The division between the fields of Inorganic and Organic chemistry has become blurred. For example, let's look at one of the major classes of catalysts used for organic synthesis reactions; organometalic catalysts (Figure $$\PageIndex{1}$$). Organometallic catalysts like these, and all organometallic compounds, contain metals that are bonded to carbon or carbon-containing molecules. So, are they "inorganic" because they contain metals, or "organic" because they contain carbon? These illustrate that clear divisions between organic and inorganic chemistry do not exist. Further, metal ions are common in biology and so the idea that metals are "inorganic" and thus classed as "non-living or non-biological" is incorrect. A canonical example is the organometallic catalyst, adenosylcobalbumin which is an important biological cofactor containing a cobalt (Co) ion (Figure $$\PageIndex{1}$$, right) and a cobalt-carbon bond.
Some of the subfields of Inorganic Chemistry focus on electrical conductivity of inorganic materials (ie conduction, superconduction, and semiconduction) and on the study of optical and electronic properties of inorganic nanomaterials. Electrical conductivity is a canonical property of metals, but carbon-based materials also demonstrate electrical conductivity. For example, carbon nanotubes conduct electricity through their extended conjugated $$\pi$$ systems. Fullerenes, of which the most famous is Buckminsterfullerene, or Buckeyball (C60), demonstrate interesting properties that are similar to nanoparticles, and when combined with metals and crystallized can demonstrate superconductivity.