Talk:Adamantane

Untitled
Quote: It melts at 270 °C and sublimates before boiling

Sublimation is the transition from solid directly to the gaseous phase, so that can't happen after melting. I guess it dissociates before it boils. 193.171.121.30 17:11, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

"It melts at 270 °C..." [in a vacuum? (see next line)] "and in atmospheric pressure..." [at what temperature, if different than above?] "sublimes..." [Is the correct word 'sublimates'?] "before boiling." [It sublimates, then boils? (solid -> gas -> liquid -> gas ) ???

What about "It sublimates (instead of boiling)"]

Suggestions: At 270 °C, it melts in a vacuum and sublimates at 1ATM. ''It melts in a vacuum at 270 °C, and sublimates at 1ATM at ??? °C.'' ''It sublimates in a vacuum at ??? °C, and melts at 1ATM at 270 °C.'' -Antonius- 23:44, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

"before boiling." In my oppinion the right way to put is before melting (see below)

@ Antonius : The process of sublimation depends on the vapor pressure of the material which again depends on the temperature. It does not really make sense to define something like a "sublimation point" comparable to a melting point. A better way to look at it is to compare it to some alcohol evaporating: It's not boiling and yet it disappears at a rate that depends on the temperature (and some other parameters, e.g. the degree of saturation of the surrounding space). Laslandes 11:08, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


 * For now I removed the boiling/sublimation part (and the data that is available in chembox is removed from the article). I would suggest to put a short paragraph about the sublimation behaviour of the compound.  What I think is that this is one of those compounds, which are solid around RT, melt at a certain temperature, but upon heating towards 'boiling' start to evaporate and sublimate onto any colder (RT or similar) surface (phenol is another one that springs to my mind).  When lowering the pressure, one will get to a point where there is no liquid phase anymore, the solid simply sublimates, and sublimates again to a cold surface (unfortunately sublimation is both ways .. while for l/g  we use boiling and condensing, and for s/l melting and freezing/crystallising, so here we talk about boiling/sublimation).  The reason why there may not be a clear boiling point is that, at any given temperature below the boiling point, there is a certain vapour pressure (hence, there are molecules of adamantane in the gas-phase) .. when there is a cold surface close, the molecules that happen to be in the gas-phase condense onto the cold surface, thereby lowering the concentration of molecules in the gas-phase, which get repleneshed from the liquid phase.  So while below boiling-point .. the compound will 'distill' towards the cold surface (maybe helped by energetically favourable crystallisation).  Any thoughts anyone how to describe this process clearly?  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 11:34, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Mountain crystals
The current article says that adamantane can be isolated from "some mountain crystals." That statement does not make sense, I work with a lot of crystals and we dont use the term mountain. Maybe a problem with translation from German.--Smokefoot 14:13, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I just checked and I guess the right translation would be "rock crystal". --Laslandes 10:25, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Solubility in water; org syn
--Smokefoot 14:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I weazeled out and left the mention that this stuff has some decent solubility in water. That property seems unlikely.
 * several entries in Organic Syntheses (free on-line) describe various adamantanes. These references could be usefully incorporated.

Photoionisation
"...it cannot be photoionised because it lacks ultraviolet absorption bands."

Sorry, but this is simply wrong. Adamantane can very well be photoionized, only that the energies needed lie in the vacuum-ultraviolett regime of the spectrum. This means practically that it cant be photoionized within air because the air absorbs the rays before they reach the adamantane. I'll change that. Laslandes 15:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

define start-class?
This is a good opportunity to once again express my criticism regarding the quality scale assessment. Exactly why is this article rated start class. It does contain all the basic information, in terms of applications the compound is pretty useless and the article is blunt about it. Please provide detailed information about exactly what is missing from this page. The only thing you are accomplishing now is scaring away potential editors and readers because the label starting class isn't exactly an advertisement for this article. Also why not try to assess how effective these quality scales are. Is there any productive editing initiated as a response to the article grading? This project must be over a year old and in any business: if it does not fulfill any objectives then scrap it. In my view the amount of new content reaching Wiki chemistry is at a record low and certainly no editors jump in with new content as a result of article grading. My suggestion: scrap it and find other means to improve articles. V8rik 21:53, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Tags removed V8rik 21:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * If you disagree with a rating you can always change it. But if you disagree with the whole concept of rating articles, it's probably better to discuss it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Chemicals where more people will notice. I'm not sure how much the ratings help, but as I understand the scale, I would rate it B class rather than Start. Some things that could be added to make it a really comprehensive article include more details about the synthesis and uses (for example, what is its chemical shift, and why is this particular compound useful for solid-state NMR?), and some mention of the stereochemistry of adamantane derivatives (commonly used as an example of a chiral molecule where the "tetrahedral chiral center" is larger than an atom). --Itub 09:20, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I occasionally vent my displeasure but it is not like I am removing the rating placeholders all over the place. I am just making a point V8rik 19:26, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Name
The article states that the compound was named for its high thermal stability. However, adamant can refer to diamond or other hard substances, and it seems more likely that this substance was named for its structural similarity to diamond. Does anyone have a source for the name origin? --Pyrochem 16:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I actually doubt that the name was derived from adamant directly. I think both words adamantane and adamant simply have the common origin, the Greek word αδαμάς which means "untamable" but it is also the word for diamond (and the origin of the word itself, Latin: "(a)diamantem"). So I think you are right, the name has most likely been chosen for similarity to diamond. Laslandes 10:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I've changed the etymology and added a reference. --Itub 09:02, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Rigid, or soft and plastic?
The article says adamantane is both "rigid" and "soft and plastic". To this lay person (albeit with a science background), these appear contradictory. Can someone please explain? Does the article itself call for clarification? —Largo Plazo (talk) 14:56, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Adamantane. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110904234140/http://www.bandwidthmarket.com/resources/patents/apps/ to http://www.bandwidthmarket.com/resources/patents/apps/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:03, 9 January 2016 (UTC)