Talk:2943: Unsolved Chemistry Problems

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search



P stands for poncentration, SMH my head 😒 --172.70.162.211 21:22, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

You may find this helpful: RAS syndrome Trogdor147 (talk) 22:25, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Oh, that was intentional, my friend. (Also, I believe you meant RAS syndrome.) --162.158.74.48 07:34, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

I think p stands for "pitch", because people start pitching random numbers when they are supposed to calculate a pH (or even an pOH) from given concentrations.Tier666 (talk) 09:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Is 'depolymerization' in this context referring to means of chemically recycling plastics? As I understand it, we basically just do recycling of thermoplastics at the moment by physically melting them, whereas being able to split a plastic apart into its component monomers would in principle enable a completely closed loop lifecycle for plastics, easing the strain on dwindling oil reserves and landfills and whatnot. Since these are supposed to be important unsolved problems, I feel like it probably is a reference to this, but I'm not a chemist and there may be something else which makes more sense. 162.158.33.134 22:37, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

In a chemistry context, depolymerization is simply the process of breaking down polymers into monomers. Plastic recycling is one potential application. Another is production of biofuels. It's a well understood process (usually just heat it up enough and/or apply the proper chemical treatment). Getting the desired outputs in an efficient manner is, in some cases, an unsolved problem. 172.69.246.150 16:05, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

i've always been taught that the p stood for "parts". youtu.be/miLcaqq2Zpk 04:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

In chemistry, I was taught that it was "potential". I didn't even know this was in dispute. L-Space Traveler (talk) 04:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

P does not stand for anything. Originally, it was contrasted with q. Sørensen was performing electrochemical experiments and contrasted the reference electrode q with the hydrogen electrode p. Using p and q like this is common, like using x and y, u and v, or m and n. It's not an abbreviation, just a variable name. He recommended normalizing the concentration of hydrogen ions (i.e. dividing it by 1 mol/l) and calling the result Cₚ or C_q (depending on the electrode). Then each of these tends to be a small number, which we could write as 10^(-p) or 10^(-q). The number p⁺_H then represented the negative log of the normalized concentration of hydrogen cations at the hydrogen electrode. You can read about it in "The origin and the meaning of the little p in pH" by Jens G. Nørby, published in Cell. The associations with words like "power" and "potential" are now widely considered urban legends. 172.70.134.39 04:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

My chemistry teacher at school taught us that pH stands for Latin "pondus hydrogenii", meaning "weight of hydrogen". I never questionned this, until today. 162.158.111.178 19:20, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

My high school chemistry teacher, who was also a French teacher, told us it was for pouvoir hydrogène, meaning “to be able to hydrogen”—I think? I never questioned this, until today. At least it's close to the puissance theory in the article—it's the infinitive-verb form. P1h3r1e3d13 (talk) 17:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Added some stuff concerning the biochem part, since that's my field of expertise. I recently personally felt the problem of the protein folding problem trying to get supercomputer time to simulate a protein I was studying! Also, given that antibody-antigen generation is still extremely faulty I highly highly doubt arbitrary enzyme design will be solved anytime soon, even though great leaps in protein folding have been made. 172.70.39.40 02:13, 9 June 2024 (UTC) caffeinated biochemist


THe issue with loose protons is not ib being or not being atoms. Loose protons have no electrons at all, and thus cannot do Pauli repulsion, and thus cannot do regular chemistry - "should" burrow too much into electron density. The former, however, is not true, because loose protons attach themselves to lone pairs and thus get eletrons and thus can do regular chemistry. This duality is the source of the "proton controversy". In water, for instance, lone H+ do not exist and form H3O+ and H5O2+ /(H2O--H--OH2)+. 162.158.172.4 09:25, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

I've always heard it described as "parts hydrogen", which seems simple enough. Surprised this isn't yet mentioned in the explanation. PotatoGod (talk) 19:47, 10 June 2024 (UTC)


Seriously guys, read the Nørby paper. It's good. It is also irrefutable. p did not originally stand for anything. Or if it did, you will have to explain what q stood for. This is like insisting the a, b, and c in the Pythagorean Theorem must stand for something in some language. It's just factually, provably not the case. We don't have to keep adding speculations about what it might have meant when there is no mystery. 172.70.230.193 05:57, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

"ρ operator"[edit]

I'm not finding any mention of the "ρ operator" in a Google search. Is this section just fiction? The author has no prior contributions to this wiki. BunsenH (talk) 22:42, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

As this operator isn't even mentioned in the comic the section is irrelevant, fiction or not. Trivia at best. I removed that part Elektrizikekswerk (talk) 09:52, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
I assume that it was intended to "explain" the origin of the 'p', as derived from 'ρ'. But I'm reasonably certain that the whole thing was just made up. BunsenH (talk) 15:55, 10 June 2024 (UTC)


Protein folding is biophysics (or rather computational biophysics if you’re doing it in a worthwhile way - Alphafold 2 anyone?), I’m genuinely mad about this. NavieredAndStoked (talk) 19:45, 30 July 2024 (UTC)NavieredAndStoked