• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


hypervalent_iodine last won the day on April 26

hypervalent_iodine had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1094 Glorious Leader

About hypervalent_iodine

  • Rank
    Malevolent Viper

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Interests
    Organic and medicinal chemistry
  • College Major/Degree
    Bachelor of Science (Hons I) - Chemistry
  • Favorite Area of Science
    Organic Chemistry
  • Occupation
    Ph.D. student

Recent Profile Visitors

76276 profile views
  1. I saw the same one here in Brisbane. My friend and I didn't have glasses, so we poked holes in some paper and watched the shadows move on another piece of paper / our hands. The dimness of the light (it being around 8am or so) during totality was otherworldly. Reminded me of being in a dust storm.
  2. Further from the above comments, I would add that if you are unable to formulate a timeline for the project with a detailed budget, you're going to struggle getting funding.
  3. I don't know of any ways to make it cheaply and cleanly, personally. Heating it as you've described will. I believe, give a mixture. This is in addition to it being water sensitive. What is it for? Perhaps there is another compound that would wok instead?
  4. What are your attempts, and where exactly are you stuck?
  5. ! Moderator Note I don't think we need to continue dragging this off topic by specifically addressing seriously disabled's post. As a science discussion forum populated by people from all walks of life, we are not equipped to provide medical advice. This absolutely extends to issues surrounding mental health.
  6. ! Moderator Note It is the opinion of staff that this thread has run its course, and thus should be closed.
  7. Could you please be a little clearer with what you're asking?
  8. ! Moderator Note We do not permit members to cast such aspersions against an entire group of people as you have done here. It is both unfair, and ill-informed on your behalf. Please review the rules you agreed to upon signing up so that you might avoid breaking them in the future.
  9. I haven't had time to watch the video, but I did do a quick Google search on it. I am from NZ myself and had never heard of what they mention. The only websites I could find information looked to be nonsense conspiracy sites though, so I'm not sure I am willing to believe anything they have to say without further research.
  10. It was sadly no longer supported, which was leading to issues.
  11. I couldn't find any connection between them. Thanks for the advice. The boss has been contacted about it and I will try and chase him up tomorrow, though I suspect his response will be to not rock the boat and ignore it.
  12. The phrase was what rang bells for me, but I'm talking about two large pragraphs, 99 % identical to two paragraphs from another paper, written as though it was their own. I'm going to look more thoroughly at the rest of it when I have time later to assess how extensive it actually is, if for nothing else than my own curiosity.
  13. This was my thinking also, and the only reason for hesitation. I have emailed my boss, who is also an author on my review. Those are helpful links, thanks. My instinct was of course to contact the editor of the journal, but I quickly felt a little out of my depth upon thinking about it. What strikes me is that this review has around 300 citations. I find it hard to believe that I am the only person to have noticed it, especially since the paragraph references the paper they plagiarised from. Seems bizarre to me. I'm going to put it through Turnitin when I get in to work tomorrow to check the rest of it.
  14. Working on a review article on a plane today, I discovered that an existing review published in 2011 contains at least two substantial paragraphs copied almost verbatim from another paper by another group that I happened to have just finished reading. There is probably more, based on a cursory glance of other sections. The review in question is a very well-cited review in a high impact factor journal, and written rather surprisingly (to me, at least) by a group at Pfizer. Having never been in this situation before, I am unsure of what the usual course of action is (especially since it's a review, and partly on a topic I am covering)? If nothing else, I assume there must be copyright issues with reproducing work published in another journal? Should it be reported to the journal?
  15. Honey contains a surprising amount of seriously toxic natural products in it. I went to a talk by a woman who studies the components of honey for a living (A / Prof Mary Fletcher, from QAAFI, if you're interested), and the stuff you find is both geographically varied and ubiquitously concerning.