SurfSciGuy

Just like to say that I am totally against ninjas, as they are merely assassins who kill for money - they have no honour. As for gay marriage - If the state sees fit to bestow priveleges on individual s who choose to get married then those priveleges should be open to all citizens regardless of sexual orientation if the society is to be fair, free and liberal. As for Victorian intolerance - it was a mixture of a reaction against the headonistic ways of the previous regimes and a rise to prominance of the US and it's puritanical culture. Victorian society becomes more and more intraverted as the years go by and imported ideaology from the likes of Kellog compounded this (can't believe the guy invented cornflakes believing they stopped masturbation). Victorian society also saw the rise of the middle class to the social forefront - traditionally a much more conservative group than the upper classes (who often continued their shenanigans anyway e.g. Prince Edward).

mmm, I think you might get people confused using the term "outer realms" that indicates to me a molecular orbital with high quantum attributes.

Found this on the web, might be of some use: American Autoimmune Related Diseases Association, Inc. International. 2 affiliated groups. Founded 1991. Mutual support and education for patients with any type of autoimmune disease. Advocacy, referrals to support groups, literature, conferences. Newsletter. Supports research, physician symposium. Assistance in starting groups. Dues $24. WRITE: American Autoimmune Related Diseases Assn. 22100 Gratiot Ave. East Detroit, MI 48021-2227 CALL: 586-776-3900 FAX: 586-776-3903 E-MAIL: aarda@aol.com WEBSITE: http://www.aarda.org

What are the outer realms of molecular orbitals? The reason pi bonds cannot freely move like sigma bonds is because they are created from atomic orbitals that have highly defined directionality, unlike sigma states, which have more freedom to move as the atomic orbitals have less defined directionality. It must be born in mind that the wavefunction distributions have an aribtrary cut-off point and that the movement issue is not absolute. Also, no bond between two atoms can bend - this would require a third party.

No they're not.

Surely Atlantis sank beneath the waves without a trace. Unless someone hasn't told me something Ireland is still above sea-level... And as for linking Dogger Bank with Ireland - that is incredibly tenuous, especially as it's coming from a geographer, not an Gael or Celtic Historian. I hope the book does not rely on the supposition.

Why was chemistry the wrong choice? Surely it provides you with a very good grounding to enter into forensic science? A PhD is very different from formal, taught education (well, in the UK at least). You have to research, and that means doing stuff no-one has done before and becoming an expert in that particular subject - you have to be committed and enjoy it. PhD's in forensics are usually done on the job, basically after you gain your master's you'll end up working for law enforcement (or even a private contractor) where you will be doing your own research as well as forensics work - not easy.

I guess it must be different in the states, but I found it relatively easy to get work in industry after two years of study (I worked for Avocado research chemicals doing large scale manual synthesis after my second year). What exactly are you looking for? If you're trying to get a temporary research position in industry I'd forget it without direct university help. You should be looking for some work in production, QC or even the business/admin side (knowledge of how the business works is also very useful).

Well it all goes down on your transcript, which can be asked for by potential employers and other educational establishments. Most top unis have a requirement for some diversity in the study programmes to make up credits for the next stage of the degree course. I, for instance, could not have progressed to from 1st to 2nd year without taking subsidiary modules. Obviously I prioritised my chemistry modules as I needed good marks in those, but I was still exposed to teaching from other disciplines, which aided my overall intellectual development. Scientists should have a broad grasp of the philosophy and history of science and should be able to appreciate the advances made by the scientific community at large, not just in a specific subject area. I think the best way to acheive this is through creating a broader learning base within higher education whether it be through offering subsidiary courses or inclusion of other topics into the syllabus (such as ethics and the history of science). I'm glad that UK institutions are final instituting these kind of reforms on their degree programmes. Oh and there is also the option of Joint Honours as well.

If you disagree with something - construct an argument that is cogent and get support for it - then lobby the powers that be to change it.

I think it's a condition, artherosclerosis is the disease, but the definitions are blurry. Energy "produces" bonds? wtf? Because time as we define it did not exist before the beginning of the universe. By the use of a wet fish, a large box and the vast amount of experimental evidence that supports the quantum view of the universe. Not when you put actualities into the equation. Sometimes A=C can be counter-intuitive. Are you talking about the wave function? If so it is the probability distribution of a particle (usually an electron) above a minimum probability (e.g. everything with above a 95% probability of finding an electron is inside the distribution and everything lower is outside). I thought it had an even number of neutrons. Ammonia dissolves in water to form ammonium and a hydroxyl ion. NH3 + H20 => NH4+ + OH- this reduces the number of free protons in the solution thus increasing the pH. Answered your own question there. Be very careful, I think you mean that when a photon excites an electron in a certain atomic orbital it can change orbit. The reason why this does not occur with everything is that the whole system is quantised and that means thresholds have to be reached (i.e. you need certain amounts of energy to excite electrons into different states). A lot of excitations that are studied require UV or X-ray photons - however there are many electron excitations going on all around you, everywhere. A photon is a quantised "packet" of light - light is electromagnetic radiation (gamma rays are light and hence are electromagnetic radiation (or vice versa)). Photon pockets?? I think the french invented it. CuSO4(aq) + 2 NaHCO3(aq) => CuCO3(s) + Na2SO4(aq) + CO2(g) + H2O The green solid is copper carbonate. That isn't a question

But that doesn't neccessarily mean they are good at fighting. Also do you mean "strength of 10 men, at night" or "strength of 10 men at night"?

My maths skills are poor. The most useful maths for me is calculus, as a physical chemist it is by far and away the most applicable area of mathmatics to my subject.

Again this is all harking back to mating for the "good of society". I really want to know what people think this is? I agree that it is unwise to bring children into this world that you cannot support financially, but I dispute any notion that people of "lower class" should not have children because they would be increasing the "lower class" or that people of said class are somehow genetically inferior as opposed to being the losers in our particular socio-political system. This is just denying class mobility which is very evident in our societies. Our social "class" system in the western world is based on the ability to earn money - as far as I am aware there is no gene that codes for "earning money" and as there are myriad ways in our capitalist societies to earn money I'm not sure one could ascribe it to a meaningfully small set of personality traits, let alone genetic characteristics. The other fact is that western societies need more children, we have an ageing population, which will become an increased social and financial burden especially if we have a dwindling number of individuals entering the working population at the other end. Discouraging individuals from having children would be a socially irresponsible venture at this juncture, regardless of intent. Of course we should encourage people to think before they bring children into the world - it is only fair on the children - but we should not, as a society, attempt to influence individuals to never have children (or only to mate with certain individuals) based on a set of assumed principals, which have no valid pretext. Effectively we are blaiming individuals for being poor and ignorant rather than seeing this as a failure of society as a whole. Humans are constantly adapting to their environment (or adapting their environment to them - we are not the only species that does this). I see no reason why we have assume that the only way for human progression is through the selection of certain genotypes. I would consider it a strength of our species that we are allowed to keep our gene pool artificially large with modern medicine - certain negative or disease traits might turn out to have positive effects in the future and may lead to the continued survival of our species.

Bringing a pregancy to term poses serious risks of fatal complications for the female - surely we should allow women the chance to decided whether to take those risks or not? Given that as a society we provide only one route of ensuring 100% against conception and that is abstinancy, which is a) not a realistic expectation of all individuals and b) denies women sexual equality with men. No to the first one. possibly yes to the second one (however as the point I made above is that it is the woman who bares the risks not the man so maybe her opinion carries more weight). I agree that abortion is not a good thing, I argue that it is a neccessary evil in a society where we wish to promote equality.

My fave composer is Mahler so I have a soft spot for him (the 3rd is beautiful and the 8th is just gob-smacking). Dvorak and Holst are fantastic, although I heard recently on Radio 3 some of Holst's earlier work (pre-planets) and despite the euligising of the commentator I thought some of it was a bit duff.

My advice is do maths as well - it's a big lie that you can do chemistry at college without maths. I'd just like to say that not all chemistry is synthesis, I'm a chemist and I do spectroscopy and atomic adsorption (of a kind). Things every chemist has to know are Thermodynamics and Kinetics (i.e. what makes reactions go) these subjects are usually taught as physical chemistry, but at the end of the day if you don't know why reactions go then you're a bit stuffed in whatever field of chemistry you choose. I'd heartily recommend any of Peter Atkins' books - they all cover topics that highlight underlying physical concepts in the chemical sciences and are important reading for all chemical scientists.

I'd go for Berlioz, Mahler and Bruckner myself - I think they understood the true power of an orchestra (well, they write good trombone parts so they must be the best!). Don't get me wrong, Rachmaninov was a superb composer who wrote many fine orchestral pieces, but his forte was the piano (ho ho!) and I don't think he was as strong an orchestral composer as the three guys I've mentioned above - but this is my personal preference.

To be fair it's all to do with porn. Most heterosexual males perceptions of lesbianism are based on "lesbian" porno - which is designed for the heterosexual male market, not on actual lesbian sexual relations. Men's idea of male homosexuality is often based on the thought of some other bloke sticking his tonga into your bum, which to a heterosexual male seems like a deeply unpleasant experience - most heterosexual men have probably not seen much gay porn. Basically Lesbianism is "sanitised" and depersonalised by the sex industry to sell to the average straight guy (the biggest market), whereas male homosexuality has not enjoyed this dubious marketing make-over (probably explains why opinion amongst women is divided). Of course I am glibbly generalising but it's probably kinda true.

I can think of better guys to talk orchestration with than old Rachie.

Just let me finish my perpetual motion machine and I'll get onto the flawless testing right away! I'm not sure by what you mean by "guess the answer" - if you mean working it out by deductive reasoning rather than use of acquired knowledge I'd argue that that is exactly what we should be testing for, not eliminating.