MOBAFire's first Mini Guide Contest of Season 14 is here! Create or update guides for the 30 featured champions and compete for up to $200 in prizes! 🏆
I think so. but that is me. I doubt most will agree with that. molecules form...change...and decay....just like macro species do. to me that is in some ways what I would consider life. all biologics can be broken down to the most fundamental level to be inorganic elements and building blocks..the combination of their synthesis, growth, change, and decay is what leads to larger systems. if the larger system is life why isn't the smaller system?
EDIT: this viewpoint is more seen by physical chemistry and the laws of entropy.
EDIT: this viewpoint is more seen by physical chemistry and the laws of entropy.
Thanks to jhoijhoi for my signature!
Bioalchemist wrote:
I think so. but that is me. I doubt most will agree with that. molecules form...change...and decay....just like macro species do. to me that is in some ways what I would consider life. the combination of their synthesis, growth, change, and decay is what leads to larger systems.
<.<
molecules don't balance their own environment so that they remain as they are.
molecules don't reproduce themselves.
molecules don't simply decay. they are simply met with a more table possibility depending on energy avaiability.
otherwise, sorry to annoy you with such arguments, god allmighty.
Bioalchemist wrote:
if the larger system is life why isn't the smaller system?
i'll grab a brick right there and call it home. it will have a bed, a toilet and a kitchen. nothing too fancy.
Quoted:
all biologics can be broken down to the most fundamental level to be inorganic elements and building blocks..
by all means, Schrodinger was so wrong proposing the cat paradox. Quanta actually have a will of their own...!
MrCuddowls wrote:
Chemist my question is this
Is there anyway to test for Macroevolution in a lab?
I know that microevolution has been done in a lab, but I can't seem to find anything on macroevolution.
Cuddowls is gonna go crazy scientists on us creating leg monsters n **** :o
Have you as a scientist accomplished anything?
How is your workday? 9-5 or do you just suddenly come up with Stuff and think WHAT IF WE ADD THIS ENZYME*insert german slightly evil manic laughing here*
Ty MM and Blood for the sigs :3 | Rammus is comming back - heard it here first!
"Carrying"-guide | My reviewservice
"Carrying"-guide | My reviewservice
Assuming that our universe is a simulation a la Matrix, is there a way to conclusively prove that it is simulated and not real, barring glitches and interference from the administrators?
polsemanden that would be some scary **** if cuddowls started creating stuff like that lol.
I think I have. my first product developed at this company is a test for cancer that can be accomplished in approximately 30 minutes depending on the instrument used. during my graduate program I also advanced the understanding of an enzyme that has potential for industrial purposes to recycle waste into something more usable.
9-5 it is. I usually come in and post on here during my downtime while the instruments are running my material. sometimes I will think of random ideas at home but most of my experimental design ideas come from reading scientific text or random discussion between colleagues.
for me in my experience most of scientific discovery comes from controlled experiments designed through theory or previous data sets...than analyzing the results and looking for trends. these trends lead you to new experimental design...rinse...wash...repeat until you have your answer/product.
I think I have. my first product developed at this company is a test for cancer that can be accomplished in approximately 30 minutes depending on the instrument used. during my graduate program I also advanced the understanding of an enzyme that has potential for industrial purposes to recycle waste into something more usable.
9-5 it is. I usually come in and post on here during my downtime while the instruments are running my material. sometimes I will think of random ideas at home but most of my experimental design ideas come from reading scientific text or random discussion between colleagues.
for me in my experience most of scientific discovery comes from controlled experiments designed through theory or previous data sets...than analyzing the results and looking for trends. these trends lead you to new experimental design...rinse...wash...repeat until you have your answer/product.
Thanks to jhoijhoi for my signature!
Bioalchemist wrote:
^ lol well said.
EDIT: I hope you aren't suggesting I consider myself god pheyniex. hope that brick is nice and comfortable. quantum mechanics is still something to this day I can never fully grasp.
shoving aside my perspective of a diety being a projection of the human desire for knowledge, having the answer for such things requires a very broad and deep knowlege of the universe we live in (and, who knows, beyond).
I accept you are a creative person and eager to learn, but such things are hard to prove and if you are not disciplined about your thoughts its easy to jump to conclusions. and those get us nowhere.
i hope you keep working on it though. =3
You need to log in before commenting.
funding in the states revolves around different things depending on what sector you are talking about.
academic sector funding comes mainly through grant funding via the government. the projects that get grant money are greatly influenced therefore by two things: what is trendy and what will get the people in government more votes. therefore much of the research done by universities is directed to those projects that will get them funding..without funding..there is no research...for instance right now cancer research is very trendy so universities will try to relate most of their research towards cancer research so that the government will fund it.
the private sector of business is also motivated by trends but more so how to make a buck and what will sell. many times what sells is what is trendy but not always. if a drug they develop has the potential to provide a 'large target audience' with treatment: they will push funding to develop that project over one that might help only a few even if there is less product developed to help the few. the unfortunate truth about private sector development is that cures don't make as much money as treatments so treatments are more desirable to develop.
there is also of course private funding from private parties...this is usually money from rich families...which usually arises when someone within the family develops a disease or defect that they gain interest in because of it and want someone to fix it. this is actually where most of the 'non-trendy' research work comes out of.
personally when it comes to what is being researched currently in the biochemical world I find it to be a soup pot with a lot of ingredients that produce a ****py soup. cancer is the biggest research target in biochemistry followed up with green chemistry products that lead to energy production aka biofuels and algae research. because research is so driven by these trends everyone puts cancer on their project titles just to get funding even if they really aren't shooting for a cancer product or even if they really don't have the right people in place to accomplish anything. there are so many people trying to cure cancer and so much money put into it with very little advancement occuring. they really need to screen the people that are asking money better to get money to the people who can do the most with it over just dumping money at anything that says cancer on it.
hope that answers your question...I tend to ramble.