Please keep in mind while reading this that I do not intend to create this, it is part of the backstory for a video game I am producing.

I created a compound based on knowledge from my chemistry class and Wikipedia. The formula is: $\ce{AuKr4Xe2C2O4^2-C2O4^2-MnO4-}$

The 2D structure looks like:

enter image description here

And the 3D Structure is:

enter image description here

I believe the IUPAC name would be Aurodixenichexakryptic permanganate dioxalate (please correct me if I am wrong).

I know the molar mass is $\pu{1089.7413 amu}$.

It is a thick, black liquid similar to Vantablack, as in it absorbs $99.99\%$ of the light hitting it, making it seem two-dimensional. It is odorless and tasteless.

I determined the melting point to be $0.01~\mathrm{K}$ and boiling to be $\pu{7538384392 K}$. The density under normal conditions is $\pu{89.45 g mL-1}$.

I was hoping someone could tell me is all the information thus far was valid and if someone could provide me other key facts about the compound (i.e. alternate names, $\mathrm{pH}$, $\mathrm{pOH}$, $\mathrm{p}K_\mathrm{a}$/$\mathrm{p}K_\mathrm{b}$, etc.)

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ As I mentioned at the beginning, it is for a fictional video game. I just wanted some basis in fact. $\endgroup$ – Zach Hilman Sep 8 '16 at 21:47
  • 9
    $\begingroup$ I don't understand the downvotes. Yes, this is kind of ridiculous, but still a legitimate question. $\endgroup$ – Gimelist Sep 8 '16 at 22:14
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If you want some basis in fact, change the element symbols to something different, which is not in our periodic table at all. That would be better. $\endgroup$ – Ivan Neretin Sep 9 '16 at 13:31
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @Michael "I determined the melting point to be 0.01K and boiling to be 7 538 384 392K. The density under normal conditions is 89.45 g/mL." is far from legitimate. $\endgroup$ – DavePhD Sep 9 '16 at 23:35
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ That stuff yearns to go back to its standard states. This would be an explosive. It would probably delete the person synthesizing it, along with his apparatus, his laboratory and the general viscinity. This wouldn't "boil" - it would blow. $\endgroup$ – Stian Yttervik Sep 18 '17 at 10:55

No, this is not possible.

Actually, if I would have to think of the most unlikely chemical conceivable, that would be it. Let's see why:

  1. Krypton is a noble gas that doesn't bond to anything. All of the known krypton compounds can be counted on one hand, and most of them contain fluorine. Putting krypton in a large molecule like this just can't be.

  2. This is the same for xenon. Even though it's slightly more reactive than krypton, it still has problems forming bonds with other stuff and even when it does it's extremely unstable.

  3. Gold is another noble element that doesn't like bonding to stuff.

  4. Permanaganate is a very strong oxidiser. This is not something you want to have around organic stuff (such as your oxalate). They are simply not stable together.

I don't know how you derived the data for it, but it seems completely unreasonable. A boiling point of 7538384392 K? How about no way? Even if you somehow could create this compound (god knows how), I would expect it to be so unstable it would decompose completely at ambient temperature. And by "ambient" I mean ambient on a Kuiper belt object.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ If you attached a few atoms of einsteinium to the compound it would be even more unlikely. :D $\endgroup$ – orthocresol Sep 9 '16 at 11:38
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ Interestingly, tetraxenonogold(II) cation is known. It is not totally impossible that it could form a salt with permanganate. Then for a fictional game's purpose, you can assume a clathrate compound of krypton and a double salt of tetraxononogold permanganate - oxalate. This is as close to a real chemistry as it can get. $\endgroup$ – vapid Sep 9 '16 at 18:26
  • $\begingroup$ @vapid then again - permanganate and oxalate together in one compound? Good luck keeping that stable. $\endgroup$ – Gimelist Sep 18 '17 at 8:10
  • $\begingroup$ @Michael Why not? There are many examples of compounds which have both oxidizing and reducing components. Sure, most of them are explosive, but can be stable at ambient conditions. Besides, oxalate is not THAT powerful reducing agent. Permanganate on the other hand will oxidize most of organic compounds, therefore any organic permanganate will be unstable and potentially explosive. But they do exist, and many are stable at room temperature. $\endgroup$ – vapid Sep 19 '17 at 9:34
  • $\begingroup$ @vapid read OP's question again. Usually mixed reductant-oxidiser are stable when they're in solid form. He wants the compound to melt at 0.01 K. Ambient conditions, on earth, are 273 degrees above that! So yea, some compounds are stable but not this one. $\endgroup$ – Gimelist Sep 19 '17 at 22:48
  1. A compound needs to have an overall neutral charge. The formula has a -5 charge so it is not a compound.

  2. The supposed 2-d structure has a -20 charge and therefore doesn't correspond to the formula.


One more No from a topological standpoint. There is no known molecular structure of this topology (assuming any bond any any atom, preserving connectivity only). The closest one would be some derivative of existing benzo[1,2:4,5]dicyclobutene [1]:

enter image description here

Also, tetraoxo-manganese unit bound in a shown fashion suggests a coordination polymer (e.g. neither a molecular structure, nor a monomer, see e.g. [2]) and therefore cannot be rationalized. If you would ask me, I'd go with something looking a bit more plausible and a bit crazy, like

enter image description here

Good game design suggests catchy and artistic, yet believable world. That's why first Thief and Deus Ex were such successful games. It's hard to break the fourth wall when player feels the universal physical and chemical laws were violated, and your molecule and especially its physical properties make player scream "no waaay!", followed by Alt+F4.


  1. Lawrence, J. L.; MacDonald, S. G. G. Acta Cryst B, 1969, 25 (5), 978–981 DOI: 10.1107/S0567740869003293.
  2. Lv, D.-Y.; Gao, Z.-Q.; Gu, J.-Z.; Liu, J.-Z.; Dou, W. Transition Met Chem 2011, 36 (3), 275–281 DOI: 10.1007/s11243-011-9466-2.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.