Bluenoise

The MgCl2 wont dry completely this way, well maybe if your humidity is close to 0%. It will likely not dry past a hexahydrate state (6 water molecules per MgCl2). When I typically buy MgCl2 this is the state that I get it in. At this level of hydration the mass per unit of magnesium is the most stable I beleive, due to being less suseptable to change in water content under typical conditions. You can probably get it alot dryer by baking it 100C for an hour or two after evaporation. (Don't take my word on it though, inorganic chem has never been my thing) You might want to try Ethanol precipitation as well. However the sucess of this will be dependant on the concentration of MgCl2 and how high you can get the ethanol content. (Also how cold you freezer is too).

Damn how'd you know? I did eat a Kebab... I don't goto the gym to burn calories anyways, I'm slim enough. I just go for the physical activity.

Do you think it counts as excercise? It would save me some time if I could counting it towards my 3 days at the gym a week...

Okay so this might seem like a stupid question, but I'm curious nevertheless, and have been unable to find the answer anywhere else. Often when I go out for the night and drink probably a bit more than I should I find that my knees feel weak the next morning. They don't hurt, they just feel weak and stiff the next day and sometimes it carries on for another day. Now I'm curious as to the exact cause of this. Is it directly caused my drinking or indirectly? Like is the alcohol doing it or is it more likely that I'm just overexerting myself running around, stumbling, falling over, dancing, going on long walks at 2am in search of pizza. Ummm yeah.

Could you tell us something about the reaction?

I wasn't aware that high schools specialize to such a degree. Informatics high-school!! I think it's a horrible idea. I can't imagine that they actually want 13/14 year olds to make up their mind about their future profession at such a young age, and so little experience. But that being said their opinion on other subjects is definatley going to be biased. And no most people who do biochem don't become teachers. All most all however do some minor teaching along the way however. I started my masters a year ago and I already teach part of a course, I even have a student working under me. However almost all of what I do is research.

Nothing is removed when bleaching. Bleaching simply oxidizes chemicals that are responsible for colour. Colour is a result of highly conjugated chemical bonds that allow a molecule to absorb and readmit light at discrete wavelengths corresponding to the difference between electron energy levels. Bleaching simply removes these conjugated bonds, usually by attaching an Oxygen molecule to them. I'd assume that the brown colour in wood is either due to certain arrangements of lignin or pigments in the wood. But don't quote me on that.

I got this to work really well once with tap water a nine volt battery and some wire when I was a kid. For electrodes I basically opened up a couple batteries carefully enough not to break anything.

I know quoting myself isn't a good idea... But I just want to apologize for my poor spelling and grammar in that post. I reread it and almost threw up.

Yeah I don't buy it. First of all life needs a renewing energy source to sustain itself. And I can't possibly thing what they maybe suggestion in serving that function inside a comet. Except for the surface where there might be light from the sun etc. However unfortunately the surface of a comet would be so bathed in radiation that it and a good few feet below the surface would be constantly sterilized. I'm pretty convinced that earth is by far the best place in the solar system for life to form, and I think the chance of it forming in comets and seeding the earth is pretty null. Edit* Now having said that. I think it's entirely possible that comets played a role in seeding the earth with minerals and small molecules water etc that was fundamental to the eventual formation of life. I think it's highly likely actually. The early earth was only a tiny fraction of the mass that it is now anyways. But I think that's the extent of their possible part.

Biochemistry grad school. However my secret identity is in synthetic biology and genetic engineering. I choose my Biochem projects based on if they allow me to design new techniques/methodologies and constructs. Not based on what I'll discover. Drives my supervisors insane having to explain all these hair brained ideas to them lol. At least they work.

Yeah plus anything with the word acid in it is likely the scare the shit out of people who don't know better.

I know that has me worried a little bit, DNA runs in a Gaussian distribution on gels unfortunatley. But hopefully the effect isn't that large. Yeah seems like a nice easy protocol I can get an undergrad to do in a day .

After the first amplification you run the PCR products on a gel. You excise a region far larger than the small RNA. This way you've eliminated any PCR product that resulted from the small RNA. Next you amplify with the overhand to get enough insert to clone.

Hmm on the other hand NaCl might not be a good example. It's probably far worse for you than sucralose.

Sure use table salt. It's not the same kind of bond, but I doubt anyone stupid of making the assumption you're trying to argue against will notice.

It does have an effect (obviously). I saw a documentary on this exact same thing. Here's a very unscientific document that you can use to start a more detailed search http://sportsci.org/jour/9804/inbrief.html Same thing occurs with weight training. Some people no matter how hard they try to bulk up and gain strength will always stay at about the same place. However interestingly enough these people still do get the health benefits associated with hight levels of training even though they don't show any visually obvious progress...

Sounds right. Now If you want a hint I suggest you look up formulas for finding the pH of diprotic acids.

Well no because you have a size selection for the large RNA's. Hmmm I guess I could use LC to size separate them, seems a little excessive though.

I'm sorry but I'm unsure which mutation rates you're referring too. But no I do not study mutation rates.

Actually I think we misunderstand each other. You're idea about coupling the small RNA to magnetic beads and fishing out the other one is what has already been done prior. I'm taking about what's to be done after that. IE. How would you go about making the cDNA from the mRNA you have captured. Even after eluting from the beads it will still be at a much lower level than the small RNA (some will fall off the beads), say a million times lower. Anyways here's my idea. RT pcr using a random primer with a small over hang for say 5 cycles. Then add a primer complementary to this over hang and amplify for 20 cycles more. Run it on a gel excise a region say 200-300 bp larger than the small RNA (as the random primer products will have to be smaller than the template), reamplify it followed by TA cloning and sequencing. The reamplification is necessary because the smaller cDNA's created from the high copy number small RNA will amplify far better than the longer ones from the mRNA. God I hope that makes sense. It's been a long week. I wish prokaryotes had poly AAAA tails.

Well we all do localized fat burning to some extent, but unfortunately there's nothing you can do to guide it! Whenever I gain wait and then start loosing it there are always area's that go first, and it's always in the same order no matter what kind of exercise I do. Backs of arms, thighs, love handles, chest then stomac. Unfortunately my belly is the very last place I loose any fat. And I never put any fat on my legs or arms. However doing abdominals will give you a more defined stomach that will look better and flatter even if you haven't burned any fat off of it.

Okay, lets say you isolated a bacterial mRNA through the binding of another RNA of much smaller size (say 70bp) how would you go about cloning and sequencing this bacterial mRNA you isolated? Rules: 1) Bacterial RNA does not have a poly A tail. 2) You're completely clueless about the sequence of this mRNA you've isolated. 3) Your sample is contaminated by this small RNA by thousands if not millions of times the copy number of the RNA you're trying to isolate. 4) There are thousands of possible binding partners for this small RNA so you can't just search for the anti-sense. So you basically have to selectively clone this mRNA and sequence it. I've thought of a possible way to do it. But I want to hear someone else's suggestion first.

I think they violate the heisenberg uncertainty principle and are thus impossible.

Now pioneer your view is definitely much better founded than those threads that follow. Though I still don't exactly agree/believe your view... But maybe after this you'll understand why we're so skeptical. http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=20734&highlight=hydrogen+bonds http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=19209&highlight=hydrogen+bonds http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=19472&highlight=hydrogen+bonds I guess sunspot was the one I was thinking of.