paulsutton

Ah OK thanks, I was probably confused by the diagram. So I can have A-T and T-A along with G-C and C-G I will have a look at what I have and make sure the right bits go together and disguard the wrong combinations. Thanks Paul

Thanks for this, Paul

Hi I am guessing this is the right place to ask this. I am building a Model of DNA using coloured craft sticks, which happen to be in 4 colours Red, Green, Yellow and Blue which is ideal for representing A G C T as the base molecules Amine, Thymine, Guanine, Cytosine As I am putting these in pairs, can I have the same molecule connected together? e.g AA GG CC TT Looking at the diagram on the compound chemistry https://www.compoundchem.com/2015/03/24/dna/ I am guessing not, as this does not show pairs that are the same. Just asking anyway. Going Ok so far, I just need some string to tie everything together. And yes I know I can buy one of these as a kit, but it is fun to do this way but also can help others do the same, as it is a cheap way of making the model Thanks Paul

Hi . Thanks for this This is for a home chem lab or rather for use at the library stem group. I don't think my budget will stretch that far so will stick to manual stirring, Paul

I am looking at building a device that makes it easier to stir or mix liquids together. Is there any advantages or disadvantages of Manual stirring Magnetic Stirring device that use a paddle to stir liquids (usually a motor of some sort) Or rotating the actual beaker so the liquid within moves around at a consistent speed. I have found by accident that the beaker I have here, sits nicely on a robot wheel, connected to a motor and Arduino, so if I can attach more securely should allow this to be set up while mixing. I will eventually add a potentiometer to this so that the speed can be controlled and maybe a few other components, such as an on / off switch Thanks Paul

If a few people get the reminder they can remind the admin to do it. I am with portfast and I get a reminder 3 months before the renewal / expiry date. Either way, thank you for renewing and keep up the good work, admins and mods are all doing a fantastic job.

Ah ok, no problem,

Cool thanks for this.

Getting things around in space, I would guess the reason the idea of a space shuttle getting to the moon was brought up is because we need to get from earth to the moon or from low orbit to the moon and back. If we wanted to transport cargo, then these transport options could be automated to allow more fuel as the need for oxygen for humans is not needed.

So on a related note, what about the spacecraft that we launch to dock with the ISS? that seems small enough. In order to fly humans to the moon or elsewhere, would it not need to store fuel and oxygen? if we didn't fly people then could the same spacecraft hold more fuel.? and perhaps be automated. Is automation a solution here?

With regard to if we are alone in the universe, life can probably mean anything from a single cell organism to something far more complex, up to a complex form of life that is intelligent, sentient and capable of developing the technology to communicate and find life elsewhere. I believe life is out there, perhaps some intelligent life has evolved from that. What we should also perhaps consider is if this life is friendly or hostile, does it have a sort of prime directive (like on star trek) where contact with a pre warp worlds is not allowed, so they may have a similar rules, so a benchmark as to who can be contacted and how this should take place. I am not too sure if the Universe is infinite, what did the article mean by this exactly. ? Given we can point a telescope at another world and figure out what the atmosphere is made of, I wonder what an alien astronomer would make of the earths atmosphere. I would guess if that world was 100 ly away it would perhaps see our atmosphere was it was 100 years ago. I think it is exciting times ahead and a great time to encourage people to study STEM. Paul

Yes I have seen this idea before, so there was more normal matter from the start. I think if matter annihilates antimatter you get energy, not fully sure.

Hi Link to this was posted on the Fediverse earlier, so am posting here too. Hopefully spark discussion but also raise awareness of this, as we are ll interested in science we need to be able to maintain the valuable trust in research. Seems that there is a lot of bad science out there that is being published, however this article relates to the USA so not sure how prevalent this is globally. Just seems concerning that we may end up losing trust and this could potentially result in less funding if it is seen as not value for taxpayers money. https://theconversation.com/rising-number-of-predatory-academic-journals-undermines-research-and-public-trust-in-scholarship-213107 Hopefully it is OK to post this. Paul

I think Helium is expensive so that could be one of many factors that makes airships less viable from a cost viewpoint, and Hydrogen is flammable so perhaps less of an option too.

If I understand how to this correctly I would just multiply 79.1 x 0.1 which is 10 % so 7.91 g Paul

Is it important to note that cooling too quickly can cause shock, which is why people who, on a hot day have jumped in to a lake or colder water and drowned (or suffered other harm) as their body has gone in to shock due to the sudden temperature change So temperature needs to be lowered slowly I guess.

I have some copper sulfate in solution along with various metals which should react and cause a displacement reaction for example Mg Zn Al If I make up a 0.1 molar solution of copper sulfate at 100ml volume I need 2.49g of copper sulfate in 100ml water. This is fine. Now if I wanted to add just enough of one of the above metals to displace all the cooper do I calculate as follows ( I could look this up, but I have an idea of how to do this, so am asking to see if I am on the right track) So if 1 M of Copper sulfate weighs 249g if mass of copper is 63.54 g then calculating the % composition gives 63.54 / 249 = 0.26 x 100 = 26% So if I have a 0.1 M solution, and used 2.49 g of the copper sulfate do I then work out what 26% of that is with 0.26 x 2.49 = 0.65g So I need 0.65g of one of the above metals to displace the copper I think I am nearly there with this, but given Magnesium , Aluminium and zinc all have different weights do I need to factor in the atomic mass of the element I am using for the displacement ? Or just weigh out say 0.65g of Magnesium to produce CuSO_4 5H_2O (solution) + Mg = MgSO4 (solution) + Cu + H20 I am not quite sure what happens to the 5H_2O here. Am I right on my thinking here ? Thanks Paul

If you use H_2O and NaCl won't you end up with Chlorine and Hydrogen ?

The Damage to Lunar Orbiting Spacecraft Caused by the Ejecta of Lunar Landers I am posting this here as it seems more of an engineering issue, so I found a paper posted to the Fediverse, looking at the problem of ejecta from the moon when spacecraft blast off from the surface and the potential damage this could do to any orbiting spacecraft. The paper can be found on arXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.12234 Would i be right in thinking that this sort of thing is harder to physically simulate on Earth, even if we had a room where the floor is covered in a layer of moon dust (the fact the moon dust is not very pleasant or safe anyway) as we can't easily simulate the moons gravity on Earth. The only way to collect data would be to go to the moon, blast off and collect data that way, then look at that back on Earth. How could we perhaps address the issues raised? Paul

Within the forums. I am not sure, in general as LaTeX is text files, then it can be read / written in any text editor.

Just seen a post on the Fedivese from NASA that it is black hole week, so they have linked to their black hole basics page. https://universe.nasa.gov/black-holes/basics/?linkId=212543809 Happy #BlackHoleWeek

And perhaps any humans swimming in the sea in that area.

Cool, thank you for this.

I am not sure how desalination plants work but how do they compare with solar stills ?

Asking here as it seems more of an engineering question Looking at the recent spaceX launch, (ok it failed) there seems to be a move to build bigger and bigger rockets to take us in to space. How much is this really needed? Would we be better off expanding the ISS (or I think the plan is to build a new space station) which can act as a launchpad to take us to the moon, this could be equipped with what could be mini shuttle craft (like on star trek) that can dock and un dock as needed. On earth we can already do vertical take off and landing with aircraft, so these shuttle craft would also be capable of this. We currently have the smaller but reliable falcon rocket that could be perhaps used to launch components and supplies to the space stations. Just seems that given what happened with the latest spaceX launch and the possible environmental damage caused the industry is going to be held more accountable. Sticking with reliable technology could be a way forward