Simulating the Half Life of a Radioisotope

Syntactic and Syndiotactic are NOT Synonymous

 

Question 20 from paper 1 of the QCAA chemistry exam 2022 is shown below. Can you answer it?

 

 You can if you make a couple of assumptions first:

1/ The 3D structure isn't given, so you have to assume (given the possible answers) that methyl groups above the chain are in fact coming out of the plane, while methyl groups below the chain are behind the plane.

2/ You have to assume that "syntactic" is a misprint of "syndiotactic" since there was no mention of this being a composite material.

Then you can choose (A) as the answer, and according to the answer sheet you would be correct.

 

However, here is an excerpt from the draft new Queensland Chemistry syllabus (for implementation in 2025 I believe),

      "Describe the structure features of

           -polyethene (LDPE and HDPE), polypropene (syntactic, isotactic and atactic) and                                             polytetrafluorethene."

(Cross my heart, this is what is says, the syllabus writers seem to have difficulties with adjectives as well as chemical nomenclature, where are the round brackets around tetrafluoroethene?)

 

So, it appears that students will study tacticity of polymers but only isotactic and atactic not syndiotactic, then they will look at composite materials in the form of syntactic foams.

Really?

 

Dear Queensland Chemistry syllabus and exam writers, the 3D structure of a polymer results in an isotactic, syndiotactic or atactic polymer.

A syntactic foam refers to a composite material in which hollow spheres are bound together by a polymer.

World Logic Day 2024

 January 14^th is World Logic Day, the perfect day to test how logical a chatbot like ChatGPT is right?

This is the question I asked,

"Each side, including the lid, of a cubic steel box has a surface area of 2500 cm². Twenty coloured balls are placed in the open box. There are twice as many red balls as blue balls inside the box before the lid is welded shut. What is the probability of removing a red ball from the box?"

What is the logical answer to this question? If you are a human being, the logical answer is 0% because if it is a cube and all the sides (including the lid) have the same surface area then there is no hole on any side to withdraw a ball, so when the lid is welded shut you cannot remove a ball.

What is the answer if you are a chatbot? 

This was ChatGPT's response (no additional comments from me, the chatbot's approach is already hysterically funny)...

"Given that each side, including the lid, has a surface area of 2500 cm², and there are 6 sides in total, the total surface area (SA) is given by:
SA = 6 x side²

Since SA = 2500 cm², we can set up the equation:

2500 = 6 x side²

Solving for the side length (side):

(side)² = 2500/6

(side)² = 1250/3

(side) = √1250/3

Now that we have the side length, we can find the volume ( V ) of the cubic steel box:

V = (side)³

V = (√1250/3)³

Now, assuming there are twice as many red balls ( R ) as blue balls ( B ), we have   R = 2B .

The probability ( P ) of removing a red ball from the box is given by:

P(Red) = Number of Red Balls/Total Number of Balls

P(Red) = R/(R + B)

Substitute ( R = 2B ) into the equation:

P(Red) = 2B/(2B + B}

P(Red) = 2B/3B

P(Red) = 2/3

Therefore, the probability of removing a red ball from the box is 2/3." 

Logical? 

Maybe not, but it does share some similar characteristics with typical student responses (pre chatbots), that is, 

a) Ignore the question and just start doing some random calculations until you arrive at some kind of answer.

b) Ignore units.

c)  Never, ever, under any circumstances check your answer to see if it makes any sense.

ChatGPT score 0% (which is apparently equal to 2/3).

Proving ChatGPT is An Idiot

How intelligent is OpenAI's chatGPT?

Here is the question I asked,

"If my mother had 3 sons and each of my brothers has 2 children, how many cousins do I have? "

 

People, being intelligent and logical, would realize there is no sensible answer since there is not enough information in the question, but chatGPT, being neither intelligent nor logical, replied (with HORRIFIED INTERJECTIONS from yours truly),

"In the scenario you described, you are one of the three sons...."

EXCUSE ME! I am definitively female ... cisgender female (she/her)

"...Each of your brothers has 2 children. Therefore, each of your brothers has 2 children, and since you are one of the sons, you also have 2 children. This means that each of the three sons (including yourself) has 2 children.

So, if you sum up the children of all three sons (including yourself), you have a total of 3 sons * 2 children per son = 6 children...."

YOU SEXIST SO-AND-SO! It's 2024 and women are still invisible in society!

"...These 6 children would be your nieces and nephews...."

WAIT! HOLD ON ... 6 children in the next generation OK'ish, but 2 of them are "mine", therefore I'd have 4 nephews and nieces in total, right? (Or is this your way of acknowledging that I may not be male?).

"... Each of your nieces and nephews is a cousin to each other. Therefore, you have 6 cousins in total."

WHAT? COME AGAIN? Somehow my 2 offspring and my 4 nephews/nieces become my cousins? WHAT? 

 

I know that the "T" in GPT stands for transformer, but transforming my gender, some basic arithmetic, and the lexicology of relationships seems to be taking things a tad too far!