Firedragon52

I could be wrong, but I think you're asking why would NH3 and H20 form the less stable ions H30+ and NH4+. This is because of the movement of the electron. Sometimes, it will break away from the nucleus of the H and leave a proton H+. The H+ is attracted to the NH3 and H20 because of the molecules 3D arrangement in space and the molecules partial charge. The Molcules have specific orientations in space. This can be shown using a VSEPR model (http://www.molecules.org/VSEPR_table.html). As you will see in both the... NH3: http://www.molecules.org/Images/animations/NH3.html and the H20: http://www.molecules.org/Images/animations/H2O.html model, that there is a segment of the central atom not being "occupied". That space is the site of a lone pair of electrons. The water molecule's 3D shape causes it to have form a dipole by the unbalanced electronegativity between the H and the O. So a passing proton (H+) gets sucked into the pretty stable water. The same works for NH3. Did I help? Just a fancy way of saying "single bond". Double and triple bonds are refered to as PI bonds.http://home.att.net/~cat6a/carb_bonds-I.htm

What will they think of next? Why can't this method be used, in a fashion, to supply energy to cars? Remember MR. FUSION from the BACK TO THE FUTURE movies? Is the amount of energy needed just out of the question?

The Nitrogen and Hydrogens are bonded together through covalent bonding. But, the nitrogen, in this case, has a positive charge because it has four sigma bonds where it only wants three sigma bonds. Does that kinda help a little?

If it's used to benefit and not harm, why not?

...The Patriot Act...

I'm kind of stealing this poll from another site. but, its a good question. Reeves was a proponent of stem cell research. Kerry even mentioned him in his presidential debate. What do you think?

Possibly, but if this chemical merely prepares the egg instead of fertilizing it, would it really be warranted to call this organism a third sex? To be considered a sex, I definitely think some swapping of chromosomes is in order, or else this third sex seems no more than a sterile helper (think worker bees).

Apparently Bush didn't know either...

Yes and no. This problem seems alot more complicated to me. Think about it this way: As far as I know, outside of asexual species, there is always an organism that creates eggs (female) and a organism that merely fertilizes these eggs (male). I'm just not comprehending how this third element could fit into this picture. Like your example: OK...So the fish that releases the eggs would be our "female". The fish that releases the sperm would be our "male" And the fish that releases this "something else" or "other" would be...what? Here is where it gets a little complicated for me. This "other" that the fish released, would it..."interact" with other eggs, in that case you could say that it is merely another type of male. Doe this "other" interact with the sperm? If it operates the same way as an egg does, than maybe this organism is another type of female. But, if it interacts with both...it just gets confusing for me here. I mean what would differentiate this gamete from a egg or sperm? Why would we need to call the organism, that produced it, something other than a male or a female?

Well, I can vote, and you can be sure that I will take this administrations actions into consideration when I vote...

Arggggg....The question seems so simple, but a well thought out answer seems so complicated. I lot of different factors would need to be considered. Like what would be the evolutionary benefit for a species with 3 sexes? Hell, sometimes the 2 sex system seems fragile and unnecessary (sometimes). How would the dynamics of this system work? Would each sex be able to breed with each other? Or would two sexes ONLY be able to breed with one of the sexes? It even sounds complicated. So, I would think life would be more complex and competitive for this organism.

I'm also glad you let it go. You should never jump into caring for an animal without researching how to take care of it first. I learned this lesson the hard way... and with terrible results.

Very off target, but, popjinx. You go to the Univ. Of Pittsburgh too. Who is your Analytical Chem Prof? You say you tutor O-Chem. Are you member of the UTU program with Dr. Bandik? I'm in the general chem UTU group with Dr. Golde. I probably pass you in Chevron without knowing it.

You have to convert what you have in grams into moles. Then use the element with the least amount of moles and divided the number of moles of other element with this number. I have a feeling the phosphorus is going to have the least amount of moles. Your answer will probably be PCl3 or PCl5

Would you really want a computer permanently embedded in your body?

They have only created anti-Hydrogen so far.

About 5'10.

Don't hate me, but this seems to be the classic scientific mistake that: Correlation = Causation I would say that no, lacking sleep does necessarily mean that one will increase nocturnal activity. In fact, it may decrease overall activity; you'll be too tired to do anything.

Here is a website that leads to picture of a Eukaryote Cell (Cells found in Animals). http://www-class.unl.edu/bios201a/spring97/group6/ This site goes indepth on the functions of the cell's various organelles: http://www.biology.arizona.edu/cell_bio/tutorials/pev/page3.html

Maybe a mild case of Psychokinesis: http://www.themystica.com/mystica/articles/p/psychokinesis_pk.html ...though I highly doubt it....

That wasn't the one I was looking for, but those are still VERY cool articles. Thanks.

To help further: http://chemistry.about.com/library/weekly/aa081301a.htm

I'm not if it also has something to do with the fact that lights wavelength, for resolution, decreases as well.