CharonY

Does it have a logo (cannot tell from the images). Typically the basic design has not changed fundamentally (mostly simplifying/prettying up controls/adding some stuff to make life easier). The easiest would be to grab a manual from a slightly later model of that company (though if it is really old it may have been bought up) and use that as a starting point. Also if it is very old the compressor tends to give out, maybe check that one out first.

A relevant point is the deaths of police officers in the US this year : 9/11 related illness: 3 Accidental: 1 Assault: 1 Automobile accident: 15 Gunfire: 14 Gunfire (Accidental): 2 Heart attack: 11 Motorcycle accident: 1 Struck by vehicle: 3 Vehicle pursuit: 3 Vehicular assault: 2

What is the 30% based on? The energy of glucose molecule relative to the energy of the ATP generated from it? You have to be aware that the production of ATP is indirect and the bulk is funneled into common (for most eukaryotes) pathways for the creation of a chemiosomtic gradient. There should not be a whole lot variance in terms of efficiency on the subcellular level (especially considering how conserved the system is). What most of the difference in use of nutrients come from is from absorption and transport of the nutrient through the body, but that is entirely based on physiological mechanisms.

The lagging strand cannot be synthesized in one go, instead they are synthesized in fragments (see: Okazaki fragments). However, the fragments need to be ligated. RNA are used as signal to identify those parts, so that they can get removed proceed in ligating the lagging strand into a continuous molecule.

Also, this is in the amateur science section, which does not makes a lot of sense for the vast majority of the listed people.

You missed the first part: I.e. it is mot likely not due to cohabitation per se, but due to the demographics. It has little bearing on the individual. Specifically: I.e. cohabitation is not causally connected to issues. Rather, it is a question of commitment. If you are unsure about it, it makes sense to test the waters so to say, unless there are limiting factors.

A sub-point could to 1) could be getting into consulting and move up from there. But making money as chemist in industry is still better than in academia (at equivalent levels of experience).

Well, lipophilic compounds have, in theory a better chance to pass the barrier and at least some essential oils (or rather volatile parts thereof) have been under discussion as carriers for for transdermal drugs. That being said, they need to be highly concentrated to the extent that they can cause contact dermatitis. Of course, the drug property also plays a role here. Obviously this will not be the case in aromatherapies (at least I would hope not).

It is unlikely that the concentrations involved will have significant impact on hormonal regulation. It would have to be very potent to do so and then it would not be a safe compound. If mere contact can disrupt your endocrine systems, you should be very far away from it... As far as therapeutic utility regardless of action it seems to have no to small effects. O'Connor et al (BMC Complement Altern Med. 2013) used a cross-trial and found no effects on agitated dementia, for example. Whereas a review from Lillehei and Halcon (J Altern Complement Med. 2014 Jun;20(6):441-51) found small benefits for improved sleep. There are a few studies that indicate stress reduction, but in all of them no placebos were used (i.e. they just compare it to applying oil with no applications). Those that worked with placebos found no effects on anxiety. So while it is not clear whether it has any significant biochemical actions, at minimum it does not appear to do any harm and may exert some of its effects via the placebo or potentially other effects. But again, the claim to impact hormones (which? how much?) is indeed dubious and there are no studies that suggest that. Also, it would be most likely harmful if it did. Finally, almost all studies describing an effect are based on inhalation, indicating that the smell may have some relaxing properties (at least to those that are not sensitive to these kind of smells).

Not wrong, just a normal variance that you will find in all cells. They are simply not all identical.

The first step (and the actual volume) is variable, of course. Other than that hypervalent's approach is the common approach. One thing I would add is, depending on the required precision, to change the tips to avoid errors (some do not and it can lead to issues). With 1:2 dilution it is not that bad, but depending on the sensitivity of your assay and how precise you need to determine MIC, it is best to minimize simple technical errors.

If by idiot you mean ignorant, then yes. As hypervalent pointed out, carbon capture via the Calvin cycle is a separate process from photophosphorylation during which water splitting occurs. During the Calvin cycle CO2 is capture but no oxygen is released. As to the light reaction: This is also not correct. The light reaction is a series of light-dependent reactions (four, to be precise) in which four electrons are released from the oxygen evolving complex (OEC). The release of oxygen is the last step in this cycle. How the water splitting actually occurs is still under debate but that mostly involves the oxidation state of the involved manganese core and the precise binding/splitting site at the moment of release. So the photon actually does not release a hydrogen but rather it oxidizes the OEC and uses that redox potential to split H2O oxidatively. Specifically for your assertions it is relevant to note that there is no CO2 needed or present whatsoever.

As I said before, Hitler did not fix anything, he put people in place. And as I said, the immediate policy was not an immediate preparation of war as you assume, although aspects helped creating a war industry (and as a side note, some of the plans were already proposed under the former chancellor, but were shelved in order to reduce spending, which further contributed to the deflation crisis). Schacht, however was pretty quickly opposed to a mobilization industry as he found it unsustainable. One of the reason why he eventually got marginalized. What I am trying to point out is the difference between enacting policies under a dictatorial regime and the actions of a dictator himself. In this case it is interesting as the same guy was in charge under both, a parliamentary system as well as under an eventually dictatorial one. The assertion that only the war industry was able to turn the German post-war economy around is similarly wrong as to ascertain that a dictatorship was able to do it (or at least too simplified a narrative that only has a cursory connection to actual historic events). . And in case it was missed, the evidence is that two major crises were met and stabilized by fiscal policies put in place by an economist (incidentally the same, put in place under different circumstances). I would be remiss not to mention that Schacht also somewhat contributed to the second crisis (post Wall Street crash) by fiercely adhering to the gold standard. What is correct however that post-crisis Schacht's action helped to consolidate Hitler's rule, but again, the economic fixes that stabilized the economy were not part of the larger re-armament plan that he actually opposed (and was basically sidelined by 1937). The further economic push afterward was the unsustainable part. He did stared more actively enacting war-related policies 35-37, but again, the most immediated stabilization was during his role as President of the Reichsbank starting 1933. To be fair, the MEFO bills used 1934 were part of the funding for an eventual re-armament, so he does had an eventual role (up to the point where he apparently not saw it to be sustainable anymore). But again, it was not part of stabilization per se, but rather a way to fund military in an underhanded way. As such I would separate it from the "fixing economy" part. While economist will argue over it, Keynesian (some would say socialist) policies enacted as first step such as building roads and hospitals and other stimulus packages are expected to reduce the immediate effects of severe deflation by pumping money into the market. And I think it is important that while Schacht did laid a foundation that enabled a war economy, he strongly opposed the eventual expansion. The main objection I have is to see history in simplified narratives that are used to support ones assertion without looking at relevant intricacies that may or may not oppose ones view.

Ask for data and how to get it, replicate it, publish it. Also try to capture the alien and keep it away from cats.

It does That is equally incorrect to the statement that Hitler fixed the financial situation. He was involved in rearmament and It eventually led to a full war economy. The latter, however, was heavily pushed by Goering and eventually led to the isolation of Schacht. The steps that were initiated included mostly infrastructure and public-works programs. You could argue that the Autobahn had also military use, though I would argue that it is a bit of a stretch. Furthermore he realized numerous trade agreements. While his policies as a whole strengthened the potential of Germany of rearmament, your analogy does not hold during the initial phases. By 35 Schacht (and Goerdeler) actually proposed a reduction in military spending and a more free-market oriented system with reduced state control, for example. In short, the fixes for the economy (which was deflation) were essentially Keynesian policies, and trade agreements that would limit deficits. I am pretty sure what you had in mind was something else entirely.

Not enough time to answer everything but there are some errors in your assumptions: Mitochondria breaks glucose into ATP. This is not correct. Depending on how you view it the final degradation is either pyruvate (end of glycolysis) or CO2. ATP is a byproduct of glycolysis or generated via the respiratory chain (assuming you are talking about eukaryotes). The TCA cycle generates reduction equivalents that are used to power proton transport throughout the respiratory chain. These pumps create a potential difference near the mitochondrial membrane that ultimately powers the ATP synthase to generate ATP. This also addresses your next point regarding NADPH, they are the start point of the respiratory chain, and the potential difference between NADPH and the terminal electron acceptor (O2 in aerobic respiration) powers the respiratory chain. I think to understand the relationship of how energy is generated via glucose (and it is obviously not the only molecule) you need to look at the pathways feeding the TCA cycle (including glycolysis but also e.g. beta oxidation) to get an idea how metabolites flow (it is not that glucose gets converted to ATP, for example). But the central hub is really the TCA where the bulk of NADPH is generated for the respiratory chain (and it also serves as a means to convert and replenish metabolite pools). That is on the cellular side of things. But for larger organisms you also need to take into account that the nutrient have to be first transported into the blood stream and targeted to organs such as liver or muscles.

Is there anything in particular you wish to discuss?

Well, one thing almost all of them had in common was the equivalent of higher education in their respective time. And as others have mentioned, the list is also wrong. Another example is Lavoisier, who was not a tax collector. While he was appointed to the Academy of sciences he bought a shares of a financial company that collected taxes. If the point is that many people had held various jobs to make a living, well that is true for most.

No need to invoke evolution here. Even DNA is is of limited relevance. The latter defines the overall background in which chemistry happens in your body but the actual processes the structure and coloration of your hair is based on what happens with the cells responsible for synthesizing it. As StringJunky mentioned, age is one of those factors that are relevant.

Your extraction protocol does have a cleanup step (typically precipitation with washing of the pellet or affinity based immobilization followed by washing). There is no optimal protocol for every sample, usually a lab adapts one or a few standardized protocols as the basis and make adjustments as necessary.

It depends on what you extracted and how. If you used Trizol, or are doing phenol extraction there is a good chance that that is the absorbing substance. Other typical things include humic acids (soil and sediment), peptides, a number of aromats and urea on top off my head. For clean up I would existing lab protocols based on you extraction method. That makes it easier to compare issues within your lab for your particular type of samples.

What curves the systems gives you is dependent on the system. Typically it is a simple fluorescence (usually normalized) over temp plot with a curve per sample. However, I wonder, if you are supposed to do this experiments is the lab/course not explaining you how the systems work?

Actually one of the few examples where a dictatorship is faster is in military actions. But beyond that there are a lot of constraints which would limit the efficiency. The example with Germany is telling, the two financial crises (inflation, then deflation) was dealt with efficiently by having the right person for the job. In this case the same person, appointed by a parliamentary, and then an autocratic regime. Things like economics take quite a bit of an infrastructure and knowledge to implement, so even a dictator would have to have a support bureaucracy to actually translate edicts into actions. So in that case I would say that in isolation it does not necessarily matter that much who is on top, but how they actually try get things done and whether they put the right people to the task. For these purposes dictatorships are not inherently more efficient.

Sorry, I think I need a translation for this.

I think your assessment makes a lot of sense. Also China has an interest of keeping people out of internal affairs which implies that they will not overtly barge into other nations. But expanding influence economically is a strategy that they have been pursuing for quite a while now.