For Prose

Haha you might enjoy this thread then DDSmith....

I was about to give you an example but Phi kindly did so for me. You wouldn't happen to be a sockpuppet of Rajnish Kaushik would you? Your writing style seems very familiar minus the numerous misspellings... Opinions can indeed be right or wrong when corresponding to facts. You mistake all opinions with some opinions. For example, it my opinion that beets taste awful. Is this wrong or right? No, it is an opinion. It's my opinion that gravity doesn't exist or that the earth is a living thing capable of reproduction by blasting earth rocks into space via volcanic activity is not a comparative opinion. You can actually read all about what opinions consist of here. Now, as always, you are completely free to your opinions. But it's best to make the distinction so you can tell others when it is your opinion and not fact. You can also confer by your poll results certain things about the way others see your view. *Cross posted with Phi*

Interesting. Never knew they had a term for me haha. Of course they could have done a better job. But in doing a better job, they may have created more possible holes in which it could be later refuted. It is hard for me to swallow that records (human created) are always credible past a certain point in history. The same goes for the religious texts themselves (human made).

Before replying, first let me inform you that I do not normally subscribe to conspiracy theories. I say that only because my belief on whether or not he existed sounds somewhat like a conspiracy theory. I do not think he existed. Period. I think that all possible records of him, including all religious texts, to be fictitious and created for the sole purpose of the power associated with it. I think there are people out there who would go to great lengths to keep the myth going.

Lance, you should really do research into logical fallacies.

This is hardly conclusive proof as to why it occurs in physics so frequently, but the other day, I overheard a student giving a speech in class. He asked his peers "What is the number one law in Physics?", to which a student answered "What goes up, must come down!". "Exactly" the speaker replied. It seems that maybe, there are more people willing to listen to their crackpot ideas. But in al seriousness, let me tell you all why all the physicists are wrong nowadays......

Ok let's start with the forces that are behind some of the folding of proteins. Hydrogen bonding, while not a very strong bond, becomes a formidable bond in larger numbers, which is exactly the case for many proteins. Van der Waals interactions are also present. Imagine a box full of magnets that have no attraction for each other for the most part, but will occasionally all have an affinity for each other's opposite poles. This is similar to a dipole-dipole induced moment where momentary asymmetry will cause the molecules (magnets in our analogy) to become "bonded", though not permanently. Another from of bonding is disulfide bonds. As the name suggests, it is a bond formed by two sulfur atoms of two cysteine (which is an amino acid) residues. This bond confers great stability unlike the other two bond I have mentioned thus far. Ionic bonds (an easy way to remember ionic bonds is to think of table salt, sodium chloride, which forms from ionic bonds) additionally provide further stability for structure. In theory, synthetic mRNA could indeed be introduced and produce desired results. I am currently reading a research article where a computationally and synthetically derived ribozyme ( ribosome enzyme) proved functional in a cleavage assay. My advice is to research "synthetic biology review article". This should produce an overview of what has been accomplished so far and where it might be headed. I know you probably don't want to share to much of your book with us, but it would be more helpful if you could ask more specific questions, like you did with the mechanisms behind folding. Edited for spelling*

While similar, they have two different functions, so I might have to agree that the amount of RNA found varies based upon cell size. Not due to constraints, but more or less, due to functional needs. I have no hard proof, just my guess on this one.

Piggykid, If you have any Apple products, a fantastic resource is iTunes U. It features videotaped lectures from top professors from top schools around the world. Khan Academy is a great resource to learn something at it's most basic level. If you are already in school, talk to your professors. Hell, talk to professors who are just in departments you are interested in. Along the way you will find some who do it just for the pay check, but you will also encounter some fantastic educators who actually love and enjoy sharing their knowledge. Don't let the ones who seem unenthusiastic about discussing topics with you bring you down. I say this from personal experience.

Which part do you not understand? There are quite a few things you will have to do, such as manipulate different concentrations of each to grow Lysozyme crystals...

Is there any way for you to dilute the milk to a point that you can, indeed, see the action? This may be the key to quantifying your experiment a little better. Of course, the addition of hydrogen and oxygen molecules might have to be accounted for.

They key is to determine how they reproduce. For example, you can look for sporangia on the underside of a fern leaf. Also, indicative to ferns are usually fronds. I am unaware if evidence of a frond is exact proof of a fern though. Can you point out specifically what sorts of differences you are looking for?

What sorts of resources do you have access to? If at all feasible, you could have the rainwater in the area tested, and use what you learn from that to conduct your experiment.

Clark, you may be interested in looking into the advances we have made in synthetic biology. Since you are asking the hypothetical what-if, yes, in the future, your scenario could be a reality. Of course, if you were asking whether or not you could create matter from nothing, then no. Not even in the foreseeable near future would this be possible. The components synthesized would have to be made from already existing components, i.e. the broken down atoms you refer to.

Hint; think double bond from one of the oxygen atoms to something else

Another hint; on some of the more difficult Newman projections, I work from the atom before to see if I can make any discoveries that would help me further down the molecule. In this case, you would try looking at the carbon that has the substituent off benzene. Also, you could try looking down the Nitrogen and see if that would help.

It looks very similar to the fire bug, which is found in Europe. I will provide a link. It's not an exact match to yours but so far the closest thing I have found. http://www.bumblebee.org/invertebrates/Hemiptera.htm And here is another one to show that there is some variation. http://depositphotos.com/25092683/stock-photo-firebug-pyrrhocoris-apterus.html The one you have visually captured may be a mutant phenotype which would explain the red on the head and a few other differences.

I don't think anyone has pointed out an obvious one yet, but the two acts are usually different I assume (anatomically speaking). Maybe if more male-male porn was just of two males kissing and fellatio, as most female-female porn is, it may be just as popular.

Studiot, can you provide where, geographically, this assassin bug was found?

Which part specifically do you not understand? The degrees of freedom is the number of possible outcomes or classes (then subtract one). In this case, your question is referring to a dihybrid cross which normally has a 9:3:3:1 ratio which would means a dof of 3 (4-1=3). Next you would follow the degrees of freedom to the highest possible number before you exceed 10, since that is your determined value. You could reject it at .01 but that would be leave you with another better choice that also, incidentally, increases your "assurance" that you did not mistakenly reject or accept your null hypothesis. There are more than one answer to this question. You just have to look at all the options and choose the best one. Hope that helps...

Does anyone know the mechanics as to why bindweed spirals in its specific direction?

Our organic teacher stated today that commercial gasoline ranges from .71-.79 g/cm^3 today in lecture. Why does gasoline have various values of density? Does it have anything to do with the various octane ratings you can purchase? Are there any other reasons?

Initially, I sided with Nature magazine on the idea of bringing back extinct species as ridiculous. After I put some serious thought into it, I have concluded this might be a hasty judgement. The real implications of how the earth is changing in dramatic ways is quite evident (whether or not this is our fault remains in another thread) but solutions for these problems are few and far inbetween. At some point, as controversial as it sounds, we as a species may be better off reverting back to a former ancestral species (the mechanics of which are highly involved and quite understandably, outside of what is currently possible I believe). Additionally, species that were once better suited for extreme environments as compared to our current trend, may be what is needed for ecological sustainability. I realize that this is all mere speculation, but to quickly dismiss an idea, and idea that may hold the key to preventing the collapse of certain ecosystems in the future, is something we should avoid. Don't let ficticious movies, such as Jurassic Park, sway your thinking in something as monumental as the idea of bringing back extinct animals. This is fallacious reasoning in my eyes.

Hello SFN community, I will not be taking summer classes this year and opting to work on research instead. I am currently a biology and mathematics dual-major. I have no difficulties in determining research for either field, but ideas bridging the two is becoming more of a challenge than I originally expected. Could anyone share ideas they have had for research involving both math and biology? I would greatly appreciate it and would certainly share credit in any presentations in which your ideas became a reality. Michael Rohly