Dioxygen difluoride (FOOF) is an incredibly dangerous and reactive chemical. It reacts explosively with nearly everything, including ice, sand, cloth, and even materials previously thought inert at cryogenic temperatures. Its synthesis is complex and hazardous, and the resulting product is difficult to contain due to its extreme reactivity. Even asbestos, typically used for high-temperature applications, ignites on contact with FOOF. There are virtually no practical applications for this substance, and its existence serves primarily as a testament to the extremes of chemical reactivity. The original researchers studying FOOF documented numerous chilling incidents illustrating its destructive power, making it a substance best avoided.
In a 2010 blog post titled "Things I Won't Work With: Dioxygen Difluoride," the author, a chemist, elaborates extensively on the extraordinarily hazardous nature of the chemical compound dioxygen difluoride (FOOF). This substance, with the innocently simple-sounding formula O2F2, possesses a reactivity so extreme that it earns the dubious honor of being considered among the most dangerous chemicals known to science.
The author begins by highlighting the deceptive simplicity of the compound's name, contrasting it with its incredibly violent behavior. They then delve into the historical record, recounting chilling anecdotes from the first synthesis of FOOF, including its ability to ignite concrete and causing explosions with materials considered generally inert, such as asbestos, sand, and water – even at cryogenic temperatures.
The post proceeds with a detailed examination of the chemical properties that underlie FOOF's extreme reactivity. The author explains that the molecule's instability stems from the weakly bonded fluorine atoms and the strong oxidizing potential of the oxygen component. This combination creates a potent and indiscriminate oxidizing agent capable of tearing apart nearly any substance it encounters, liberating vast quantities of heat and frequently resulting in explosive reactions.
Further emphasizing the dangers, the author describes the challenges associated with containing FOOF. Even specialized equipment made from materials like nickel and Monel alloys, known for their chemical resistance, suffer significant corrosion upon contact. The volatility of FOOF exacerbates the risks, requiring storage at exceptionally low temperatures to prevent it from becoming gaseous and potentially interacting explosively with its surroundings.
The author continues by recounting various harrowing incidents from the scientific literature involving FOOF, including a particularly dramatic episode in which a spill of just a few drops resulted in the complete destruction of a laboratory apparatus and the erosion of a significant portion of a fume hood made of concrete. These examples serve to underscore the extreme caution necessary when handling this exceptionally dangerous substance.
Finally, the author concludes with a resounding declaration that, given its extreme reactivity, inherent instability, and the potential for catastrophic accidents, dioxygen difluoride is a chemical they would resolutely refuse to work with. The post leaves the reader with a profound appreciation for the power and peril inherent in some chemical compounds and a healthy respect for the choices chemists make in prioritizing safety.
Summary of Comments ( 29 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43533496
Hacker News users react to the "Things I Won't Work With: Dioxygen Difluoride" blog post with a mix of fascination and horror. Many commenters express disbelief at the sheer reactivity and destructive power of FOOF, echoing the author's sentiments about its dangerous nature. Several share anecdotes or further information about other extremely hazardous chemicals, extending the discussion of frightening substances beyond just dioxygen difluoride. A few commenters highlight the blog's humorous tone, appreciating the author's darkly comedic approach to describing such a dangerous chemical. Some discuss the practical (or lack thereof) applications of such a substance, with speculation about its potential uses in rocketry countered by its impracticality and danger. The overall sentiment is a morbid curiosity about the chemical's extreme properties.
The Hacker News post discussing the Science.org blog post about Dioxygen Difluoride (FOOF) has a significant number of comments, many of which add humorous and insightful perspectives to the already entertaining and slightly terrifying original blog post.
Several commenters build on the author's dry humor, extending the list of things FOOF will react with. One commenter jokes that FOOF "reacts explosively with the concept of 'things I won't work with'," highlighting its extreme reactivity. Another adds "sand under vacuum at -196C." emphasizing just how difficult it is to contain. This contributes to the overall impression of FOOF being a substance best avoided.
A few comments provide further technical details and context. One points out the chilling detail that even asbestos, a material known for its resistance to heat and fire, bursts into flames upon contact with FOOF. Another notes the remarkable fact that chlorine trifluoride, itself a notoriously reactive and dangerous substance, is considered a relatively mild fluorinating agent compared to FOOF. This comparison helps put the extreme reactivity of FOOF into perspective. Another commenter explains the origin of the "FOOF" nickname, deriving from its chemical formula (O2F2).
Some commenters discuss the practical applications (or lack thereof) of such a hazardous material. One commenter questions whether there's any scenario where using FOOF would be preferable to other, safer methods, leading to speculation about potential uses in rocketry, though even in that context, its dangers likely outweigh any potential benefits.
A recurring theme is the sheer terror inspired by the substance, with comments expressing a mix of morbid fascination and a strong desire to stay far away. One commenter aptly summarizes this sentiment with "Nope. Just… nope," capturing the overall reaction to the sheer reactivity and danger presented by Dioxygen Difluoride.
Several comments also appreciate the writing style of the original blog post author, Derek Lowe, praising his humorous and engaging way of conveying complex scientific information. This appreciation adds to the overall positive reception of the post and encourages further discussion.