Gen1GT

Well, I am trying to find some research on Leptin and how it correlates with weight-loss/weight-gain. Specifically, and I doubt this research exists, I am curious how much leptin drops during caloric deficit, and how much leptin increases during caloric surplus in those same patients. Some of the studies showed relationships between leptin and omentin-1, but I don't know what omentin-1 is. Dislayers, thanks for the references. It appears from your links that it's a signalling protein.

Hi everyone. I was reading some research, and noticed Omentin-1, but upon consulting the internet, I only arrived at more research papers, but no explanation of what it is. Does anyone know what Omentin-1 is? Thanks,

Not rubbish at all. I'm reading the cartoon book of chemistry, and it's the best so far! LOL

Studiot, you're exactly correct; my interest in learning chemistry stems from my current interest in nutrition. I want to learn about biological chemistry, which is obviously mostly organic chemistry. Unfortunately, none of the books mentioned by you or Empress are available at my local library, so I'm going to have to bite the bullet and purchase them. Thanks for the recommendation!

Most of the links in the original post are dead. Perhaps an edit is in order?

What you all fail to recognize, is that sodium chloride currently in the seas is healthier than sodium chloride that used to be in the seas and is now mined. So much in fact, that sea salt costs $8 for a tiny shaker, and table salt costs $0.06 for nine pounds.

Hi everyone. I'm looking for a good book for beginners to help me get my head around chemistry. I've read "What is Chemistry," by Atkins, which I found too elementary (although I did learn about the different types of chemical reactions). I attempted to read "Organic Chemistry Demystified," but it was too advanced. I need something that's going to cover electron shells, stoichiometry and all the basics in detail (perhaps with exercises) to I can eventually move on to learn organic chemistry. Does anyone have any recommendations? Thanks in advance,

Sorry, when I said, “…The idea that energy in a system can only increase…,” I actually meant “The idea that ENTROPY in a closed system can only increase…” Although I thought of this idea myself, upon further research, I found out I’m not the only one. Timothy Gutowski, a professor at MIT published a paper in the journal Environmental Science & Technology about the subject. One example they found was in tires. The tires containing post-consumer recycled rubber had higher rolling resistance, which increased the fuel consumption of the car they rode on, cancelling the energy saved by recycling. Also, some new products are produced on such massive scales that micro-managed and locally manufactured products cannot compete in production volume and the resulting savings in energy. Most products made from petroleum require more energy to recycle than to produce new. The scale of new plastic production is so massive and efficient compared to recycling it. A recycled plastic has to be collected by fleets of trucks getting 2.8 miles per gallon (84 litres/100km!!). The product then has to be sorted (entropy created by the machines, the building and the people). At this point, the recycled plastic will start being processed equidistance from final product as newly produced plastic. The first two stages of recycling create WAY more entropy than petroleum processing. Is it not true that the more you try to organize nature the more entropy is created as a result? -edited to remove an error

I'm posting this idea in the quantum theory section because I know entropy is a quantum physics based concept. I was listening to some Brian Greene, and he was speaking about black holes and entropy. The idea that energy in a system can only increase got me thinking about recycling and other environmental concerns. When we manufacture consumer products, we're decreasing entropy of the object itself (car, toy or whatever), but with entropy of the manufacturing taking a beating. Now, when we recycle something that's already required a net increase in entropy, aren't we compounding the entropy by wasting resources in recycling it? Isn't it better to let consumer goods rot in a land fill than recycle them? I would think the process of recycling, in an attempt to reduce entropy, would just end up speed up the increase in entropy. Thoughts?

Whatis the difference between heat and pressure on an atomic level? It is my understanding that heat is the manifestation of the movement of atoms. It is also my understanding that pressure is at least partially a manifestation of atomic movement. You can increase both heat and pressure of a gas, for example, by reducing volume. You can then remove the heat, but the pressure will remain. Why does pressure remain? Is it from atoms hitting the walls of the container?

1) Okay, so if a device can use an electron to pop out two photons, they will each have 1/2 opposing spin? That type of thing? 2) I can't explain this further...in the books I've read, Clauser tried to disprove Bell's Theorem by using a machine to fire particles in opposite directions with one detector set to measure momentum and the other to measure position. Because the particles were fired at the same time, we could deduce position and momentum at the same time by measuring each particle separately. 3) I think you're dancing around my idea...LOL

Response to swansont: 1) I don't understand your answer. You're going to have to be analogy heavy. I would submit six more questions to understand your response, and more than likely, each of those six responses would require yet another six questions to understand. You can see how this could get out of control. I'm sure there is an analogeous explanation to how particles become entangled. 2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clauser_and_Horne%27s_1974_Bell_test Why weren't they able to measure both position and momentum? What does spin have to do with either position or momentum? 3) Okay, let's forget about momentum. If we fire a photon (which we know is travelling at c) at a wall of strings, does this not give us exact position and velocity? 4) One down, three to go! LOL

I am still learning as quickly as I can (thank Bob for audiobooks and long drives), but I have some problems with quantum theory. I might as well put them all in one thread, as I'm sure I'm not the only rookie who needs clarification on these concerns. 1) Quantum entanglement - how to two particles get entangled to begin with? 2) Quantum entaglement experiments - I know about the machine (by Clauser?) that fires two particles in opposite directions. One detector is supposed to measure velocity, and one detector is supposed to measure position. Why was this experiment a failure? 3) Uncertainty - it doesn't make sense my head that we'll never be able to measure both position and velocity accurately. How about this thought experiment: In a vacuum chamber, you fire a photon at a wall of strings. Isn't the resolution of the string wall high enough that we know exactly where the photon hit? We already know it was going the speed of light, so doesn't this give us an exact position and momentum? 4) Uncertainty - If we can't exactly calculate position and momentum of a particle, how does the LHC exist? Don't we need to move a particle at an exact velocity to a known position where it could be measured? If not, how can we can any result at all from the LHC experiments? Please avoid jargon in your explanations ... thanks in advance!

That's a great formula for "Force makes it go." Pressure is merely force over a defined area. Thanks alpha, I'll just this formula in my examples.

caKas, that's great, thanks. Also a resistance to volumetric flow does not create pressure, but only results in pressure; and that is the mistake persons in my industry tend to make. The increase in pressure is an example of Newton's Third Law. I always that if the resistance created the pressure then the resistance creates its own energy, which clearly defies the second law of thermodynamics. Energy comes from the pump, not the resistance (be it a restriction or load).