mississippichem

Good question md. I'll go further and ask how one might falsify any said ontology if someone bothered to come up with it?

Anything in particular you would like to know about AAS? That is a rather broad topic. There are many different AAS techniques.

You write a check payable to mississippichem in USD for no less than five thousand. You could actually just be competent and knowledge, but where is the fun in that?

All I know is that a collision with a moose is not an elastic one, and as a process is not in general reversible. Though dS>0 for the system just the same.

He is definitely right. As far as industrial production goes, I think that it's usually done by electrolysis of concentrated aqueous NaCl IIRC. If my electrochem brain is working today that means you should get Cl2 gas at the anode and NaOH at the cathode. No idea what kind of electrodes you would use for that. I don't recommend you try it either lest you get a whiff of Cl2. EDIT: upon balancing this reaction on the little piece of paper next to me, I realized that you should get H2 as well at the cathode. So really don't try this!

I'm not opposed to that general notion.

Same problem down here in Mississippi except for to the (n+1)nth power. I live in a relatively progressive city as far as MS/AL/LA go. But I'm sure that my city is still WAY more conservative and deeply religious than even the more conservative of the cites in the northeastern seaboard. Down here you can almost use churches as a geographic guide***. People in my state are, for the most part, not even willing to consider any alternative political view. If you ask what their opposition to a single payer system is, you just get told that it's socialism and socialism=evil. I consider myself somewhat moderate though I can be quite liberal on some things and quite conservative on others. Even that is not good enough for much of the local social scene here. I speculate that in this country we will continue to see a growing difference in the political and religious beliefs of the major urban centers and the rural states. As has been said earlier in this thread, the neoconservatives have the unprecedented advantage of being in bed with both big business and evangelical Christianity. ***How do you get to the grocery store? "Take a left at First Baptist Church then a right at United Methodist. It's the first building on the right next to the Pentecostal Tabernacle."

Many people enjoy raising children. Some bad apples just need to die as well. For the record I have no children, and probably shouldn't as I can barely take care of myself .

OP: You already have a thread on this. I suspected that you were up to numerology. You are just arbitrarily adding numbers. I doubt you will achieve any meaningful result. The Schroedinger equation is not relativistic anyway. That's where Dirac comes in.

You could try to denature some hair proteins by reducing the Cys-Cys disulphide linkages back to thiols. This is the chemistry behind "perms" IIRC.

Beta depends on velocity in SR so I'm not sure what you mean. You've also written something that resembles the total spin quantum number formula but I don't really understand what you're asking.

It's all about the choice of norm. taxicab vs. 2-norm in QM I enjoyed this article very much myself.

Right. Molar concentration is defined as moles of solute per liter of solution. This should be distinguished from liters of solvent. A side note: Your equation is not dimensionally correct. [math] \frac{3 \ \mathrm{mol}}{1 \ \mathrm{L}}= 3 \ \mathrm{ M} [/math]

It should be noted that solvent effects are a huge consideration in organic chemistry. I also think that the molecular collision frequencies in these low temperature gas clouds must be extremely low. Photochemical reactions dominate space chemistry to a large degree. Life as we know it needs a polar and or nucleophilic solvent to make biochemistry "go".

Well stated. Thanks for the clarification.

My keyword was populations. I never said that any single bacteria could develop a resistance. Perhaps my use of the word "develop" implied what you seem to be replying to.

Here's an example: Many antibiotics have a certain functional group called a beta-lactam: Image cred: beta-lactams Some bacteria have these enzymes on the surface of their cell walls/membranes that can hydrolyze the beta lactam rings (the four-membered N-containing ring) of antibiotics. Image cred: beta-lactamase mechansim This of course deactivates the drug. Evolutionarily I'm not sure how this happens but I know that bacterial populations can develop more aggressive beta-lactamase enzymes over time with exposure to beta-lactam antibiotics. Some drugs have even begun to incorporate other beta-lactam molecules in the pill formulations as "sacrificial substrates" so that the bacterial beta-lactamases "bite" the sacrificial substrates first leaving the active drug intact.

To the OP in addition to the above: Let me add that you should find the substrate that has different electronics around the carbon atom attached to the leaving group. I hope this isn't too much of a hint. Remember that traditional SN1 and SN2 reactions need to happen at carbons with a certain geometry and a certain electronic structure. If I told you what that electronic structure and geometry were it would give away the answer.

Disgusting, worst beer Sam Adams makes. I almost always agree with you Moontanman but not here.

When you follow that up with fundamental misunderstanding of the subject that you just claimed to be educated in...priceless.

Not even a coherent chemical sentence.

You do realize how many biomolecules posses lone pair electrons right? You are essentially claiming that every sugar or amino acid is toxic.

Expand [math] e^{\sin x} [/math] as a taylor series at [math] x_{0}=0[/math]. Integrate it between 0 and infinity. When you try to take the limit you'll see. Also. You could just plot the function or think about the fact that the function oscillates sinusoidally between e-1 and e1 as 1 and -1 are both the extreme values of sin x. This is all assuming that by "does it terminate?" you mean does the integral from 0 to infinity have a finite value?

+1, I agree quite strongly here. Even though I'm very much a hardline atheist my goal is not to "make converts" when I talk to people about religion. My goal is to get people to think critically about events that occur or have occurred in our universe. One can easily go wrong by clinging to atheism with illogical religious fervor. If one is to become an atheist I think he/she should reach that state by their own logic. To the OP: You could begin to talk about scientific things in a manner that stirs his thoughts. I imagine you could do this without exposing yourself and getting in trouble if you take it slowly. Tell him some things that you may have read about in history with respect to science. Something like: "Isn't it interesting how Newton thought about the world with respect to physics? He observed things and was able to collect his observations logically into theories of how objects behave." Or perhaps: "Isn't is interesting how humanity throughout the years has been consistently able to use logic and reason to deduce matters that were previously explained with mythology?" If he is a Jehova's Witness he will acknowledge that the Ancient Greek myths about Zeus making lightning when angry are untrue. Once you can get someone into the right pattern of thinking, that is, the rationally skeptical one, you have accomplished a lot.

Newton was also an alchemist. Do you believe in that as well? What is your point?