don’t forget to make the space non-breaking :D

… this sounds absurd to me, at least as stated wrt the enzymes “dissolving” the floaters. Your body does not like foreign proteases floating around. I am also skeptical that the enzymes would survive denaturing and pepsin et al. in the stomach and duodenum (empty stomach or not), get absorbed intact, and somehow not get inactivated by the immune system (again, rogue protease = bad). Not to say that your floaters weren’t reduced (though the brain sometimes will just learn to ignore them) or even that the supplement wasn’t responsible via metabolites. Just, action of an intact enzyme itself seems unlikely. Corrections welcome; I’m going off my gut here and am not a biologist.

I know of a manager who unironically believes this for internal corporate technical reports (ours are academic style and more rigorous and formal than they need be…). It’s not quite to this extent, but I’ve overheard conversations where the manager apparently can’t fathom why their subordinates are incapable of double digits over a year.

Do not power law fit your process data for predictive models. No. Stop. Put the keyboard down. Your model will almost certainly fail to extrapolate beyond the training range. Instead, think for at least two seconds about the chemistry and the process, maybe review your kinetics textbook, and only then may you fit to a physics-based model for which you will determine proper statistical significance. Poor fit? Too bad, revise your assumptions or reconsider whether your “data” are really just noise.

Always run qNMR with an internal standard if you are using it to determine purity. And, as a corollary, do not ignore unidentified peaks. Yes, even if it “has always been that way”.

DOE models almost certainly tell you less than you think they do, especially when cross-terms are involved, or when the effects are categorical, or when running a fractional factorial design…

A WAT. Y THO

The aspie-to-chemistry pipeline is strong ;)

Also, if you want another categorical rabbit hole and have a decent ear, check out the IPA for transcribing pronunciations

Counterpoint: my lease says no :) Can’t have shit on my balcony because it “mars the aesthetic of the exterior”

It’s not that the predictions are wrong or anything, it’s just that they typically go something like “teehee this will be interesting” because caution is for the crayon-eaters in EHS.

I suppose that makes LANL and co gender R&D labs.

Ugh I had an older colleague, a PhD organic chemist, who was absolutely convinced that soy would make me (m) infertile. I ordered tofu once when out to lunch and he would not stop warning me to “be careful” and to be mindful of starting a family and “you know those studies.” When I mentioned that the consensus was at best inconclusive and most likely there is no such link, he said that no, “they” definitely showed that excess soy is bad and that he worried about my reproductive health. Like dude even if eating tofu did cause reproductive health issues, mine is none of your goddamn business. On the other hand, the same guy is also convinced that BPA (another estrogen mimic used esp. in certain plastics) concerns are a total hoax because “they did bad science because their sample containers had BPA in them and it leached into the urine samples giving false positive.” Also something about the only evidence of it binding like estrogen was that someone glanced at a crystal structure and halfassedly thought it looked like it might fit and rolled with it for career reasons. Like, I don’t know, man, maybe a couple studies used containers made with BPA, but most probably didn’t. I haven’t read them, but I know you didn’t, either. Also, you’re literally a petrochemist, you know BPA is mostly used in polycarbonates, and lab plastics, especially for analytical work, are mostly polypropylene or polyethylene designed to avoid exactly this kind of leaching. Honestly.

Tbf sometimes it’s hard even for organic chemists because the authors will just put an abbreviation of a non-standard variation of the name of some named reaction over the reaction arrow and then proceed to draw the product in a completely different conformation from the starting material, leaving you trying to work out which carbon is which in the world’s most annoying game of spot-the-difference (or in many cases spot-the-similarity).

Maybe incorrect rebracketing? It’s supposed to be be-inhalten, not bein-halten. Otherwise maybe a writing style thing…

rip dubna, miratum got you beat

Ya but the moon covers at best only about 10 ppm of the sky’s area so given a random direction within the hemisphere defined by the sky in which the moon is visible and traveling in a straight line you have a roughly 99.9990% chance of missing so that’s understandable really.

GFP is often combined with other genes of interest in biotech to provide an easy way to check whether the genes of interest are successfully incorporated/active. Glowy cells = successful, dark = unsuccessful/inactive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reporter_gene

Correct. The article in question reports that boiling specifically hard water results in the coprecipitation of some portion of the microplastics with calcium carbonate. The precipitate then settles out, and the depleted bulk solution can be decanted to separate it from the MPs.

Counterpoint: advisor said no.

“Just use Word, everyone else does. I have never heard of this latex thing, so must be just some trendy useless overengineered software that does Word’s job but worse. Word can track changes just fine, and you can leave comments.” proceeds to strikethrough, highlight, and inline comment everything instead of using either of those features “I want to read what you wrote, not fight technology” proceeds to email you three separate times after forgetting to attach v28 about how a graphic looks wrong because Word ate it

I’m more a fan of “that one fused 7 and 6 memebered ring diazacycle that has that guanidine sorta thing going on that people use as a strong base when their molecule is too much of a coward to handle a real base, shit, the fuck is it called… a oops it’s not guanidine, the fuck is the nitrogen version of an ester called, yeah that”, personally.