Horza2002

I think you'd be suprised at what people have been reported to swallow... http://www.x-raytechnicianschools.org/the-25-weirdest-things-eaten-by-a-human/ Swallowing someone elses false teeth while kissing does seem a little odd!

I've never realised how hard it is to read a ramble without any fullstops...

From how I understand quantum nature, the diffraction pattern exists because of the wave-particle duality of the photon. As it passes through the slits, it acts like a wave and so diffacts though the slits to give the pattern. During this time, the photon is a superposition of all the possible states. However, if you start watching one of the photons as it approachs the slit, it is no longer a superposition as you force it to be one single state. I think that is how it works in a hand-wavy not very accurate way...

Basically, you need to take each of the variable and alter them seperatly while keeping the other the same. Temperature is the easiest example; make up a lot of whatever solution your going to use (this will keep oxygen concetration, salinity and pH all constant), seperate them out into several different flask and then have each flask at a different temperature. Then you just do the same for each of the variants you want to test. All you need to remember is change one variable at a time and change it to a range of values aswell (i.e. to an experiment at 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40oC etc.)

First of all, you need to work out what reaction has occured; right out the chemical equation. Once you have that, it might help to come up with the mechanism for this reaction (or at least what is turning tinto what). Your right in that a catalysts provides the reaction with an alternative route to the product (and product to reagents; remember catalysts don't alter the position of equilibrium, just the rate at which you get there) which is lower in energy somehow. Once you have an idea how the reaction occurs without the catalyst, look at the structure of the catalyst and then think how it might help the reaction. If your teacher told you it had to do with shape, then I would believe him/her.

I agree with you that yes, other things in the Universe do indeed evolve (like stars, etc) but the term Theroy of Evolution applies to life. It does not explain how stars form or how life started. Chemical evolution is a seperate theory that is related to evolution yes but as Mr Skeptic has pointed out, you need something that self-replicates before evolution can occur.

Ok so techincally the anwser is yes and no. In the situation you outlined, no bond will form because the magnesium would simply transfer its electrons to the He ion to give a helium atom and a Mg2+ ion. It is theorecially possible that the Helium could form a dative bond to the Mg2+ ion but this would be incrediable weak

No, the term and theory of eveolution only concerns life and its changes etc. Abiogensis is the theory of how life began..they are not the same thing. You saying that chemical evoleved into life is that same as sayog evolution is worng coz its onlya theory. Although, thinking about it, it all really depends on what your definition of life is though.

While this is not a scientific journal paper, it shows that they were discovered in a comet in 2009. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17628-found-first-amino-acid-on-a-comet.html This paper here was published in the journal Advances in Space Research in 1995. While it is not direct evidence of amino acids in space, it highlights the possibility amino acids can be formed in the prescence of cosmic radiation present in open space. IN this experiment, they exposed methane, ethane and propane to various cosmic raditation and detected glycine (the simplist amino acid), alanine and some non-proteogenic amino acids. Formation of amino acid precursors in cometary ice environments by cosmic radiation : K. Kobayashia, T. Kasamatsua, T. Kanekoa, J. Koikeb, T. Oshimab, T. Saitoc, T. Yamamotoe, d and H. Yanagawaf

Well the origins of amino acids has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with evolution. That will refer to abiogensis not evolution. Experiments conducted using the early Earths atmosphere have been carried out many times with varying reaction initiators. And in each case, amino acids, nucelotides and a varitey of other complex organic molcules were observed. Amino acids have since been shown to be found on asteroids, other planets, in nebulae etc. So it appears that they are very easily accesible to be made in nature. I would say that the greater mystery is why life predominately uses L-amino acids and not D- given that the naturally occuring synthesis of amino acids is racemic so should have produced a mixture (I would be interested if anyone knows as to the reason for this btw). While I'm no evolutionary biologist (actually im a chemist), I'm making an educated guess at these next bits. You are assuming that the giraffe evolved its long next first and then realised..hang-on I can't drink now. The increase in neck length would have happened at the same time as the ability to bend the neck to drink...otherwise you would be right, they would have died out. Many evolutionary processes can occur at the same time..its not a linear progression. Where did you get that statistic about mutation occuring? Because that will depend greatly on the cell (prokayrot or eukaryot) and the type (heart, liver, etc). In human cells, and I beleive in certain strains of Sptreptomyces and E.coli, there is a mechanism by which the DNA is regually checked and repaird to make sure that it has the correct sequence. However, not all animals/cells have this ability to do that. In early/less complicated life, no such mechanisms exist and so mutations can occur rather frequently. Especially in very simple cells where teh DNA is simply in the cytoplasm and is not protected by a nucleus or proteins... Why do you think the chances of a mutation being good is so slim? Many Gramm-positive bacteria are now becoming resistant to loads of antibiotics; one example is Vancomycin. Vancomycin works by binding and holding VERY tightly to one of the essentiall 'bricks' that the bacteria need to make their cell membranes/walls (the D-Ala-D-Ala dipeptide). However, a lot of bacteria now have had a mutation that means one single atom in that brick has changed (from a nitrogen to an oxygen; one of the amides is replaced with an ester). This change makes Vancomycin 10,000 less effective, to the point where it is completely useless as an antibiotic....from the bacteria's point of view, that mutation is EXTREMLEY beneficial.

It appears that the general consencus is that its not a natural product. It would therefore appear that they are classing it as a sweetener and not a flavouring

Im a chemist and I would says for it to be natural, you would have to find it in nature somewhere. Even if its a modified natural product, I would say that its artifical as its not natural anymore...thats how I personally see it

I guess this is depending on how you are defining artificial. As StringJunky has pointed out, sucralose is based on a natural product and so might be considered natural even though you have altered the structure; its most probably a legal definition that is different to that used by scientists to describe a natural substance. I think also it is classed as a sweetener and not a flavoring.

The positive will be on the magnesium as it is more electropositve than bromine (or bromine is more electronegative depending on how you want to look at it).

No you haven't invented a perpetual motion device

It is indeed a type of chemical reaction. As is reduction, subsitution, elimination, decomposition

Well that would depend on what topics and areas of chemistry that you want to read up in. For organic chemistry at University level, then "organic chemistry" by Clayden, Greeves, Warren and Wothers is a must. For inorganinc at University, then Shriver and Atkins is a must as well.

That Metabolic pathway picture is very detailed!! Very good that one

Its generally not because some of the plastisers used to make the plastic often dissolve in ethanol so stronger spirits will mean become contaminated. It might also be a image thing...things sold in plastic bottles give the impression of being cheap and poor quaility.

I'm not sure if I've ever seen a study about PhD suicides to be honest. From my experience, undergraduates in maths and MORSE courses seem to have a few each year. I've also heard of a few deaths in chemistry resulting my accidents in the lab..but they don't really count here. I wonder if this is indeed true, that maybe medical students are more likely from the fact they have a hard enough degree to do, but also if their families put additional pressure on them to do well at it. PhD/Post doc is a very competitive world already, let alone with the cuts, but didn't the Government leave the science budget alone? Ok granted its not being increased for the next few years but at least its not being decreased.

In order to be able to predict more accurately, the program would eed to take into account the conformation so would need some modelling capabilities...might be a little tricky for a free-be on the internet!

AdiChemistry This website looks like it a copy-paste job from Wikipedia and "The Organic Chemistry Textbook" though. Not very good though, very basic information that doesnt have any up-to date references in it with new improvements. While the NMR-predicter is ok for simple molecules, it'l be no use for more complicated moleules. It also doesn't take into account the diasteroisomer difference. But, when your stuck with a compound...every little helps. Actually, I've just put the NMR of one of my compounds I've made into that NMR predictor. While it didn't get the hydrogen at -0.5ppm (not that I'd expect it too), it didn't get much of the others right. It doesn;t appear to like having aromatic rings in it.

Do you mean in a single cell, where do they come from? Or do you mean in the history of life...which ones came first?

If I remember rightly, almost all of the worlds supply of soya beans is actually grown using GM technology...but unfortunatly I can't find the reference

The smell of rotten eggs is actually hydrogen sulphide (H2S - a molecule with sulphur bonded to two hydrogen atoms)