From: Alison og Thomas Høyer (alihoyer$##$mobilixnet.dk)
Date: Wed Feb 16 2000 - 12:29:25 EST
When Boole introduced his algebra of propositions, he met with similar 'sour points'. People hated to see logic reduced to the simple arithmetic calculation with logic equations, operands and operators. It took away the beauty of pure thought.
I am not afraid of an intellectual deroute of organic chemistry. I think we will see many of the tendencies that Jacob points out, for instance, the introduction (at a high cost from Aldrich) of kits for synthesis optimization. Instead of starting out with spending hours in the library trying to pin down the best conditions for a particular reductive step, you begin by subjecting your substrate to a standard kit of 48 reducing conditions.
However, this is an automation of dull tasks, it may even be seen as a reinforcement of the experimental aspect of chemistry, but it doesn't make the decision making mechanical. If we don't need to excercise our brains very much about reducing a compound, then that only leaves room for making decisions on higher levels, which will be organic chemistry just the same.
I remain your enraged colleague,
Thomas Hoyer
> Hello Albert,
>
> Maybe unadvertedly you touched a sour point. The following opinion may not
> sound very encouraging but the conclusions you may reach take into account
> present trends and a vision of the future, that might look bright or dim,
> according to ones own taste. The following is written at the risk of
> causing the rage of many learned colleagues,
>
> All branches you mentioned of organic synthesis will be relagated in the
> future to purely mechanical decisions, automatic if you wish. Instead of
> planning and carrying out lengthy synthetic paths, people will opt for
> computing them in terms of synthones derived from available sources, and
> estimating reaction kinetics and yields. Once a set of alternative
> synthetic paths is obtained, people will mount a synthesis train made of
> standard units, where the process will be carried out according to the
> calculated parameters. Perhaps even "mounting" will require minimal
> intervention in well-engineered contraptions. If the yields of the product
> are reasonable, then only the final purification (again, almost automatic)
> operations will turn out the desired stuff, otherwise, next alternative
> will be executed.
>
> In some branches this approach is already quite advanced (although not
> without opposition). For example, the classical approach was synthesizing
> long series of compounds with potential pharmaceutical activity, to be
> individually tested for reactivity and ancillary specifications. The
> futuristic antithetical approach consists of preparing a "library,"
> namely, a mixture of compounds that were synthesized together according to
> certain rationale, to be tested for certain activity. If activity is
> apparent, then effort is invested to identify, isolate, analyze and
> synthesize the active principles of the library.
>
> Perhaps in the future learning synthetic chemistry will focus on how to
> program the software that is in control of the various activities just
> decribed. The actual syntheses will be performed by technicians or chemists
> trained in the operation of the semiautomatic or automatic equipment. This
> is, to my chagrin, relegation to ablivion of the art of organic synthesis
> as we knew it in the past.
>
> Have fun,
>
> Jacob
__________________
ORGLIST - Organic Chemistry Mailing List
Website and Archive: http://www.orglist.net/
List coordinator: Joao Aires de Sousa (jas$##$mail.fct.unl.pt)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 19 2003 - 12:15:34 EDT