Language: English
Tags:
comment nobel  comment  nobel prize  nobel  pedal  predictions martin  predictions  prize predictions  prize  protein  side
Rate this Feed

Feed Details and Statistics

## remarking on the unremarkable

Last Build Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 23:18:45 +0000

Comment on why is the left bike pedal left-hand threaded? by sam

Wed, 21 Feb 2018 23:18:45 +0000

Walterl, your understanding of physics seems to be a bit off. I urge you to take a partially threaded bike pedal and try to screw it in using first a pedal wrench and then by simply turning the pedal. You'll find that turning the pedal has the same---not the opposite---effect as the wrench. Ball bearings don't reverse the rotation force.

Comment on why is the left bike pedal left-hand threaded? by Walterl

Mon, 19 Feb 2018 05:20:39 +0000

Well I think you have all been led astray. When the Wright brothers found the left pedal was coming undone, I’m sure that the pedal was not rotating around the pedal spindle, with a ball bearing race - rather , it would have just been a bushing. Bushings have relatively high friction, so imagine the bushing to be effectively seized. The pedal would now undo, as you rote the crank forward, whilst keeping the pedal flat. This is analogous to putting a Pedal spanner on the crank spindle and rotating the crank forward. Now if you replace the bushing, with a ball bearing, look what happens to the little balls. Viewing from the right, as the pedal stays flat, and the crank is rotating forwards ( clockwise) the ball surface contacting the pedal body is moving in one direction, but the surface on the spindle side is moving in the opposite direction. Imagine a bicycle wheel - when the front of the wheel is rotating to the ground, the back of the wheel is rotating upwards. So now the force of rotation on the pedal spindle, is opposite to that when a bushing is used. So now with a bearing , a right sided pedal is self tightening, until the bearing siezes, then it winds the pedal off !

Comment on 2017 nobel prize predictions by Joe M

Fri, 06 Oct 2017 14:01:24 +0000

Another year of "the dude" not winning is a good year for discovery-based research and a rejection of those who shamelessly claim what's not their original discovery.

Comment on 2017 nobel prize predictions by Dyche

Tue, 03 Oct 2017 12:17:15 +0000

Congrats on the correct Physics call.

Comment on 2017 nobel prize predictions by sam

Mon, 02 Oct 2017 17:25:48 +0000

Joe M, I agree with your points.

Comment on 2017 nobel prize predictions by Gabbar Singh

Fri, 29 Sep 2017 17:27:59 +0000

Ronald Drever's death, while a tragedy for those who knew and worked with him, brought peace to a man who went from the pinnacle of experimental physics to the depths of dementia. The "third" seat should be given to the 1000+ members of the LSC who have worked for an (estimated) 10,000 man years to make LIGO a success.

Comment on 2017 nobel prize predictions by Joe M

Fri, 29 Sep 2017 02:22:09 +0000

I still think cell adhesion has a good chance. R. Hynes, E. Ruoslahti for integrins and M. Takeichi for cadherins.

Comment on 2017 nobel prize predictions by Joe M

Fri, 29 Sep 2017 02:12:02 +0000

The microbiologists deserve credit for the Crispr discovery. The Nobel is for an initial discovery, and not so much for tweaking a system to make it applicable. The Nobel is not intended to award shameless self promotion either.

Comment on 2017 nobel prize predictions by Martin

Wed, 27 Sep 2017 02:11:46 +0000

I feel that in this year The Nobel Prize in Chemistry will be awarded for FOLDING PROTEINS and CHAPERONES : Hartl and Hurwich, maybe Ellis. I give 90% for this option.

Comment on 2017 nobel prize predictions by Ted

Tue, 26 Sep 2017 08:48:08 +0000

I will make a long-shot prediction for the chemistry prize--long-shot because 1. no one seems to be predicting this guy except me, and 2. his work is a bit on the applications side for the Nobel; the committee seems to prefer fundamental discoveries over new methods and strategies for solving problems. The prediction is Peter G. Schultz, for doing TWO things: 1. Pioneering the strategy of screening molecular libraries--creating a large community of different molecules in the same test-tube (or on the same solid surface) plus a strategy for fishing out and identifying the ones which do what you want, AND 2. Using this strategy to expand the genetic codes (protein-vocabularies) of many unicellular organisms, to include unnatural amino acids (nonsense/stop codons code for the unnatural amino acids), enabling protein chemists to probe, or change, protein function by programming the cell to incorporate a lab-synthesized amino acid, whose side chain includes an unnatural moiety, into any chosen site of any protein of interest. If you use an unnatural amino acid whose side-chain contains an environment-sensitive probe, you can obtain info about the site where you direct the amino acid to, and if you use an unnatural amino acid whose side-chain does something, you can change the protein's activity--for instance, you can start with a protein which binds a certain sequence of DNA, and make a new protein which CUTS that sequence. Or, you can incorporate bio-orthogonal moieties into two proteins and link them together in a very specific way. Lots of applications for basic protein-chemistry and for applications! The best way to make, for instance, antibodies with two different binding sites.

Comment on 2017 nobel prize predictions by Martin

Mon, 25 Sep 2017 12:27:00 +0000

Nobel Prize in chemistry ? Maybe Sir E. Southern for southern-blotting (1/2) and Charpentier and Doudna for CRIPSR-cas 9 (1/2) ?

Comment on 2017 nobel prize predictions by Me

Mon, 25 Sep 2017 01:16:42 +0000

For CRISPR, there is a heavy pack of pretenders. Maybe they could give the Physiology prize to Mojica, Horvath and Barrangou for the discovery and demonstration of the CRISPR immunity, and the Chemistry prize to Doudna, Charpentier, Zhang (Church) for harnessing it in genome editing.

Comment on 2017 nobel prize predictions by Martin

Fri, 22 Sep 2017 09:04:10 +0000

And I think that The Nobel Prize for CRIPSR-cas9 will be awarded in Phyeiology or Medicine (No chemistry): Philippe Horvath, Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer Doudna.

Comment on 2017 nobel prize predictions by Martin

Thu, 21 Sep 2017 19:12:16 +0000

Prof Andrzej Trautman first with Ivor Robinaon (King's College London) to proved that gravitational waves are real phenomena and we can to measure this waves. Andrzej Trautman are 84 years old.

Comment on 2017 nobel prize predictions by Martin

Thu, 21 Sep 2017 18:56:10 +0000

I think that The Nobel Prize in Physics for garvitational waves shuld got prof. Andrzej Trautman from University of Warsaw, Poland.

Comment on 2017 nobel prize predictions by sam

Thu, 21 Sep 2017 17:39:11 +0000

Oh, I missed that. Sorry to hear that.

Comment on 2017 nobel prize predictions by Kagayaki

Thu, 21 Sep 2017 01:43:44 +0000

I have to say that Prof.Ronald Dreve has passed away this year...

Comment on update on scope room dustiness by Everyday Scientist » reduce scope room dustiness

Wed, 13 Sep 2017 23:40:32 +0000

[…] by Everyday Scientist » update on scope room dustiness — August 26, 2016 […]

Comment on why is the left bike pedal left-hand threaded? by Paul

Mon, 07 Aug 2017 14:54:54 +0000

I feel that the pedal manufacturers are missing the whole point, I get the reverse thread for fixing the pedals what is annoying to me is that they don't do it for the bearing cones and one always goes loose and one always goes tight at the bearings. simple - reverse the thread for the cones also one the left side so it rotates it's setting better to stay without the need for constant tweaking or stripped threads trying to get the pedal to hold tolerance.

Comment on sonicator rules by Pankaj Jha

Thu, 03 Aug 2017 04:25:46 +0000

Dear, could you tell me what is the water level limit in the Sonicator.

Comment on plasma cleaner review by sam

Sun, 04 Jun 2017 05:19:17 +0000

Hi Shruthi. I don't know, it must be that the surface charge of the glass is not wrong. Or there's no gunk for the protein to stick to. :) I haven't encountered that problem, as it typically seems that GFP or other proteins will easily stick to an unpassivated surface, even plasma cleaned. But maybe you need to try first coating with PLL or laminin?

Comment on plasma cleaner review by Shruthi

Fri, 02 Jun 2017 03:29:02 +0000

Hi, I have been using plasma cleaning lately for my coverslides to remove fluorescent background and yes, it cleans well and leaves no background. However, I find it hard for getting my protein (mCherry) stick to the slides after plasma treatment. Any thoughts?

Comment on ti-1250 by Wes

Thu, 27 Apr 2017 06:12:33 +0000

Someone had put a free stuff sign out and this calculator was just laying on a shelf inside its original box took the old battery and put a new one in and it powered up

Comment on review of Point Grey camera for microscopy by Roberto

Thu, 20 Apr 2017 20:34:07 +0000

For 500 bucks, it sure is cool as it sounds!