Dagl1

Yes, I also interpreted it as sarcasm (also based on his other posts) thus I was wondering what he meant with "the profound science" comment;p My apologies for being a bit unclear. Dagl1

Are you sure you are reacting to the right person??? read what I wrote again;p I feel like you are arguing against the wrong person. I personally think RNA world is a pretty nice hypothesis. I certainly don't think it is guided. Maybe you are reacting to the person I was also reacting to? Renaissancechemist? -Dagl

I don't what you mean with your first comment; the chance of YOU with YOUR characteristics existing is very very very unlikely, yet we all exist. I don't get the "profound science" comment. In the case of abiogenesis (I personally feel RNA world has a good shot at being the real reason), it is true that not ANYTHING can happen, 2 billion years ago a human would not randomly appear due to "chance". However due to the vast scale of reactions happening and the long time that these were happening, an unlikely event (amino acids forming, or rudimentary RNA forming) can definitely become possible. If you disagree, I am interested in what your view on this is? -Dagl

It definitely is a classification one can make, using XX or XY to determine biological sex, which then does lead into the problem that these syndroms exist. However in my opinion it is important to understand the function of these chromosomes. In short: Every human requires 1 X chromosome, when you have more than 1, the other becomes inactivated (X-inactivation), with the exception of some very specific regions (Pseudoautosomal regions). Having a Y chromosome is what makes someone have the male phenotype (of course there are some mutations, particularly to testosterone-signalling genes) which can lead to a female phenotype even with a Y chromosome. Thus having XXY or XXXY still in most ways makes you a (albeit with some functional problems) male. Gender is from what I understand the psychological sexual identity; so basically what sex they most identify with. I hope I didn't make any mistakes, if you disagree or think I am wrong, I am happy to learn! -Dagl

He did? Hmm I am probably wrong but I seem to remember hearing that Hawking himself thought it was a bad analogy (but maybe he was criticizing his own analogy, or my memory is just bad and I seem to remember something that hasn't happened, a google search did not help me find where it came from (granted searching for 2 min isn't a real "search")). Edit: Interestingly to note, while asking Mr. Googly, I came across the explanation that it is not an matter-antimatter particle pair, but negative_mass-positive_mass pair, this of course would mean that negative_mass exists, which I don't think has been proven to be the case.

@beecee I did not mean to say that Hawking Radiation was false (I reread my original statement and I don't feel like that is the way one would interpret it, but my bad if I was being unclear). I meant to say that, when speculating about new models for natural phenomena, it may be a good idea that everyone understands what they are talking about, and is not just using an analogy they have heard somewhere (which does not make sense when thought about it in more depth). It is fair to say that virtual particles are becoming real particles (in some ways) but it is not fair to say that this is due to the anti-matter particle of a virtual particle pair falling into the black hole. Again though, I am definitely not someone who should be lecturing physics (although I "know" a lot of random facts, my understanding is quite poor:( ), so I accept that it is possible this video also gives a wrong explanation (although PBS spacetime seems pretty nice in general). -Dagl

@renaissanceChemist I think it is worthwhile reading the following two articles (or at least the first one which is relatively easy to read). @other people in this thread, the read is maybe still interesting for a more in depth look into the science of CO2/H20 emissions. The first article gives a nice explanation of the different spectra of H20 and CO2 and their greenhouse effects. https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/wea.2072 https://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/papers/PhysTodayRT2011.pdf -Dagl

I don't have time to fully read the entire thread, but I did some searching of Hawking radiation across the three different pages. From what I have read, most people here seem to misunderstand Hawking radiation by the commonly used (but wrong) analogy of virtual particles appearing on the edge of the horizon, then having the negative matter particle fall in, thereby reducing the overall mass of the black hole. I am not a physicist of any sort and I wouldn't be able to properly explain the mechanism but this analogy is, as far as I am aware false. It doesn't make much sense, why do only the negative particles fall in, and not also the other way around. Thus see the video linked below. I am sorry if this was addressed already but I thought it is important to properly understand physical phenomena before coming up with new theories (or give explanations which may or may not be true). -Dagl

I see, so because when x is infinite it doesn't matter if it is +1 or +20 million because the function will still increase to 1 when x moves towards infinity? Hyperbolic tangent tanh does look nice, but it does make me notice that these functions don't follow the iterations the program follows (where (0,90) (1,153) (2, 197)). Of course they get to the same limit, but they don't follow the same incremental steps (see below for output of program (I changed the code a little to accurately reflect data)). increment = 62.99999999999999 Y = 153.0 x = 1 increment = 44.099999999999994 Y = 197.1 x = 2 increment = 30.869999999999994 Y = 227.97 x = 3 increment = 21.608999999999995 Y = 249.579 x = 4 increment = 15.126299999999995 Y = 264.70529999999997 x = 5

@taeto I was definitely thinking of 90 + 210x/(x+1). You have already been answering all my questions so if you don't feel like helping helpless me I can understand; but your answer raises three new questions! Firstly, why do we put /(x+1), where does that come from in a more, hmm logical/explanatory sense? Secondly, why is that analytically questionable;p? Lastly, well of course I think that the hyperbolic arctangent is a little mundane of course (I had to google what this was hahahah)! Would such a function be less analytically questionable? Thanks for the amazing answers, if you don't feel like explaining this stuff, that is fine as I already have my original answer! -Dagl

Hahaha I am unsure how to answer that question; I have done 2 months of python programming about 1.5 years ago. But writing this program took only about a minute or 2. It's interesting to note that writing this program was extremely easy but I had been been trying to figure out the formula for a whole 45 minutes. Now I do have one more question, what would be the function (or at least the structure) of a function which starts at 90 and then gradually approaches 300 (with 300 being the limit)? -Dagl1

Check out this link of the Domain of science: "The map of science" it is an explanation of all science and (some) of the interactions within the fields. I know this is maybe not EXACTLY what you are looking for, but its cool anyway!

@taeto Thanks! For some reason I thought this would be function that looks similar to y = ln(x) (in shape) but then with 300 being the limit, but I suppose that is only the case for the python program I wrote as with that one will just approach the total number of articles read (which has little to do with x in a function). Hmmmm learn something everyday, I always thought Y(x) is the function with x being the argument, thanks! Regarding the 1, ye that makes sense. Thanks! I think I am gonna go and do some higschool math because I hadn't realized that I lost soo much knowledge since I left hahaha. -Dagl

I think it is an interesting idea, however for my personal discipline (Human biology > cell/molecular biology) I learned everything through reading wikipedia (during undergrad) and then reading reviews + articles. With the exception of Kandel's "Principles of neural science", I haven't found any book I would recommend over just searching on the internet; I notice that books (for the sake of making it easy to understand for students) will rarely mention the unknowns, exceptions or further reading, while when you read on the internet you come across more and more in depth information which can make you easily confused in the beginning (but is also way more interesting than the cookie cutter book stuff, in my opinion). The same goes for Kandel's book, however I found that book to be an amazing starting off point for further learning (with a lot of interesting "facts/fluff" which lead me to read up on a lot of different interesting topics). I will think of some sources I found very interesting or useful, there are definetly some! -Dagl

Thank you! That looks awfully familiar to the type of functions I came across in high school, but now I have two more questions! Firstly, if we would make this an Y(x) = function, what would it become (90 - x) / (1-0.7)? Second, Why is that 1 there in the formula (as in, in highschool I just learned that this was a function, but now I would like to know WHY it is like this, if that makes sense). Again, thank you very much -Dagl

Hi there, Everyday I am reading articles besides doing experiments in the lab and I was joking with one of my friends that it is going to take me forever to read all 90 articles I still have on my desk, because on average I add 0.7 more articles per article that I read. So then I was wondering what type of mathematical function this would. I have written a quick python program which approaches the limit of whatever this function would be (I think it approaches 300 articles). I however still haven't been able to think of what the actual function would look like. Could anyone help me out, thanks! -Dagl PS. the python code (I know this can be written a lot better, but it works so whatever, although of course if you want to give me a tip sure (there is no need for having both B and X)); X = 90 B = 90 Xtotal = 0 while X > 0.0000001: X = X *0.7 Xtotal = Xtotal + X print("X = "+ str(X)) print("Xtotal = "+ str(Xtotal)) print(Xtotal+B)

@Sensei We scientists will all be surprised when suddenly the guy/girl comes up with a heart. "I just had to find out what hurt less, then it was all so simple". @Suno Without discouraging you, because I think that following your ideas is important, do you have the proper theoretical knowledge of (molecular) biology?

Ahh, I don't know why I didn't think of that. Thanks!

CharonY, Could you explain what you mean by appending digestion sites to your primers? I have done quite a decent amount of plasmid construction before, but I don't feel like I understand what you are referring to? Kind regards, Dagl

Dear Chesspuma, In order to help you I need to know a few things; firstly, is this for PCR or qPCR as these things differ. In the case of PCR, you want to amplify this about 2300 bp fragment? There is the NCBI tool "Primer blast" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/tools/primer-blast/ which can give you an indication of primer combinations available. I like this website; http://www.premierbiosoft.com/tech_notes/PCR_Primer_Design.html for a more indepth look into primer design. I can't remember right now, but there are other websites which you can use to verify primer specifications (also know that you should test your primer set once you obtain them, as computer simulations are not always right). I am not entirely sure what you mean with "how can I add sequences for EcoR1 and Bamh1". Do you want to do digestions? Pasting the entire fasta sequence in here: http://nc2.neb.com/NEBcutter2/ will allow you to see enzyme cutting sites. Hope that helps, Dagl1