CharonY

Photosynthesis is a somewhat later development. The point is not really the acquisition of hydrogen per se, but essentially liberation of electrons (or reducing equivalents) for energy conservation. Chemolithotrophy basically covers these range of oxidative processes. Of note, many, but not all chemolithotrophs are also extremophiles. Forgot to add: because of this process, some bacteria (hydrogen oxidizers) can utilize hydrogen as an electron donor.

Only the actual synthesis of the DNA is from scratch (using a very simple de novo/amplification chemistry). The genome sequence is from the same bacteria, with a portion of it removed. It is similar to very old studies to cure sequences, except that they now removed the whole chromosome and put in the synthesized ones. And yes, they basically took the cells, removed the DNA and put in the reduced version. I.e. it is still to early to call that an organism from scratch (and yes, the press has massively sold the technical and especially the scientific achievement).

But they were introduced into the same cell from the sequences were previously removed from.

Isn't it great for single-issue parties? Just burn and run. And come back when there is another crisis. Being part of the problem is so much easier than being part of the solution. Ironically, isn't he to remain in the EU parliament for a while?

Basically the issue is that in order to understand functions we need a larger picture of brain activities. Looking at individual cells or even molecules is only relevant if we want to figure out specific biochemical activities and interaction, but are not too interested in overall physiology. There is no easy way to bridge this particular gap. To put it differently, different resolution is used for different questions. If you want to look at brain activity you need something more like PET, MRI or equivalent and improved versions thereof. If want to go into high-resolution stuff once you are interested in cellular physiology or biochemical interactions.

So do you look at the leakage and pressure or at individual water molecules?

Congrats!

In order to figure out where water flows in a system (even a small one) would you try to measure individual water molecules?

You see, the issue that I see or the disappointment that I have does not stem from the immediate economic ramifications. Rather, there is a whole range connected to the Brexit vote. 1) people can be easily manipulated to vote against their interest without any shred of evidence and by exclusively appealing to feels 2) the results and aftermath basically demonstrated that a sizable portion of the population are not "concerned citizens" but outright xenophobes and bigots (as a corollary, it also shows that even if one removed all visible minorities chances are that some other scapegoat is found) 3) while this mainly shows the because of that, we see legitimization of extreme right-wing "policies" which do not need a foundation in reality to be successful 4) we have seen that behavior more than a couple of times throughout recent as well as not so recent history. The only thing we do learn from this is obviously that we don't. I could add more to that, but it is just overall depressing.

3D structures are typically based on crystallographic studies and are highly complex you can see and download structures form the PDB database. Not all structures are of sufficient resolution as the most common distance between a hydrogen and the acceptor in a given pair is usually below 2.5 angstrom. That being said, even a lower resolution structure can provide clues which and where certain moieties interact. In any case these are not trivial to understand.

You are switching between several orders of magnitude between and even within a sentence. Again what would a molecular resolution really tell you? Remind more again on wich scales neuronal connections are formed. Also try to visualize the change from tissue to cell, subcellular compartments, macromolecules, ions and atomic structure.

If the force of the same, i.e. you do not need the higher forces of an ultracentrifuge it should not matter. What could make a difference is if you have different vials.

I am registered cynic, so it should not surprise me in the least. But I still feel a pang of disappointment seeing these things happening.

On a different note, it is sad to see that the vote has empowered racists and bigots to come of the woodwork, as they assume that after they had their say it is now socially acceptable. Obviously, it only shows that these thoughts are bubbling under the surface of virtually all societies (easily seen with refugee crisis in other European countries). Still, sad to see that in action. Also noteworthy is that this time the resentments are not exclusively against the obvious targets (i.e. visible minorities) but also increased insults and abused have been targeted against especially Polish (and other European) communities. I should stress that this is not exclusively directed against Brits, I have nothing against them, and some of them are my best friends (OK I could not stop myself, sorry). Rather, it shows how very primitive, almost tribal notions persists even in very modern societies that are well covered up under a veneer of civility. However, once there is even a nudge that implies that this behaviour is acceptable it tends to break out to expose the ugly, hate-filled underbelly of society. We are just deluding ourselves thinking that we are better and have overcome these issues. We (as the whole society) really have not. Edit: Also, it is telling that UKIP got the popular vote for the EU-parliament, which is just mind-boggling. And as it turns out they are also the "laziest party" In that regard Farange's speech is set to destroy any irony meters vaguely pointed in his direction. I am serious, especially listen to the end of the speech where he demands that the EU does not cut its nose to spite its face and tells them to be sensible grown-ups... after telling the MEP that they never had a proper job in their lives...

Apart from the fact that this is a two-year old thread, it should be added that neither ELISA nor Western are exclusively used to measure antibodies. In fact they can (and often are) used to quantify anything that can be a antigen, including proteins other than immunoglobulins, peptides, hormones as well as other immunogenic biomolecules.

Popularity implies being accepted and valued within certain groups. The advantage of this can be partially internal (confirmation of status, for example) but also has practical aspects (improved social interactions and collaborations).

Relevant quotes from the actual report. The data leading to that conclusion are also presented deeper in the (quite extensive) report. However, it should be noted that it was not the actual major part of paper, which predominantly deals with the certainty that it is, in fact. extinct.

While you have written quite a bit about yourself, it is not quite clear to me what it is that you are asking. And even less how that relates to either the title or the Medical Research. However, I would suggest that if you have a question, try to present it more clearly, if possible. What would help is to organize the question and, at least in the beginning, cut off superfluous information that may distract from them.

Nah, I am pretty sure after arrival they look at the interesting life forms on the planet. Some of which are able to utilize primitive tools like nuclear missiles. While curious, this is about the intelligence level of the average pet. Hence, after taking some samples, the search for intelligent life forms continues.

Why do you dismiss existing instrumentation? Why do you think that size and/or tracers are limiting? How do you even think that lasers would be of any help (think in terms of penetration, volumes to be scanned, time frames, type of date, etc.). Why does the flow needs to be measured on the molecular scale in the first place?

I really wished that those standards would apply to politics. To be fair,though, the industry has an excellent playbook in establishing lies, too (thinking about tobacco industry for example). Instead of outright lying just sow doubts. Remember, it is not really a lie, if you really, really believe it..

I think that is what I am getting at. The role of the voters is vastly underappreciated, considering that ultimately they are one of the balancing tools to the commission. Also I took a quick view through the powers of the EU commission a bit ago and there seems very limited things that they can do without another body (like executive oversight of the budget I think?). So it appears that their powers may be overestimated. Together it gives potential voters the idea that their vote does not matter, while factually it actually does.

Sorry, I meant medical doctors. Quite frankly, I did not get it at all. My best guess is something is that it has something to do with their overall conservative stance, but I can only speculate (have not talked to them for a while).

That would be the minimum infectious (or infective) dose.

Can't open it, but I have no doubt that there will be issues. Also, I am not saying that the measure is perfect. But as all comprise regulations, it is very likely that all sides are unhappy to certain degrees. What I do appreciate is that at least in theory it starts looking at an issue that has been basically ignored.