StarTalk Radio - Explosive Science with Kate the Chemist

Episode Date: April 22, 2025

What are chemical reactions like in space? Neil deGrasse Tyson and Chuck Nice team up with Kate the Chemist to explore how cesium helps us tell time, the elusive quest for the periodic table’s “island of stability,” how AI is revolutionizing chemistry, and more!NOTE: StarTalk+ Patrons can listen to this entire episode commercial-free here:https://startalkmedia.com/show/explosive-science-with-kate-the-chemist/Thanks to our Patrons moe shannon, Shaye S, Nic Chappell, Brandon Gibson, Ernest Carducci, Andrew Kidder, Aidan Beaney, Maurice, Erin Murphy, Robin Guo, Szymon Środa, Richard Brounstein, Jayant Dhawan, Ernesto Medina, Javier Lee, micheal stucker, Leslie Ekker, Steven, Ramkumar Agnihotram, Andrew Carl, Takashi H, Jasper, Lacie, and Linda, Kevin Contreras, ScarlettMoose, Sophia & Nick Sestrac, Earl Gleason, Jabari, the Dark and Not-All-That-Powerful Wizard, Bostjan Pisler, Rich Culbertson, Jeroen Allebé, Jack Black, Lauren New, Kevin Curry, Zs_cience94, Rich Dercheimer, Ned, Charles Davenport, Jenna Noeller, Nick Dragan, Simon Coulson, Andrii Pronkin, Andrew Coffey, D G, sai, and Ben Barzilay for supporting us this week. Subscribe to SiriusXM Podcasts+ to listen to new episodes of StarTalk Radio ad-free and a whole week early.Start a free trial now on Apple Podcasts or by visiting siriusxm.com/podcastsplus.

Chuck, I think that show we just recorded had good chemistry. Yes, I especially like the explosions. Or how to make one. Coming up on Star Talk. Welcome to Star Talk, your place in the universe where science and pop culture collide. Star Talk begins right now. This is Star Talk. Neil deGrasse Tyson, your personal astrophysicist. We're doing cosmic queries today.

That means Chuck is in the house. Chuck? Hey, hey. Alright, you got the queries. I do right here. And where'd they come from? They come from our people at Patreon. Nice. The supporters who give us money and that is why we like them.

No, we like them because they're curious. Well that's right. Yes, that. That's why we like them. So today, it's going to be all about chemistry. Nice. We love chemistry. I know a little bit of chemistry but not not enough to do a cosmic queries on it. And I know enough to listen. We combed the landscape for a chemist and we went to the top shelf.

Yes. Top shelf. Yes. Kate the chemist. Yes. The McCallum 30. No, it's the 30 year old. The 30 year old scotch of chemists, baby.

Top shelf. Top shelf chemists, baby, top shelf. Top shelf chemist. Kate the Chemist, welcome back to Star Talk. Thank you for having me. I love visiting y'all. Oh my gosh, and let me get your full last name in here. I don't know, does anyone in the world know this? Beaverdorf?

Mm-hmm, married into that. Oh! Ah! Ah! Wow. Just, just, just, don't blame me. That's it, that is so funny. Married into that. Wow, just, just, don't blame me. That's it. That is so funny.

Married into that. Wow. Okay. So, is your husband a scientist? He is a scientist. We met in grad school. That makes sense. All right.

All right. I think we talked about him on a previous thing. Did you meet at University of Texas? We did, yeah. See, I remembered that. Nice, nice job. Good for you. Yeah, I was high. Okay, that was, okay.

Okay, you are a professor for the public understanding of science. Yes. We need more of those professorships. 100%. Yes, I know in England they have several of those that were funded by, who was it, one of the Microsoft guys.

Well, the one in Oxford is the Simeonier one. Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, that's Simone. Charles Simone, yeah, he's a Microsoft billionaire. Oh, okay, perfect. I understand he also used to date Martha Stewart. Yes he did, he dated her when he went into space. Oh, and had her make the food for everybody on the space station at the time. From prison?

See man, or? No, don't stop! Or... The prison stint was short. It was after that. So Kate, so you're also an author. And you're a host seeking a scientist. Yes.

Do you find them after you seek them? I do, yes. Every time. I seek one every time, at least one, sometimes two. And it works every time. Very glad to hear that. So you're at Notre Dame. Yes, just like this job.

Yeah, and, oh it's new? Yep, September. Okay, well welcome. Thank you. Yes, yes, not welcome, congratulations. I'll take it, yes. Yeah, I was there a few years ago, gave a public talk. Yes, they speak very highly about it.

A very proud institution. Do you teach classes, but there are special classes? So I don't teach right now, but in a couple years I'll be teaching science communication courses. So we're going to build a science communication minor and hopefully turn it into a major. So good. It's so important right now.

Will this be in collaboration with the communications department? A little bit. So it's a partnership with... Or journalism department? Yes, that. So the arts and letters program. So both of our colleges are going to come together, and so we'll take their expertise and the actual communication,

our expertise with science, and kind of blend it together. And I think it's going to come together, and so we'll take their expertise and the actual communication, our expertise with science, and kind of blend it together, and I think it's going to be really beautiful. And we need it so badly. So badly. Journalism is so broken, and science might be a way to sort of stitch that, a force to help stitch it back together.

Well, you know, I'm not even sure if journalism is as broken as we think. I believe that people have siloed to an extent where they can't accept whatever journalistic point of view is being put forward, because they can't think critically. So they just go, what the hell, man, that's not cool what you just said there, because you know, I don't agree with you.

And then that becomes the whole argument. Well, you need somebody to fix that. Right. You know. But I think science is a way of actually bridging the gap because when people learn how science works as a way of thinking, it changes their entire life. So if you got the journalism department involved,

very good, and they, so are you teaching scientists to be better communicators or journalists to be better scientists? Both, that's clutch, right? We have to do both of these. That's amazing. So for the scientists, right? Clutch is a new word like that.

Excuse me. Sorry. Did that word come into being? I don't know. I thought it was so fetch, but I'm just getting past fetch. It's important. It's important. It's so clutch.

I love it. All right. It's necessary. We have to teach the scientists how to communicate, right? And that could be a number of different mediums, podcasts, books, written, right, journalism. Right. Because the science degrees don't care about that. We're not trained in talking to the public in any medium.

We're really not. We're taught to talk to each other, and we're taught to write in passive voice, which I don't know if you've ever read passive voice. It's boring, it's super boring. So if you're trying to connect with the non-scientist, passive voice is not the answer. Right, but both are necessary,

to be able to talk to scientists, but then be able to translate to the lay person is what's really important and for some reason it's I don't know How can I put it? I don't want to say that it's that it's countered to the way Scientists are as people like my son is right now studying to become a molecular biologist. Nice. Okay What did that happen? You can tell me that yeah, that's what he decided, you know, and he got a full ride Yes, you as a father and he wants to be a molecular bio. How'd that happen? That's why he wants to be Look at my life. It was like oh no

Some comedy is not the way to go But I told him I was. Yeah, let me tell you something, comedy is not the way to go. But I told him, I was like, dude, that's great. With your kind of personality, you would make an excellent communicator for that. And he was like, yeah, I don't want to do that. Oh, yeah, okay. I don't want to talk to people about it, I just want to do it.

And I think a lot of scientists feel that way. Yeah, they just want to go in the lab. I just want to do it, I don't want to talk about it. Yeah, shut up and get back to the lab. Exactly. Right, well, I mean, as scientists, we have three categories. I just want to do it. I don't want to talk about it. Yeah, shut up and get back to the lab. Exactly. Right. Well, I mean, as scientists, we have three categories. The first thing we do is we ask a question.

The middle thing we do is we seek the answer. We do our research. And then the last thing is actually sharing it with the public. But that's where we drop the ball. We really don't do it enough. And it takes a skill. My husband is introverted. He's a great chemist.

He's a great software engineer, but he would hate to do what I do. And so it takes a certain personality to get out there and put yourself out there. And you also have to have a thick skin. People will come after you for what you say. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So we are here in my office at the Hayden Planetarium. What brings you to New York?

Oh, I'm here for a spot on the Today Show. Oh, excuse me! And a spot on the Sharon Bitsch Show. So we just squeezed us in. We are a straight up booty call. You answered. Oh, oh. So if you're on a Today Show, then you don't need,

if you're on a Today Show, then what do you, what do you, what do you, what? Well I like talking to you, why, what do you, blah. Well, I like talking to you. Was that the question? Okay. That was kind of the question that I, It's different, right?

So the Today Show, you're talking to a certain audience. It's the American public, right? And they're usually people who aren't necessarily signing up for a science lesson. They could be in the doctor's office. Oh, that was so nice of you. You just called our audience smart. They are smart.

They're science enthusiasts, right? Wouldn't you say so? No, no, no. So, no, very important point. Here, we already know our audience smart. They are smart, they're science enthusiasts, right? Wouldn't you say so? No, no, no, so, no, very important point. Here, we already know our audience and it's a science audience. The Today Show, people tune in not expecting science. 100%. And then you slip that in,

and now they can get excited about it. That's the goal, that's the goal. So do a little fire, do a little dance, and maybe teach one thing. If I can teach one thing, I consider it a successful segment. Which hosts will you be with on the Today Show? So Al Roker, Craig Melvin, and Dylan Dreier.

Oh, cool. You gotta bring in the weatherman, because they know science. And Al is great. He's an actual science enthusiast. Yes, he is. As is Dylan, they're both meteorologists, so they have that science background,

and it's very fun to do stuff with them, because they ask the questions, too. They're interested, and they have that science background, and it's very fun to do stuff with them. Because they ask the questions too, they're interested, and they have that science background, so they want to push it just a little bit, which I love, right? You need the buddy. So I probably, we probably did this the last time you came through, because I want to get to the questions

we asked, because we have a million questions that our audience wants to ask. And they all know you. Yeah, they all know you. So, yeah. So, just a couple of fast ones here. When you were a kid, did you burn holes in the carpet and explode the kitchen?

Give me science, mommy! What kind of, were you like girl nerd, where this is, I gotta do this? Yes and no. So I was more of an athlete, I was a soccer player, so that was the true love. All right, very nice. But I was a very, one who asked a lot of questions.

So my parents would count the number of questions I would ask in a car ride, so it would drive them nuts. My mom was more a helicopter mom, so there was no blowtorch anywhere near me. There's no chance I would have ever been able to set something on fire. But I was able to do stuff. I could see this in a sitcom, the over curious kid,

just, hey mommy, daddy, how about that? And then the car, and then the next scene, you're just out on the street. The car keeps going. The drunk is leaving you. I'm sure they thought about that. I am positive. Or more kindly, they drop you at a museum somewhere

and then they keep driving on. Yes, that's perfect. Okay, but so how did, if she's a helicopter mom, what freedoms were, did you still have to express yourself? Okay, so this is where I really appreciate what she did when I was younger. So she made one bathroom safe. Like there were no chemicals,

like cleaning chemicals I should say. But there was food coloring, there was shampoo, bath soap, bubble bath. Stuff that can't kill you. Stuff that can't kill you. Put it in this, she had this big green plastic bowl and it was like go to town. I will say the food coloring was removed

after the first time. Okay, were you green at the end of that? I think so, I don't say the food coloring was removed after the first time. But after that. Were you green at the end of that? I think so, I don't remember. Food coloring doesn't come off very easily. Well, if you look at my Instagram, I'll show you, my face was just covered in green food coloring very recently.

I had something go wrong. Wait, wait, sorry, I just made that up. You're saying that actually happened? Oh, it happens all the time. I do this one experiment where I intentionally cover myself in soapy green bubbles. And it comes right off in the shower. Just two face washes, you're good.

Okay, all right, I ain't doing that. I am, I'm willing to. Oh you are, that's why you are Kate the Kevin. Yes, that's right, I like it. So Chuck, give us some of our cosmic curiosity. Let's get right to it then, shall we? This is Sean Browning, and he says, hello, this is Sean Browning,

I'm coming from Hood River, Oregon. Hood River, yeah. Why does cesium have such a violent reaction when exposed to oxygen? And what are some of its practical uses that the average person would not know about? Okay, in the periodic table, the periodic table is kind of shaped like a U.

And so cesium is in the bottom left-hand corner. And so the bottom left-hand corner is where your biggest atoms are. And so cesium is really big, and what that means is it has a very, very positively charged core, it's nucleus, but its electrons are very far away. So it can barely reach the electrons. And so because it's so big

and their charges are so separated, oxygen, which likes to take electrons from a neighbor. It is, exactly, yes. It loves to steal electrons. It will steal the electrons. That's a book title, the electrons. The electron thief. Oh, I like that.

That's your next book, okay? We'll write together. That'll be fun. But yeah, so it's so big, and so oxygen can come in, grab the electrons, and the electrons gladly jump to oxygen, because it's much, much much smaller and it can't be destroyed. Stacey I'll see you later! Yes!

You understand me? I told you. I can do bad-ass by myself! Oxygen over there been calling me forever! I see it, I'm coming honey. I can see it. Yeah, yeah, yeah, there it is, there it is. Okay, so, so, so now it reaches for oxygen.

What is the result of that chemical reaction? Is it exothermic, endothermic? Probably exothermic would be my guess. It really depends on the situation and where the energy levels are. It will form an ionic salt, and so it either forms cesium oxide or cesium superoxide, so just either two cesiums and one oxygen,

or two oxygens and one cesium. And it forms these two products, and that in itself is quite stable. The oxides usually are. Okay, so what does it look, because he said violent, what does this violent reaction look like? So my guess is he's thinking about

when you throw these group one metals into water. So we've seen this with sodium before, if you've Googled that. Love me some sodium in water. Right, right. Oh my gosh. So you've seen this with sodium before, if you've Googled that. Love me some sodium in water. Right. Oh my gosh. So you can cut it with a knife? The metal, cut it with a knife, toss it in water,

it basically blows up. Yeah, definitely. But that's reacting with water. It is. Or is it the dissolved oxygen that it's reacting with? It's the same process as happening. It's the electrons being pulled from the group one metal. Got it, all right.

Yeah, and then it's an exothermic process, like you said, so that will ignite when you throw it in water. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. So, the other part of the questions you asked about, like what are some things that people might not know about cesium? And so, the cesium-133, I think, is used for an atomic clock.

And so what happens is you basically disturb these atoms, they give off a frequency, and you can use that frequency to measure time. And how are you exciting the atoms? It's a disturbance, so usually it's like a push, you can use that frequency to measure time. And how are you exciting the atoms? It's a disturbance, so usually it's like a push. You want to get it to vibrate, and so you just have to move it a little bit. And that frequency is then mapped out

to keep track of time and it's so. So is it so consistent that you can easily use it, you can set a clock by it. Nice, nice, exactly. In fact, the duration of the second is defined by how many cycles of the cesium atom. Okay, so how many vibrations do you get in a second with cesium?

It's like nine decimal places, I'm sorry. Oh, so that's why it's an atomic clock. And that's why it's very precise. Right, because if you got nine decimal places in one second, that's pretty damn accurate. We got you, yes. You're good for all time, no pun intended. What?

Chuck, stop it. He's on a roll. He's on a roll. You want to know how precise this is? Right. For that vibration. For the vibration. The chemist told us about.

It is nine billion, 192 million, 631,770 cycles of that vibration. So that vibration is the exact definition of a second. Of a second, there you go. That's cool. And if I can add to that. Please. If I may, until that was defined with that precision,

the second was a predefined fraction of the year 1900. Okay. And so that involved Earth's rotation, around thing. the second was a predefined fraction of the year 1900. And so that involved Earth's rotation around the thing. The rotation of the Earth was built into the definition of the second. Why wouldn't it be? Because there's 60 seconds. Since we use that as. 60 seconds in a minute.

60 minutes in an hour. 24 hour clock. Okay, why wouldn't it be? But that meant if Earth were slowing down or speeding up, there'd be no way to know that. Because the mechanism that's giving you the second is changing. So you offload it onto your cesium atom.

Now we say, yo, Earth! What? So since we start. We don't need you, Earth. We totally don't need you. Not only that, you're acting up. So since 1972. Plus you're slowing down anyway.

Since 1972 we've had to add 25, seven leap seconds just to account for Earth slowing down. It's all because of your cesium, Adam. Look at that. My cesium. I love it. I love it. I don't know any other uses though, is there?

Not real, I mean I'm sure there's other ones. I mean, let's be honest, that's enough. That's enough. What more could you ask for an element? I mean, seriously, measuring time down to a billionth of a second. Yes, a billionth of a second. Come on, that's pretty damn good. Yeah, all right. Hello, I'm Vinky Broke Allen and I support Star Talk on Patreon.

This is Will. And Will says, Dr. Bebedorf, Dr. Tyson, and dear Lord Nice, thanks Will for including a title for me. Which is not real. Will from Euclid, Ohio here. Euclid? Euclid. This is a town called Euclid? There's a Euclid? Euclid. This is town called Euclid?

There's a Euclid, Ohio. I've never heard of it until just now, but guess what? I'm glad to know that it's there. Wow. Yeah. He says, most gracious thanks for using my question. You probably had this question a zillion times, but I've never heard an answer to it.

So here it is. We've all heard by now that the Mentos and Diet Coke thing, okay, cool. One, what's the history and who thought of that? And two, what causes the chemical reaction that everybody puts on YouTube to make the video? Yes! The soda geyser. Okay, so that went back to about 1910.

It was originally done with those Winto Green Lifesavers. I was about to say, we didn't have Mentos in 1910. No, it didn't. So it was originally done with the Winto Green Life Savers. Winto Green, yes, I remember that. O apostrophe green. Life Savers, is that old? They are, yeah, they are.

And so they go into the soda, like a soda pop, right? And so it had that little hole in the center, and so it would make this really neat geyser, and it would come out. Through the hole in the middle of the Life Saver. Yep, but then in the 1990s, the Life Saver company changed the size of the Life Saver. The science teachers were upset, and they said,

all right, throw this experiment to the students, let's figure out how to replicate this, now that the Life Saver doesn't fit in there. They did a science- These are some committed chemists right here, I tell you. It's awesome, though. I can totally see high school teachers just grabbing their students

and grabbing all the candy, all the soda and say, all right, figure out what it is. Experiment. Experiment, exactly. So what's special about the surface of a Mentos, because it doesn't have a hole in it, right? And if I remember correctly, they're solid candies, right? It's solid candy, but it has these nucleation sites, so these little divots, and they attract On the surface. On the surface.

And so it attracts the carbon dioxide in the soda. The carbon dioxide slams into each other, builds up pressure and it just shoots out the top. And then they found that Diet Coke has the best reaction because it has the highest carbonation. Okay, I thought, however, that's not why they use Diet Coke. Oh, please tell me then if it's otherwise.

Okay, I didn't think that was why. So one part is that it doesn't have the sugar. That's why. And so it's not as big of a mess for parents. It's a mess. Right, diet coke, you just hose that, but sugar, then the coke evaporates and everything is gummed up.

I thought that was the main reason. It is one of the main reasons, but if you are on a flight, I don't know if you fly commercial still, but if you are on a flight. What do you think? Excuse me, I'm on the subway to get here. Okay, perfect. So I don't know if you fly commercial still, but if you are on a flight. What do you think? Excuse me, I'm on the subway to get here. Okay, perfect.

So I don't know, you're fancy. I don't know what your brother's like. Ride commercial. Okay, well, for the rest of us, when we have a flight attendant go down in a plane, watch them. When somebody orders Diet Coke, just watch how they pour it.

It takes way longer for all that carbonation to sink and for them to top it off. So you can actually watch it happen right on a plane ride. Compared to a non-diet. Like a Mountain Dew or a Coke or anything. It just has that most carbonation. Anything would help you do that experiment. Please do, you'll see it.

Plus, at the lower pressure in a plane, there's less to press down on the CO2 anyway. Also true. So that there's more bubbling action regardless. Yeah, that's a good point. I will check that out, okay. Please do, please do. All right, so that means if I have a soda maker machine,

a carbonator, whatever those machines are called, if I, because I have, I do own one, but I have, there are three settings, there's low, medium, and high. Yes, there is. If I go high and then repeat that three times, that's the liquid you want. Probably.

For your experiment. You're also gonna blow apart your kitchen. No, stop! You just made a bomb. Thank you for saying that. You're also gonna blow apart your kitchen. Stop! You just made a bomb. Thank you for saying that. Okay, next. Andy here from Thousand Oaks. I've heard the human nose is an incredible chemical sensor

that not only detects very faint traces of a molecule, but also tens of thousands of types of molecules. My question is, do you use this fact in the science of chemistry to aid in your work in any way, or do you generally avoid smelling experiments due to unknown noxious effects? I love that. Remind me, because chemistry for me was a long time ago,

you don't actually stick your nostril on top of the test tube. 100% accurate. But there is this. Wafting. You remember. So that can dilute it to a level that you can know whether you should get closer.

Exactly, yes. So the rule number one is do not eat anything or smell anything or drink anything in lab. Rule number two is okay, we know you're gonna smell it, so let me teach you how to do it safely. Got this? Yep, it's wafting. You're pushing the molecules towards you.

Some of the molecules. Yeah, it's true, a small portion of them. But I think part of the question is asking, like, do you ever do this and do you ever use your nose? I did something just recently where I had to do this, where people helped me by bringing two beakers out to my performance stage, basically my stage table, and they weren't labeled.

One had water, one had vinegar, and I immediately just stuck my nose right in there because we can Tell the difference between it and then I was able to do the experiment without any doubt or anything But you use it you use your nose to protect yourself It's a way for us to know whether or not chicken is bad or good or anything like that So it is a tool that you can use if you're safe about it in the chemistry lab. Is there anything that smells good that will also kill you?

Ooh. I'm sure. Or, has that gene pool been removed from our species long ago? Hilarious. That's a fair question. That is a fair question. Yeah, I am sure there is something that smells good

that will kill us. I can't think of anything off the top of my head right now Do you have one in mind? No, but I have the opposite which is we know that hydrogen sulfide Okay is especially deadly at some level Well below the level that we can detect it. So when you smell it you say this is nasty I'm gonna go in the opposite direction. It was still far from killing you. But anyone who's, but you know what, hydrogen sulfide's like rotten eggs or? It's a fart.

Fart, fart, okay. I was gonna say rotten eggs, but fine. Everybody knows it's a fart. You're a comedian, you can do a fart joke. Listen, that's the first time I got in trouble in chemistry school. Right, we had hydrogen sulfide, and I took it and put it in an eye dropper and went around and

putting it on people so they would smell like fart. You did not. I did, yes I did. And the teacher said, you should be a comedian. Did you really? I did, yes. You should be a comedian. Yes.

That's what they said. And I wouldn't have gotten in trouble for it if I had just kept it to the doggone students, but I had to get aggressive. So anyway. Yeah, so there's a suspicion in our evolutionary past that there's an idea that hydrogen sulfide can build up in the bottom of the ocean. If the ocean oxygen cycle stops, then you have anaerobic life forms,

and hydrogen sulfide is one of the byproducts of them. And if it builds up to a big enough bubble, it'll come up, and if you're on the shore when that happened, and you liked the smell of farts, you would go to it and just die. And if you sort of didn't care, you died. If you didn't like it, you went to the hills. And so the argument is this happened with some frequency

in the history of our species that it was built into us. That's interesting. I hadn't heard that before. So all the uncles that said pull my finger ended up dead. Ha ha ha ha ha ha. But somehow we still do that. We still somehow. Evolution. It's never the aunt that does. We still somehow. Evolution.

It's never the aunt that does it, it's just the uncle. So it's the guy gene that carried it forward. All right. All right. Give me some more. This is John. He says, hello, Dr. Tyson, Dr. Kate Lorden. I is John here from Arkansas.

I used to teach high school chemistry, but I still struggle. Teacher in the house. All right. Teacher applause. But I still struggle with electron configurations, especially in the transition metals. What is it about that section of periodic table that makes it so doggone convoluted?

Yeah, and why they call transition metals? Because the edges, they're pretty clean, we can understand them. You got the gases, the noble gases, and you got the, you know, and you go in the middle, and their representation on the table is different. Right? And you have, and these others that are a series,

then they pull those out, what's up with that? What's up with that? Is that one of the reasons? Can you make that cleaner for the rest of us so we can learn? I can try. So one of the reasons why transition metals are called transition metals

is because they go through different color changes. And so you can actually see them transition through their oxidation states. And so maybe they're a plus two or a plus three. You can see the color change across the table. Okay. Yeah, so you could just sit there

and watch your reaction go from, I'll just make up some colors, so some blue to green to red, and you're watching it go through different oxidation states. So you can actually monitor it. So inorganic chemists, which is what I do, we usually like color changes. And that's one of the reasons why we're drawn to that field is because we work with transition metals.

In high school and also what I taught, which is general chemistry, so the first year of college chemistry, we do general trends. And so we say if something is like this, it'll operate like this. We just try to identify trends. And so the S block and the P block, so the outside if something is like this, it'll operate like this, we just try to identify trends. And so the S block and the P block, so the outside areas of the periodic table, they really follow these trends. But the middle, the D block, the transition metals,

don't really follow the trends. It's not like prison, you can D block. What are you getting out? Okay. And so that's what's hard about teaching it, especially in high school, because there are no typical trends you can go by. Gotcha, no general rules.

So there are general trends that you can go by, and there's certain ones that always break rules, like your jewelry metals, so copper, silver, and gold will always, I'm going to nerd out on you, but they're usually D9, but because of the way the electrons fall, they go to D10, and so they can just redistribute their electrons.

I cannot get as excited about that as you do. Makes my stable. I'm sorry. But it's an explanation of why we use these metals. Sounds like a boy band battle. Oh it does. I used to be in D9 but now I'm in D10. It's the inorganic flaring. We talk about our D orbitals and where our electrons are

and so I just love that part. And it's just where your electron's sitting, they move around to be stable. If you have, let's say you have five orbitals, there's five D orbitals. If you have two electrons in each one You all knew it If you have two electrons in each one that provides stability

But if you have two two two two and then one it's less stable And so what it does is it takes another electron and move it over here to provide stability and so these specific atoms like copper and silver and Gold will do that just naturally. And that's why it can be confusing for high school students because you don't usually teach these exceptions. And for grownups. And for grownups, yeah, for everybody, true.

But he's a high school teacher, so just wanted to pull it back, yeah. Okay, cool. Because in astrophysics, nine out of 10 atoms in the universe is hydrogen. And there's nothing easier than the hydrogen energy levels. And we don't even have to think about orbitals. There's just a layer, there's just levels,

and the electron moves back and forth. But when you have all of these electron clouds, it gets way more realistically described, but complicated. Yeah. It's really hard, because you have to figure out how the orbitals are actually going to overlap, are they going to be be complementary will it be? bonding non-binding anti bonding

There's all these are molecules in space and we have to but they then they're sort of astro chemists at that way I can I can do most of my astrophysics completely ignoring that it turns out. That's kind of interesting Yeah, not to not to say that That was that was not meant as, yeah, okay. Chuck, what else do you have? All right, this is Mihir Date, I think. Mihir says this, hey, Kate and Neil, Chuck, there are books on complex topics

like quantum physics for babies. How effective do you think these books are? Should graduate level science topics be introduced formally at the elementary level in an engaging and understandable way? The cool experiments seen in school provide momentary excitement, but they don't leave a lasting impact. Books, however, might.

By high school age, the kids' ship has already sailed. Grab their attention while you can, I say. So, wait, tell us about your books first. Okay, I have seven children's books. Five of them are about little Kate the Chemist. She's 10 years old, run around the neighborhood in the East Coast side. Was this a shill?

No, no! Was this a plant? No, I didn't! Well, I do, he asked. That's her mother, her mother. Your mom, thanks, mom. Was that Teresa? Was that her? Yeah, so go That's her mother, her mother. Her mother put that in. Your mom, thanks mom. Is that Teresa? Is that her?

Yeah, so go ahead. I have five fiction books, I have two non-fiction books, and I have one for adults, it's called It's Elemental. So I just write to try to share science with the general public and try to make it fun. So are the kids' books doing what you want them to do? Yeah, yeah, definitely, because the two non-fiction books each have 25 experiments that you can do at home with materials

You probably already have in your craft drawer And so what I want them to do is for parents to pick up that book and use it over spring break and do Science experiments with their kids. Okay, that's cool. That works. That's what I love that Okay, so and it seems to me. Yes. I think an experiment can be lasting, contrary to the claim of the question. An experiment, yes, it comes and goes, but it can trigger curiosity that whether or not you fully understood the chemical reactions that made it happen, you just don't forget it.

And so I think educators overvalue the lesson plan relative to the inspiration. I think so too. And research actually supports what you're saying too, but it also is that you can have a connection with the scientist. So if you show up one time and do an explosion, okay fine, maybe you'll spark the interest,

but if you keep going back and you form a connection with the students and you form that bond, that's when you can actually make a difference. And so showing up really does have value. But can I push back on the quantum, what is it, quantum physics for babies? You said quantum physics for babies. How effective do you think these books are?

There's astrophysics for babies. There's a series of these books. But what do they mean by babies? They're not talking about actual babies. They're board books that you can flip through and so they're really small, but I think those are primarily for the parents who can't read another book about the cow goes moo.

And so it's intellectually stimulating for the parents, they can be better parents. But at the end of the day, exposing kids to all this vocabulary is just good. So that when they get to the science class, they've been exposed, they're not hearing the word molecule for the first time, they already have a general understanding of what it is. Maybe, maybe.

Hunter here from Columbus, Georgia. We saw Neil a few weeks ago. I was just there, gave a public talk in Columbus, Georgia. I wanted to ask Kate a question about the periodic table. If the island of stability is real, what kind of properties do you think we might be able to expect from atoms in it? Oh Okay, so were you talking about the island of stability Neil or they just want to point out that they saw you a couple weeks ago

Yeah, so this is something that I think is really interesting because as a chemist I'm familiar with the band of stability, but the island of stability is a little bit outside of my reach So can I do band and then I throw to you for island sure unless they're the same thing and we just call them something Different what's your band of stability band of stability base, which is another? to my reach, so can I do band and then I throw to you for island? Sure, unless they're the same thing and we just call them something different. It could be. What's your band of stability? So the band of stability basically... Which is another boy band name.

We are the band. The band of stability. Actually, that would be Coldplay. Okay, all right. Kate got it. So the band of stability is all about figuring out what ratio of neutrons to protons makes an atom most stable. And so if you have 20 protons or fewer,

the ratio is one to one. If you have more than 20 protons, that number alters a little bit. And so for chemistry, specifically atoms, you have 1.5 neutrons to every one proton. That gives you your most stable atom. So that's how I think about it. Where does the island of stability come in?

Is that an extension? At the end? Oh yeah, so okay, so I can only tell you how I have come to learn it, and we can maybe dovetail with what you described. Above a certain atomic number, the nucleus is so large, and every one of them are unstable.

You can ask, well, what makes a stable element? Is it stable forever or just for a few years or a few minutes, right? So there might be some practical definition of what we call stable, but for our purposes, all those big atoms do not live for long. And the ones we're discovering, you know, 101, 102, 103, which is the limit of the table when I was in school, 103 was lorencium, I think it was.

Or still is. Still is. Still is, thank you. It turns out that the calculations for the stability of the nucleus, when you go beyond the ones we're currently discovering, into the 120s, 130s, somewhere in there, and I forgot the exact range, somewhere in there is an island

of stable, very heavy elements. And so you have to get past the unstable ones. Typically you make another element by cramming protons and or neutrons into a pre-existing. California, you slam California into a different other one. Yeah, exactly, you slam unstable elements into other unstable elements. See if another unstable element shows up. And some of them live for a thousandth of a second.

So if you slam Californium into Alabamium, you're definitely gonna come up with something unstable. God damn, I'm telling you, I can't believe they came over here like they did. Alabamium. Oh, you got me with that one. Oh, those liberals, I tell ya. It'll be the color purple, though. See, that's how you get out of that.

So this has been described in physics as an island of stability, which we are all just, our appetite is wedded for it, because if you have a new element that is stable, what are you gonna do with it? What properties does it have? And that all happens on the chemical side, not the physics side.

Yeah. Right. So, with the island of stability then, are we saying that it's, because I know like, oganese and whatever lasts for less than a second, right? So are we saying these- So the oganeseum, so that's the 118 I think.

118, that's the highest one we know about right now. The highest numbered one, yeah. So I guess what I'm curious about is then, would these atoms then stay around for, are we talking seconds? Are we talking years? Like what do we think? Again, my understanding is that they're permanently stable.

But what it would mean is your rules either have a new manifestation in those heavier nuclei or somehow that rule shows up again. But I can't wait till we get there. Right, I'm really intrigued by that. Because I'm curious if it's just like relative stability where it lasts maybe a second still Instead of a thousandth of a second. Right, right. Yeah, you couldn't still have a water in your hand

That's what I'm curious about. Right, as am I. This is Jessica. Hello Dr. Tyson, Lord Nice and Dr. Cade. This is Jess from Toronto and Dubai. Well la di da, Jessica. Anyway, la di da. She says- Let the people show off where they've been. Listen, you got it. I haven't been to Dubai, so I'm going to give it to you.

I'm probably the only person here who hasn't been to Dubai. I haven't been to Dubai. Oh, okay. I've been several times, actually. Well, we knew that. La di da for there. La di da. So, anyway, we're going several times, actually. Well, we knew that. Well, la-dee-dah for there. Well, la-dee-dah.

That's the way. So, in space where there's no oxygen and gravity is minimal, how do chemical reactions, especially combustion, change at the atomic level? Could studying these reactions in a vacuum reveal new insights into quantum effects, like wave function behavior in molecule bonding or energy transfer. And quantum mechanics says everything is probabilistic.

Is there a tiny chance my candle would light just to mess with me? Thank you, Neil, and I love you. And by the way, that's the different kind of probabilistic, so go ahead. Right. So we should separate that into two areas. There's what are you doing with no air, but you have two molecules that might perhaps know

about each other's existence quantum mechanically, through entanglement, maybe that was a little bit in there. The other one is just in zero G. In zero G, combustion is fun, tell us about that. Well, what's interesting about in zero G is that all of our reactions behave like gas gas phase reactions because we don't have gravity, right? And so we are we get to kind of do stuff that we couldn't do on earth We can do it up in space because you can move things around they expand more like a pencil would never float around here on earth

It would stay at the bottom of a beaker, right? Same thing. Whereas if you're trying to do that Pencils and beakers. Well, I Well, I'm just trying to give a solid, because if I give just a random molecule, people might not know. But you can visualize a pencil in a beaker, right? A pencil molecule. A pencil molecule, yes. It's staying at the bottom of a beaker.

We know where it's going to sit. It's going to be at the bottom. It will have interactions. The whole time. Yeah, the whole time. But when we go to space, now it moves around. So we have solids that essentially get to behave like a gas. And so the chemistry is just different

and you get to look at it. My question is, do we have combustion reactions outside of Earth and outside of the International Space Station? I mean, do we, we have to have oxygen to have combustion. Right? Yeah, so I guess what I was really referring to, which was accurately portrayed in the movie Gravity,

okay, there was a small fire that began. Mm-hmm. And they just let it go and it extinguished itself. Because normally, on Earth, where there's one G, the heated gas rises, bringing fresh oxygen in to continue the combustion. But here, it's just, it ate up the oxygen, no more oxygen in town. And the CO2, whatever, the byproducts,

can't feed the flame and it snuffed it out. So you can't burn a candle in zero G is the point. Unless you have a gentle breeze. Right, you have to have something moving more oxygen molecules that way. Into it, into it. That's so cool. Right, so that means. I did not know that. That's so cool. Right, so that means.

I did not know that. So you didn't know that? I love that. Oh yes, which way? That is so, you cannot be romantic in space. Mm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm.

So anything that combusts, it assumes that it's just moving through the material to burn the whole thing, right? A piece of paper burns the whole thing, and we take it for granted, it's relying on hotter gases being less dense and rising. Right, so do you ever try to think about those experiments? I have not really thought about it, because all of my chemistry happens on Earth,

and I'm terrified of leaving Earth, and so that's usually where I stop. I just love that, too. Chemistry I do is on Earth, okay? No, but if we needed you for space to consult. I'd say call someone else. It's not happening. There you go. I don't do that, that scares me.

You wouldn't go to space? No, no, I don't know why that's my line, it just scares me, I don't want to. Well you're strapped in a plane, you're like, oh, halfway there. You're strapped to a rocket, I don't, I don't know. No, no, but in a plane you still have one G. Right.

Okay. All right. What I think about though is how you could do different experiments in space. Like you can do the experiments of a womb because you can kind of replicate that and how the baby moves around with not zero gravity, but they have that vibe, right?

They're able to float around. So you can do those type of experiments in space. That's what I think about. Right, okay. And so there's some around. So you can do those type of experiments in space. That's what I think about. Right, okay. And so there's some reactions. What's a reaction that could only happen in zero G? I'm curious, well not only, but there's certain ways you could do it.

Because I could think about taking two different solutions and have the drops come and collide with each other that you wouldn't be able to do on Earth. And create these many reactions right there as they're floating. That's amazing. And just have that unfold right in front of you. So solid rockets, could you do it inside,

like what's in the solid rockets? It's solid fuel. No, no it isn't. Yes it is. It's a combination of. No, no, solid rocket boosters? Yes. You can go in there and like bang on the fuel.

It's solid. That's why it's called solid rocket. Oh, that's why they're called solid rockets. No, but generally there's another tank that can be. That's what I'm talking about, that. Oh, okay, that tank. That tank. Yes, that has hydrogen and oxygen.

Right, so that. Liquified. Which is way denser than air. Okay, and then you take the hydrogen, oxygen, and so now, take us from there. I got a tank twice as big, holding liquid hydrogen, and half that size holding liquid oxygen, and you gotta keep it really cold,

because they're liquefied. And that's why, if you ever see the launch, you ever see slow-mo rocket launches from Florida, you see these chunks of ice falling off the rocket. That is because Florida is a moist environment, and the rocket is cold, and it just, all the moisture gathers on it. If you do that in the desert,

you're not gonna have condensation freezing on it. Okay, so tell me what's happening when you combine, because in the subject of space, you have liquid hydrogen, liquid oxygen. And I just wave my hands and say, yes, it makes water and there's energy. But take me into that. So a traditional combustion reaction,

traditional, not what you're talking about, has a source of fuel that has carbon associated with it. You treat it with oxygen, you produce water and carbon dioxide. What's really neat about what you- That would give you energy. Yeah, and it releases energy, it's exothermic. That's anything that burns, basically.

Anything that burns. Anything organic that burns, yes. That's why it turns black when it's done because it lays bare the carbon. Yes. Yes, okay perfect But when you remove the carbon you can have a combustion reaction That's much cleaner And so that's when you what you're talking about so you have hydrogen plus oxygen will give us water It'll still be combustion still be combustion, but but but that that more cleaner kind so that the exhaust of that rocket is?

Water. Water! There you go. There you go. We did it. That's awesome. It's very neat. So do you think in quantum physics, two molecules can see each other

before they make contact? See each other? In a way that they say, I want to get a little closer to you. I mean, I always always I the music in my mind all chemistry is driven around the rearranging of atoms and that's all driven by electrons either electron repulsion or attraction so that's how I think about interactions is where are the electrons are they attracted to each other what would be cool is if two entangled particles made an entangled molecule. Wouldn't that be weird?

Whoa. That would be wild. So that would be weird. One molecule, one quantum molecule with its bits separated. Right. That'd be so weird. That would be weird, but they have to be identical. So maybe a hydrogen makes a molecule H2.

A lot of oxygen, nitrogen, we breathe O2 and N2. So they're quantum entangled to make one molecule. That's a sci-fi story right there. It is. Wow. Could be really weird. Super cool. That is very cool.

All right, here we go. This is Alissa Feldhaus. But you're Katie Earth chemist, so that's not a future book coming at you. No, thank you. All right. Alissa go. This is Alyssa Feldhaus. But you're Katie Earth Chemist, so that's not a future book coming out of you. No, thank you. All right. Alyssa Feldhaus says this. Hello, Alyssa from Rocket City, Huntsville. Alabama? My daughters, Amelia and Olivia, just love you. My question is, what is the biggest,

most impressive, kid-friendly experiment I can do with a four and an eight-year-old that will keep them interested in science for years to come. We love a good bang and aren't afraid of getting dirty. Wow. Okay, that's full carte blanche there. That's a loaded one, because four-year-olds getting with a bang, it makes me nervous,

but I think if you have adults involved, you could do the exploding paint can experiment, which is really fun. That sounds good. What? You know, hey, with a four year old and an adult. Why not give them some paint? Wait, wait, the way she said it, yeah, everybody knows the exploding paint can.

I pictured that they could help you set it up and then the adult would actually trigger the reaction. So it's very simple, you just need a paint can, empty, never had paint in it before, put about an inch of baking soda at the bottom, take a cup, plastic cup, fill it with vinegar, food coloring if that's your flavor, and then nestle the cup into the baking soda.

Food coloring into the vinegar. Into the vinegar, yep, in the liquid, and then you can put the cup of vinegar into the baking soda, so nestle it in like a sandcastle. Then you're gonna put the lid on the paint can, use a mallet to hammer it shut, you want it completely shut, no place for gas to escape, now get the kids out of there,

they can go far away, put their safety goggles on, then adults also with safety goggles on. Always safety goggles. Yeah, shake it up and keep your head back because what will happen is a neutralization reaction, you'll release carbon dioxide, just like we were talking about earlier with the Mentos and Diet Coke, yep, exactly.

It's gonna be oops. And then the lid flies up, it's really colorful, it's cute, it makes a noise. But why doesn't it have to sit it down afterwards, right? You can't hold that thing. Yeah, you should put it down. Yeah, good point. Well, how do you know when it's about to blow up?

It happens very fast. So what I do is I go shake, shake, shake, and I slam it down on the table, then I step back, and then I move on to my next one, and while I'm shaking my second one, the first one goes off. Wow. Okay, so why doesn't,

so I thought pink hand lids were stronger than that. I think pink hand lids are tight, especially if you mallet it shut, but apparently not. Not enough to just. It's no match for CO2. Exactly, because it's not secured, it's not locked in. It's not clamped. It's not clamped, exactly.

So if you have all those CO2 molecules coming in, going bop bop bop, and that lid, it will shoot it straight up in the air. It's very fun. Wow. I love that one. And that happens in seconds? Yeah. And the only reason why you put it in a small plastic cup

is to keep it separate long enough to hit the lid. Exactly. Because otherwise it will escape. All the expanding gas will escape before you get a chance to mallow it down. So when you nestle it in like that, you keep everything separate, you mallow it down, now you mix it, bang.

And you throw it up first, so the liquid's gonna go up, and then it all slams down at one time. And so when you shake it, it actually really nicely distributes the vinegar all over, it grabs that baking soda, and then you get the cool acid-base neutralization reaction. All right. Very funny, keep your head back,

keep your head back, because you could get hit in the face. Yeah, see, I'm going to let my kid do that. Followed your kid? This is the money maker. I don't care how old the kid is. It don't matter. I can't have a paint can blowing up in this. Like, sorry baby, this is what pays the mortgage.

So you shake that can and put it down as quickly as possible. But you can't overstate the need for goggles. For all your experiments. I usually wear goggles, a lab coat, and gloves. It is a little overkill sometimes, but I like to set a good example. It would break my heart if a kid got injured doing something they watched me do.

Gotcha, gotcha, all right. Hello, Dr. Tyson and Dr. Beaverdorf and Lord Nice. James from Denmark here. What would you say are the most promising developments in applied chemistry today? Mm. Oh, man. Do you claim material scientists in your community?

Ooh. I do, yeah, because that's chemistry. It's all chemistry. It is chemistry. All chemistry. And it's usually a branch of inorganic chemistry as well. Which is your bailiwick? Yes, that's my favorite. Those guys are awesome. So what's on the horizon there? Oh there's so many different things right now. One of the things I'm really interested in is how we are bonding with AI and we're kind of trying to use it to help

us and so one thing that I just read is that they asked Microsoft AI you know what could we do to replace lithium in our lithium ion batteries? And it took a week, but it came up with an answer. And so now we are able to use... A hamster's in a hamster wheel. Thank you, AI, for that brilliance. Exactly. So now we have an answer.

We can use it and go troubleshoot and see if that will work. And so what I'm really interested right now is how those two worlds are kind of merging together and how we can use that to do better research, more effective research. And so that's what's happening right now and I am really excited about that. Well that's what AI is best at. Yes, AI guided admiration.

Yes, yes. I think it's fascinating. And looking at molecules is easy for AI. It's like, you know. Well it has a lot of information that it can pull together. It ingests everything. And it can think in terms, I use the term think,

it can think in terms of future combinations that we could never even get to. We would not have time to get to it because it can calculate them all at once. Aren't there books that have all the chemical potentials of all reactions? Oh, are you talking about the CRC? Yes, CRC.

I have one, it's a huge book. What is that? Oh, what does that stand for? Cambridge Rubber Company. I mean, a consolidated rubber company. Is that true? So there are these compilations of all these properties that have been discovered piecemeal

and assembled into these volumes. Any scientist, we have a CRC on our shelves. Whoever that company was, they decided to compile all the information you could ever want in science. You know what I did? I found at auction a CRC from my birth year. So I bought it so that that is a slice in time of what we knew about the chemistry, the physics, the bio.

It is all science in there, including math. Okay, so here's the point. It's a thousand pages. It would take me a lifetime to read through it, but AI could ingest it and come up with new chemicals. Why couldn't it? Right, it's the best of both worlds, right? Because you list, is the word chemical potential?

What is the likelihood that two atoms will come together? What's the? Well, atoms or electrons, because potential is usually electrons. Yeah, usually potential when we're talking about that. Activation potentials or whatever. Sure, activation energies. So the book has it, but you're not gonna sit there

and read thousands of things and come up with a new molecule. But let it do it. But let it do it while you're out on the beach sipping a pina colada. And then you get a notification on your phone, I found that new. You've been looking for? And then you say AI, write the paper.

It's like the best grad student you could have. It's so funny. All right. It's been said, primarily because it's basically true, that there's no understanding of chemistry without physics. And there's no understanding of biology without chemistry. And so I come to the table as a physicist. So when I look at the world, I see the interaction of matter, motion and energy.

The biologist sees the interaction of all life. Yet the chemist is situated between those two. Because to go from inorganic molecules to self-replicating life, there's some complex chemistry involved. In fact, biology is the most complex form of chemistry we know. But it's not only that, it's everything around us. Everything is made of atoms and molecules. And we take it so much for granted that

Somebody at some point in our past thought about that What those atoms would do when they were brought together? To make a solid object to make a liquid object to make rocket fuel to make those those ice packs that you shake and Put on your injury One of them turns cold the other hot. A chemist was in the middle of that. So I don't think we spent enough time paused in reflection of what role chemistry and the chemists who are behind it all have done for civilization. And that's a cosmic perspective.

I think that's all the time we have. That's all there. Kate, you gotta come back more often. Thank think that's all the time we have. That's all there. Oh, thank you. Kate, you gotta come back more often. Thank you for having me, I love this. Oh my gosh. So, and your podcast is?

Seeking a Scientist. Seeking a Scientist, and that's with NPR? It's with NPR, yeah, out of KCUR, it's out of Kansas City. Excellent, and you interview other scientists. Yes. And you engage them with their expertise, and you bring your chemistry patina to it. Perhaps, yes.

I definitely try to bring the science communicator out of the people I interview. Because not all of them would necessarily be communicators. Yeah, and do kind of like what you and I do, where we feed off each other and kind of fact check a little bit. Yeah, fact checking is fun. And have the same kind of conversation.

And so it's really nice to feature scientists that might not normally get featured, and I love that. There you go. Very cool. Kate Beberdorf. Well, thanks for stepping through. And congratulations on your new gig at University of Notre Dame.

Yeah, the Fighting Irish. Fighting Irish. Yeah, there it is. All right, we'll look to, and try to come back more often. I will, thank you so much, I appreciate it. It's always fun talking to you guys. Oh yeah. All right, Chuck, always good to have you, man.

Always a pleasure. This has been Star Talk Cosmic Queries, the chemist's edition. Until next time, as always, keep looking up.