LucidDreamer

You can probaly find a bunch of proteins that meet your criteria by looking at the proteins associated with Cyclic AMP and other 2nd messenger systems.

Measuring stoichometricaly basically involves adding the right amount of each component so that you don't end up with an excess of one left over. I believe the formula for this reaction is: KCl + NaNO3 ----> KNO3 + NaCl So its a basic 1 to 1 ratio where you add one molecule of potassium chloride to one molecule of sodium nitrate to get 1 potassium nitrate molecule (and one table salt molecule). But since KCl is a lighter molecule than NaNO3 you need less of it, as far as mass(or weight) goes. KCl has a molecular weight of 74.551 and NaNO3 has a molecular weight of 84.980. So the ratio of KCl to NaNO3 is .877. So you would need 87% as much KCl as you need NaNO3. But it’s been awhile since I did that so maybe YT will correct me if im wrong.

I think what you have mentioned is the basis for calibrating a machine. Each and every scientific instrument is going to have known and unkown variables that create interference. I believe what you do when conducting a specifive heat capacity experiment is to use a known standard, water which has a specific heat capacity of one. By comparing your substate of say ammoinia to your standard you can factor out the interference of the metal which absorbs some of the heat. I think.

Wow, tough question. Its not likely that anyone on this forum (even as smart as some of them are) would know that information off hand, but i could be wrong. For that kind of information I usually use PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi or scifinder, which can be found in most university libraries. Of course, if you’re asking this question there is a good chance you already familiar with both of these things. I would also suggest using Boolean operators liberally to save time. Just for kicks I ran a search in pubmed and came up with this link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=10874046 <--- It has to do with chloroplast ribosomes and not yeast, sorry. But, the researchers apparently used both electrophoresis and mass spectrometry so maybe it might help. Good luck.

I think the best use of our time and energy right now is to continue sending out probes to other locations in our solar system. These non-manned missions are relatively inexpensive and give us a wealth of data about things outside our planet. I think the manned missions while being super-cool are dangerous, expensive, and provide a poor benefit/cost ratio. Similarly the seti program is probably futile as well. It’s like searching for a particular piece of hay in a giant space-sized haystack. I don't know the exact numbers of this, but I have heard the chances of intercepting these waves are astronomically small. Assuming that we won't create some kind of wormhole or a light-speed hyper-drive device enabling us to beat the speed of light, sending out star-trek like missions to explore and search for life is impractical. However, I do think that we have a good chance of finding intelligent life eventually. Some day we might posses the technology to transport ourselves at near light-speed. That coupled with bio-friendly spacecraft, genetic engineering, and cryogenics could allow us to colonize other planets. Man's civilization will form an ever-increasing web across the galaxy and the universe. Eventually we will bump into a neighboring alien civilization if we don't destroy ourselves first. After all that’s a long time off.

Interesting question. As Aardvark mentioned a rested mind has a healthy supply of neurotransmitters while a worn out mind has a depleted supply of them, making it more difficult to perform any mental task, including visualization. Also, the dreaming brain and the woken mind have different ratios of neurotransmitters. I believe that while you’re asleep you have greater concentrations of active serotonin and melatonin, and possibly reduced amounts of active dopamine. There also seems to be some sort of switching mechanism that switches the brains concentration from the senses to a sort of inner reality. After you just woke up you might have still been in a sort of pseudo-sleep state that increases your ability to visualize. Btw, I have also noticed an increased ability to visualize after I just wake up.

I can see your point, but this is a science forum not a philosophy forum. Nothing that I see is real its only my minds recreation-a sort of mental hologram. I understand and agree with this, however in order to accomplish anything, things like color, velocity, force, and time need to be treated like real forces. If I want to harvest a wheat field I need to take into account things like the above forces to construct a tractor. Other wise you will have a bunch of wise men sitting around sporting beards, wearing long flowing robes, talking about whether the wheat, time, or velocity really exist all the while starving to death.

I'm sitting at my computer right now but just hours earlier my nephew was sitting at this exact same spot. My girlfriend has sat here, as have many friends and relatives-maybe a couple of dozen people in all. Are we all meshed together into some kind of mutated bio blob? No. We are not because the moments that we sat here are separated by time. I ate pepperoni pizza earlier for dinner. By now some of that pepperoni has worked its way into my system and become part of my body. At some point that pepperoni was part of a pigs body. Are the atoms that make up those pepperonis somehow existing in both our bodies? No. The point that those atoms existed in the pig’s body and the point at which the atoms exist in mine are separated by time. I can't see gravity, but I can see the effects of gravity by observing the planets circle the sun or an acorn fall from a tree. Time may not be a concrete object you can hold in your hand but it's something that exist, something that effects everything around us. I only have to look at my grandmother's face to know that time is a very real phenomenon. The science that launches spacecraft, produces radio waves, and propels automobiles is built around equations that include time. We know that those equations are right, and that time does truly exist because that technology works. Take out time or gravity and classical physics collapses. Questioning whether time exist is like asking how do I know I exist or how do I know that everyone else isn’t just a figment of my imagination. These are questions of philosophy, not science. Sure time, like all these words and ideas, is simply a construct of my nervous system and not the real thing. But time is as real as any other thing that exist within our limited perceptions and I suggest we don't disown it.

Animals use oxygen as a powerful electron acceptor in the final stage of the electron transport chain. The electron transport chain is a series of protein complexes that pass the electron down the line until it reaches oxygen. The purpose of this is to create energy for the cells many chemical reactions. Plants use CO2 as a source of carbon to make 6-carbon sugars to store energy. These two gases are used for different purposes in biological systems. Some bacteria species use nitrogen instead of oxygen as the final carbon acceptor, so you could consider changing it to nitrogen because it might be scientifically more plausible. The others suggestion that CO2 could just be used as a source of O2 might also be possible. However I do have a suggestion that might solve some of your problems. Not only would the environment of Venus make it difficult for humans to exist it would also make it difficult for them to grow or raise any form of food. If you want them to breath carbon dioxide why not make them plant-like. This would solve two of your problems at once. Your genetically engineered humans would breathe carbon dioxide, using the oxygen in their electron-transport chain and using the carbon in a photosynthetic process to create a fuel source. They would likely have green skin because it is saturated with chlorophyll and require large amounts of water. They might also have a pre-lung filtration organ to filter out the nasty gases the others mentioned. I'm not sure how your genetically engineered humans would deal with the incredible pressure and intense heat of Venus. I would suggest you take the easy way out, having your humans establish some sort of environmental change system to convert Venus’s very inhospitable environment into a more pleasant one. If you make your humans too bizarre your readers will no longer relate to them. Well anyway, good luck. Hope to see your book on the shelves of Barnes and Nobles.

I believe that the question was not talking about the speed difference of different atoms within one substance, but instead its asking if there is a difference between the speeds of atoms within two different substances. For instance, lets consider three different beakers: one contains air, one contains water, and one is filled with salt. If we just looked at the beaker filled with water molecules we would find that the molecules of H2O within the beaker were moving at different speeds. Water molecule one is moving at 1mile per hour, molecule 2 is moving at 2 miles per hour, and molecule 3 is moving at 3 miles per hour(completely unrealistic speeds). The average speed of the beaker is 2 miles per hour and every other beaker of water at the same temperature and pressure has the same average speed of H2O molecules. However if you compared the average speed of the water molecules to the solid salt molecules you would find them moving slower at an average of 1 mile per hour and the beaker's average molecule speed would be higher at 3 miles per hour. Larger molecules move more slowly at the same temperature. This is because to contain the same amount of energy they have to move more slowly. Molecules of different states move at different speeds: gas>liquid>solid The molecules of the air im breathing now are moving more quickly than the atoms of the chair im sitting in and the molecules of O2 that im inhaling are moving faster than the CO2 that im exhaling.