Stirring Bars Are Superstition?
Posted4 months agoActive4 months ago
science.orgResearchstory
skepticalneutral
Debate
20/100
ChemistryLaboratory PracticesSuperstition
Key topics
Chemistry
Laboratory Practices
Superstition
The use of stirring bars in chemistry labs may be based on superstition rather than scientific fact.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
36m
Peak period
2
1-2h
Avg / period
1.1
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Sep 6, 2025 at 1:03 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Sep 6, 2025 at 1:39 PM EDT
36m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
2 comments in 1-2h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Sep 7, 2025 at 2:42 AM EDT
4 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45150960Type: storyLast synced: 11/17/2025, 6:01:44 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
very few competent chemists would elect to commence a reaction, with a large amount of reactant still undissolved at the bottom of a vessel.
the stir bar is often left in, through the rest of the reaction.
i.e. it doesn't necessarily speed it up or change the yield. So why do you care if the reactant's still on the bottom of the vessel in that case?
if you start a reaction like that without stirring, you will see a big difference in product yeild.
this will limit yield, as well as creating an impromptu addition of a secondary quantity of reactant
this paper is qwackery, mr lowe demonstrates in this submission, a paucity regarding chemical reaction kinetics, and fails to cultivate a critical interpretation due to this lack of knowledge.