Talk:Ether

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Chemistry B‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

As a Drug

It is used as a drug. Any information about that? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.97.178.2 (talk) 00:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Yeah I was searching for information on ether as a drug, but all I found was its chemical properties. Someone should add it. CheesePlease NL 11:38, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. There should be some information regarding its use as a general anesthetic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.162.18.223 (talk) 07:18, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I came here to find out more about it's use as an anaesthetic, but it's just a page of scientific forumula and information only useful to scientists. -NeF (talk) 01:13, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Various remarks

How does it smell?

In the sidebar, furan is shown as an aromatic compound that is not an ether. Furan is the prototypical aromatic ether and is the unsaturated form of THF (hence tetrahydrofuran)

The funny thing about the Michaelson-Morely experiment is that Einstein was already formulating relativity before he knew anything about it.

Also, wasn't the root of the english word "ether" the Latin word "aether", which means "air" as in "the sky".

You sure aether doesn't refer specifically to the upper air, which corresponds to the fifth element that fills all of space? Its Greek equivalent does, at least.

Despite their comparably attenuated reactivity, ethers can act as Lewis acids (see Acid-base reaction theories). For instance, diethyl ether forms a complex with boron compounds, such as boron trifluoride etherate, F₃B:O(CH₂CH₃)₂

Wouldn't the ether be the Lewis base here? Josh Cherry 00:59, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)

The article states that the "x y ether" nomenclature is official IUPAC nomenclature; I don't want to edit the article as I may be wrong, but I'm sure that I was taught (at degree level) that this was trivial nomenclature and the only IUPAC nomenclature was the "x-oxy-y" type, such as "methoxyethane" - please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm going to do a bit of research and find out, and possibly edit the article if I'm right - ta :) edd 08:33, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

should this be a disambig page?

what do people think? a discussion of diethly ether belongs on a separate page to discussion of ether's in general... jsut a thought... Erich 06:38, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Williamson ether synthesis

The equation given for the Williamson ether synthesis shows an alkyl halide as a reactant, but what follows gives sulfonate esters as an example of a leaving group. Either the equation is not general enough or this example is incorrect. Josh Cherry 15:53, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Space theory

Should some mention be made of early astronomical/astrological claims of space consisting of heavenly bodies suspended in "ether?" 153.104.16.114 17:29, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What came first?

If the known chemical was named after the ancient concept of "ether" or "aether", being what fills the void, or the universal solvent, then shouldn't this be the main entry for the word "ether"? All other entries may branch from this one. The article makes no mention of the ethymology of the chemical. Odraxir 00:17, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that most of the article is relevant to chemistry alone and to include every association with "ether" will make it confusing to read. As wil alcohol , maybe a "Chemistry of.." page is better and to help produce a whole new specialist chemical section.

Aminal

The illustration of the aminal does not have the same structure on this page, as on the aminal page... (Which one is correct?) ChristianB 13:44, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the image on the ether page is technically a hemiaminal but the distinction is not always made. I have no objections against the current image V8rik 17:54, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Needs a message that directs people to the Ether of classic physics

I think there needs to be a message that says something along the line of "for the Ether in classic physics that is believed to be the medium of which light travels, see [link]" at the top. RegalStar (talk) 21:28, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it enough with the link to the disambiguation page that is already at the top of the article? --Itub (talk) 09:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of name

Why are they called ethers? Did early chemists believe these newly discovered substances were the "aether" (either the luminifarious one or the Fifth Element), or is it more complicated than that? Daibhid C (talk) 21:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That picture is massive

we need to find a different illustration, the one currently one the site is needlessly large--66.210.54.83 (talk) 19:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which one? There are sixteen images in this article at present.

Ben (talk) 12:34, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The one that appeared in previous versions of the article such as here:http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ether&direction=next&oldid=240861814 . Worth a look. You can't miss it. Meltyman (talk) 23:59, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this edit was enough to fix the problem.

I'd prefer to undo this revision by Meltyman because the image is now too small to read easily.

Ben (talk) 12:02, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I re-sized the image in the commons and then put it in a frame rather than a thumbnail in the article, i.e. pic on page is now actual size but that actual size is a fraction of the actual size of the previous image. This edit was OK but it bled into the next section a bit, I thought. Meltyman (talk) 19:54, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's legible now but it's the aspect ratio has changed so the image is stretched. Ask the original author to recreate it in the required shape.

Ben (talk) 22:12, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The aspect ratio has changed and the image has been stretched, but neither change is important to the understanding of the article or to the ease with which it can be read. It could look better but it's far from the mess that prompted me to edit this article in the first place. If the current edit bothers you, you might try following your own orders. Meltyman (talk) 23:00, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]