Weird scientific sentences - You know there are such (Feb/11/2009 )
scolix on Feb 11 2009, 11:06 PM said:
hobglobin on Feb 11 2009, 07:57 PM said:
"Will expected and unexpected non-target effects, and the New Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act, cause biological control of broom to fail in New Zealand?" A book chapter title, anyone can predict the content? 
I am sure it has something to do with an ongoing research by the wizarding community about the side effects due to use of certain elements to control the broom movement during Quidditch.
Quite right... laugh
The recent development in broom by inclusion of non traditional component, has many concerned. -perneseblue-
Trof on Feb 11 2009, 12:52 PM said:
I came across this line in one paper.
JH1 activation loop moves away from the JH2 domain, which is surprisingly consistent with what would be expected.
Like.. What?
Anyone got something weird to share too?
JH1 activation loop moves away from the JH2 domain, which is surprisingly consistent with what would be expected.
Like.. What?
Anyone got something weird to share too?
Here is another line:
"The remaining 15% of cell water interacts directly with biomolecular surfaces and is motionally retarded by a factor 15 +/- 3 on average...."
What is "retarded water"??? Any ideas?
-Wolverena-
Wolverena on Feb 12 2009, 03:50 PM said:
Trof on Feb 11 2009, 12:52 PM said:
I came across this line in one paper.
JH1 activation loop moves away from the JH2 domain, which is surprisingly consistent with what would be expected.
Like.. What?
Anyone got something weird to share too?
JH1 activation loop moves away from the JH2 domain, which is surprisingly consistent with what would be expected.
Like.. What?
Anyone got something weird to share too?
Here is another line:
"The remaining 15% of cell water interacts directly with biomolecular surfaces and is motionally retarded by a factor 15 +/- 3 on average...."
What is "retarded water"??? Any ideas?
It should be more or less immobilised water in the cell, due to interactions with structures and molecules (e.g. hydration wrap around proteins, don't know the englsih term for it).
BTW:
"Sweep the house with blossed broom in May/sweep the head of the household away."
-hobglobin-
Here is another line:
"The remaining 15% of cell water interacts directly with biomolecular surfaces and is motionally retarded by a factor 15 +/- 3 on average...."
What is "retarded water"??? Any ideas?
"The remaining 15% of cell water interacts directly with biomolecular surfaces and is motionally retarded by a factor 15 +/- 3 on average...."
What is "retarded water"??? Any ideas?
hahaha......did you get these lines from: retarded et al. 2009, journal of retarded scientists ?
-Curtis-
Curtis on Feb 12 2009, 12:50 PM said:
Here is another line:
"The remaining 15% of cell water interacts directly with biomolecular surfaces and is motionally retarded by a factor 15 +/- 3 on average...."
What is "retarded water"??? Any ideas?
"The remaining 15% of cell water interacts directly with biomolecular surfaces and is motionally retarded by a factor 15 +/- 3 on average...."
What is "retarded water"??? Any ideas?
hahaha......did you get these lines from: retarded et al. 2009, journal of retarded scientists ?
It is a paper about cell water dynamics, published in PNAS. I would assume that it is a good paper, otherwise it might not have been published in that journal....but it sounds funny.
-Wolverena-
You may reconsider your appreciation of PNAS papers. Some (not all, though) paper get published because the PI is a member of some kind of PNAS. Doesn't mean those papers are not good, but they certainly get accepted more easily!
-madrius1-
Wolverena on Feb 12 2009, 09:50 AM said:
Trof on Feb 11 2009, 12:52 PM said:
I came across this line in one paper.
JH1 activation loop moves away from the JH2 domain, which is surprisingly consistent with what would be expected.
Like.. What?
Anyone got something weird to share too?
JH1 activation loop moves away from the JH2 domain, which is surprisingly consistent with what would be expected.
Like.. What?
Anyone got something weird to share too?
Here is another line:
"The remaining 15% of cell water interacts directly with biomolecular surfaces and is motionally retarded by a factor 15 +/- 3 on average...."
What is "retarded water"??? Any ideas?
I would have been more shocked if they had written 'emotionally retarded' instead but it would've made more sense....
-casandra-
casandra on Feb 12 2009, 09:42 PM said:
Wolverena on Feb 12 2009, 09:50 AM said:
Trof on Feb 11 2009, 12:52 PM said:
I came across this line in one paper.
JH1 activation loop moves away from the JH2 domain, which is surprisingly consistent with what would be expected.
Like.. What?
Anyone got something weird to share too?
JH1 activation loop moves away from the JH2 domain, which is surprisingly consistent with what would be expected.
Like.. What?
Anyone got something weird to share too?
Here is another line:
"The remaining 15% of cell water interacts directly with biomolecular surfaces and is motionally retarded by a factor 15 +/- 3 on average...."
What is "retarded water"??? Any ideas?
I would have been more shocked if they had written 'emotionally retarded' instead but it would've made more sense....
But only in a psychology journal about men's psychology
-hobglobin-
hobglobin on Feb 12 2009, 04:02 PM said:
casandra on Feb 12 2009, 09:42 PM said:
Wolverena on Feb 12 2009, 09:50 AM said:
Trof on Feb 11 2009, 12:52 PM said:
I came across this line in one paper.
JH1 activation loop moves away from the JH2 domain, which is surprisingly consistent with what would be expected.
Like.. What?
Anyone got something weird to share too?
JH1 activation loop moves away from the JH2 domain, which is surprisingly consistent with what would be expected.
Like.. What?
Anyone got something weird to share too?
Here is another line:
"The remaining 15% of cell water interacts directly with biomolecular surfaces and is motionally retarded by a factor 15 +/- 3 on average...."
What is "retarded water"??? Any ideas?
I would have been more shocked if they had written 'emotionally retarded' instead but it would've made more sense....
But only in a psychology journal about men's psychology
Yeah, the kind that you read, right dr H?
-casandra-
madrius1 on Feb 12 2009, 02:58 PM said:
You may reconsider your appreciation of PNAS papers. Some (not all, though) paper get published because the PI is a member of some kind of PNAS. Doesn't mean those papers are not good, but they certainly get accepted more easily!
I don't disagree....I have actually seen it. But I still would hope that most of the papers in the journal are good papers.
-Wolverena-