind this are our modern Einsteins and Newtons), but i am about the pendant producing SEF.

anyway. mr. demo-er says the pendant gives you extra strength, i believed him easily because he had me on this 'body balance test' and i failed miserably, but when i held thy-mightly-SEF-powered-pendant, he wasn't able to topple my balance at all! that amazed me, thought i could use it to show off at the gym LOL.

until i read about Placebo Effect just now (using search strings 'quantum pendant scam')... you know, asking someone with a headache to drink this tablet saying it can cure all sorts of head problems haha, then the sick person expectedly gets fine afterwards and thanks you for it. then you tell him the truth, that the tablet is just a piece of candy. hehehe and the now-fine person gets sicker thinking how stupid he is to fall for such a psych trick. yessss, that's the freakin Placebo Effect. it's all in the brain. in the brain. in the mighty brain. you can even convince yourself that you're decapitated just by concentrating on it (though what's the point?), yeah, but that's a different story hahahaha

and so, i'm left with a huge amount of disbelief, but i'm not completely losing faith in it because the whole Scalar Energy research thing is entirely new and interesting to me (i read something about time and space warp, so that tickled a geek nerve in me), so might as well be assertive about it. so far, my short google trips didn't give me anything concrete. some people say it's real, some don't

i think...


it's expensive.
damn expensive for a piece of cooled-down lava from some Japanese volcano.

any suggestions on this is greatly appreciated. i like how the pendant looks, it looks...uhm, tribal and very agimat-ish. and it also gives me hope, though it could be a false one, that i could be stronger. i mean, as long as i strongly and firmly believe in that, i could hold on to any piece of odd looking jewelry and be as strong right?

when it comes down to it, it's all in the mind.
as long as SEF has not been proven yet, the pendant is just an object you put your faith into. kind of like religion, yes.

and so we were sold an occult item for 9000 each. one for my mom, one for my dad, hey that's 18 freakin thousand pesos. should i use the placebo effect to calm me down?
------

no quantum pendants nor scalar energy junk needed: 5 Superpowers You Didn't Know Your Body Was Hiding From You