In a typical bacterial cell the membrane potential across the inner membrane is –0.15 V. The protonmotive force is –21.2 kJ mol-1 at 25°C . If the pH in the periplasmic space is 6.35 what is the pH in the cytoplasm?
a) between 6.40 and 6.69
b) between 6.70 and 6.99
c) between 7.00 and 7.29
d) between 7.30 and 7.59
e) between 7.60 and 7.89
Lewis Carroll’s Alice would have had trouble distinguishing reality from Wonderland had she been with me on the Sunday after Thanksgiving as I watched a TSA officer confiscate my father’s aftershave at the airport in Burlington, Vt. It was a 3.25-ounce bottle, clearly in violation of the currently permissible three-ounce limit for liquids. Also clear was the bottle, which was obviously only about a quarter full. So even the members of some isolated human populations that have never developed sophisticated systems for counting could have determined that the total amount of liquid in the vessel was far less than the arbitrarily standardized three ounces. But the TSA guy took the aftershave, citing his responsibility to go by the volume listed on the label. (By the way, the three-ounce rule is expected to be phased out late in 2009. Why not tomorrow? Because of the 300-day-rules-change rule, which I just made up.)Let's think a little more about the gedankenexperiment. If the bottle is really empty then you probably would have discarded it so the empty bottle isn't a good test. What if it only has a drop of aftershave in it? That will be barely visible to the airport security guys but it might give you one more day of smelling nice.
Feeling curiouser, I did a gedankenexperiment: What if the bottle had been completely empty—would he have taken it then? No, I decided. When empty, the bottle becomes just some plastic in a rather mundane topological configuration. Not to mention that if you really banned everything with the potential to hold more than three ounces of liquid, you couldn’t let me have my shoes back. You also couldn’t allow me to bring my hands onboard. I kept these thoughts to myself, of course, because I wanted to fly home, not spend the rest of the day locked in a security office explaining what a gedankenexperiment was.
I first commented on what I used to call “the illusion of security” in this space in July 2003, after attending a conference on freedom and privacy. We heard the story of an airline pilot who had his nail clippers snatched away by the TSA just before boarding his plane. He then walked into a cockpit equipped with an ax.
Canadian newspapers are headlining a recent decision by the US Congress to "buy American" [Obama's 'Buy American' plan blasted]. Liberal foreign affairs critic Bob Rae said bluntly the position taken by the U.S. Congress is illegal.Canada and the USA have signed a free trade agreement (NAFTA) that is legally binding in both countries (and Mexico). The USA has failed to live up to its commitments before but it has lost when the issues went to arbitration. Unfortunately, the legal proceedings take many years and during that time US protectionism benefits American countries at the expense of Canadian and Mexican companies. Meanwhile, America benefits by selling its goods and services in Canada and the Mexico.
"A country cannot bring in a measure that restricts international commerce and international activity in this way," he said.
However, late yesterday, Obama's administration signalled a different view. In an interview with CNBC, U.S. Vice-President Joe Biden defended the "Buy America" steel provision.
"I don't view that as some of the pure free traders view it, as a harbinger of protectionism," Biden said.
As officials at Canada's embassy in Washington scramble to lobby U.S. senators to water down the language in the bill, Canada's trade and industry ministers suggested the measures could be challenged under the North American Free Trade Agreement or at the World Trade Organization.Canadian policians were worried about Obama's commitment to international trade. So far it looks as though those fears were justified.
"We are reminding the Americans that they have legal obligations under NAFTA, under WTO," said International Trade Minister Stockwell Day. "History shows clearly that you can't fall back into protectionist measures. That happened in the 1930s and what could have been a bad one- or two-year recession turned into, as we know, the Great Depression. So we want to curtail that."
But a NAFTA challenge will be neither easy nor a quick way to resolve anything.
From today's Globe and Mail: Toronto church leader denounces atheist 'attack ads'.A prominent evangelical leader says atheist ads suggesting there is no God - now headed for Toronto's transit system - are "attack ads" and should not be approved.Hmmmm .... let's wander over to the Canadian Family Action Coalition website to see some examples of Christian love and tolerance. We certainly don't expect to see anyone attacking what other people believe, do we?
The Toronto-based Freethought Association of Canada won approval yesterday from the Toronto Transit Commission to place ads on buses and inside subway cars that read: "There is probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."
Charles McVety, president of the Canada Family Action Coalition, which fought against the legalization of same-sex marriages, said his group has not decided whether it will formally complain about the ads once they appear.
"On the surface, I'm all for free speech. ... However, though, these are attack ads," Dr. McVety, president of Canada Christian College in Toronto, said in an interview yesterday.
"These ads are not saying what the atheists believe, they are attacking what other people believe," he said. "And if you look at the dictionary definition for ... bigot, that's exactly what it is, to be intolerant of someone else's belief system."
Your right to chose – your obligation to pay
Women who want the “right” to dispose of their baby in an abortion mill may be able to defend that position due to the lawlessness of Canada.But they cannot defend under any law or logic the position that tax payers must fund their abortions.
You want a right to chose then you have an obligation to pay.
If the Canadian government refuses to put any restriction on the killing of children in the womb, then it has at minimum a moral and legal obligation to stop allowing tax funded hospitals and taxpayer money to be used for such a purposes.
REAL Women has carefully documented, over the past few years, as reported in REALity, the relentless effort by the federal Liberal Party of Canada to push the homosexual agenda. Prominent Liberal Cabinet Ministers, especially a long line of Liberal Justice Ministers, starting with Allan Rock in 1996, working in tandem with the party hacks appointed to the Bench by a series of Liberal Prime Ministers, have brought about a homosexual revolution in Canada. Anything homosexual activists demanded was handed to them on a silver platter by the Liberals - sexual orientation protection in the Human Rights Act, same-sex benefits, same-sex marriage, immigration privileges, the subverting of religious rights, etc. During these monumental changes, the public's views were disregarded by the arrogant Liberals. After all, the Liberals were the party of power, in perpetuity they thought, and they knew what was good for us. The democratic process of consulting the public was irrelevant to the Liberal elites.
Have the Liberals learned their lesson by their defeat in 2006? Apparently not - judging by the new generation of Liberal elites, post Prime Minister Jean Chretien - who are also keen on pushing the homosexual agenda on the road to society's destruction. This was made apparent by their unabashedly marching in the so-called "Gay Pride" parade in Toronto on June 29, 2008.
They marched alongside drag queens, gyrating exhibitionists, nudes with their genitals totally exposed (but wearing sandals to avoid indecent exposure charges), sado-masochism specialists, "leather-men" etc. No doubt believing they were liberated forward-thinkers, these supporters of the Parade in fact, revealed themselves to be mindless followers of politically correct thought. The politicians in the parade included the following:
Former Leadership Candidate MP Bob Rae (Toronto Centre); Former Leadership Candidate and Liberal Deputy Leader Michael Ignatieff (Etobicoke - Lakeshore); Toronto Liberal MP Mario Silva (Davenport), a self-acknowledged homosexual; Toronto Liberal MP Carolyn Bennett (St. Paul - Trinity) happily escorted by transsexuals during the parade; Former Liberal Leadership Candidate Gerard Kennedy; Liberal MP Belinda Stronach (Aurora-Newmarket); Toronto Liberal MP Borys Wrzesnewskyi (Etobicoke Centre). The latter attended a morning church service conducted by the homosexual Metropolitan Community Church minister, the Rev. Brent Hawkes, who broke the law by officiating at an unlawful same-sex marriage ceremony in 2002; and Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty and his homosexual cabinet minister George Smitherman, Minister of Energy and Infrastructure.
Sex ed coming to your 6 year oldI'm convinced. Charles McVety, like many of his friends, is a hypocrite.
Homosexual activists will stop at nothing. They will try to "educate " your 5 and 6 year old children that sodomizing another human being is normal - healthy - natural. It is none of these. This project in Great Britain is a forerunner to what is happening in Canada in various ways.
So you must demand information about what teachers intend to teach YOUR children in sex-ed, health and social classes.
Now any opposition to homosexual sex behavior is called heteronormativity, homophobia and transphobia. The phobia is that activists continue to fear any opposition to their sexual behaviors, respect for marriage and reality of monogamy's benefits. They now even have to invent meaningless words like homophobia and now heteronormativity. It is not even a word.
Protect your children's well being and health.
I took this photograph of Charles McVety last June in front of the ROM [Charles McVety Visits the ROM
[Hat Tip: Canadian Cynic]
The Conservative Party under Stephen Harper has proposed drastic cuts in research funding. The new budget suggests that the major research councils will be able to "save" 87 million dollars over the next four years due to increased efficiency. The Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada are streamlining operations and aligning programs with the objectives of the Government’s Science and Technology Strategy and national research priorities. Through closer coordination, these agencies are improving the effectiveness of existing programs, aligning their programs with their core roles and fostering the development of innovative new programs.
These savings will be used in this budget to support repairs at post-secondary institutions, to upgrade key Arctic research facilities, to expand the Canada Graduate Scholarships program and graduate internships, and to support new world-class research facilities. This budget also sets aside $750 million to support the current and future activities of the Canada Foundation for Innovation.
The Liberal Party's Industry, Science & Technology Critic is Marc Garneau (Westmount-Ville Marie). You can send him a message here. Tell him that the Liberal Party should not support this budget.Liberal party science and technology critic Marc Garneau told CBC News the funding of Genome Canada would be an issue the party would address with the government when it discusses amendments to the budget.If the Liberals don't think this is a "show-stopper" then maybe it's time to vote NDP.
It will also raise cuts in the budget to Canada's three research councils. The cuts total close to $150 million and peak in 2011-12 at $87.2 million, Garneau said.
But he stopped short of saying these issues would be deal-breakers in ongoing budget talks.
"What we're going to do is continue to remind the government that they are not doing enough in that particular area," said Garneau. "I won't tell you whether or not this is a show-stopper because I'm not making those decisions, but I think our party will continue to point out the lack of real support in science by this government."
Osamu Shimomura (1928 - ) was awarded the Nobel Prize for isolating and characterizing green fluorescent protein (GFP) from the jellyfish Aequorea victoria. Here's the Press Release describing his achievements.Glowing proteins – a guiding star for biochemistry
The remarkable brightly glowing green fluorescent protein, GFP, was first observed in the beautiful jellyfish, Aequorea victoria in 1962. Since then, this protein has become one of the most important tools used in contemporary bioscience. With the aid of GFP, researchers have developed ways to watch processes that were previously invisible, such as the development of nerve cells in the brain or how cancer cells spread.Osamu Shimomura first isolated GFP from the jellyfish Aequorea victoria, which drifts with the currents off the west coast of North America. He discovered that this protein glowed bright green under ultraviolet light.
The images of the Nobel Prize medals are registered trademarks of the Nobel Foundation (© The Nobel Foundation). They are used here, with permission, for educational purposes only.
Monday's molecule is on Tuesday this week. Sorry for the delay, I've been busy with a mid-term test in my introductory biochemistry course. 
Dima and Bill have offered to donate their free lunch to a deserving undergraduate so the next two undergraduates to win and collect a free lunch can also invite a friend. Since undergraduates from the Toronto region are doing better in this contest, I'm going to continue to award an additional free lunch to the first undergraduate student who can accept a free lunch. Please indicate in your email message whether you are an undergraduate and whether you came make it for your free lunch (with a friend). 
The latest issue of SEED magazine concentrates on the idea that "Science Is Culture"—whatever that means.It wouldn't be the first time a standing model has excluded data that could revise it. In the 1980's, NASA analyses of the ozone layer flagged a great many data points as errors—values that seemed too low to be real, values that indicated a huge hole in the planet's protective layer. NASA scientists overlooked the possibility until an outside group published its discovery of the ozone hole in 1985. ....THEME
Something similar happened in the 1990's when DNA that didn't code for proteins was labeled "junk." Noncoding DNA, biologist have since found, regulates protein-coding DNA.
PZ Myers has a brief account of his encounter with Kirk Durston in Edmonton (Alberta, Canada) last weekend [An ugly debate in Edmonton].He's a good debater, because he relies on a powerful tactic: he'll willingly make stuff up and mangle his sources to make his arguments. I'm at a disadvantage because I won't do that.Exactly. It's hard to debate someone who lies with a straight face, especially if they act like a Christian while doing it.
It was a very frustrating experience. Like most Intelligent Design Creationists, Durston was all over the map in terms of spreading lies and misconceptions about science. This scattergun approach seems to be very successful for them. I assume it's because no one person can address all of the problems with their presentation. Most people will catch one or two flaws but they'll assume that everything else has to be correct.Sounds like nothing has changed.
Does God Exist? A Debate
Time: Tues Jan 27, 6:00pm
Location: Isabel Bader Theatre (BT), Victoria College, 93 Charles Street West
Tickets: $2 (Student) at the door (Tues) $10 (Non-Student)
Theist: Dr. William Lane Craig
Atheist: Dr. James Robert Brown
This will prove to be an exciting debate between two world-renowned philosophers, including a professor from here at U of T. After a formal debate structure, both debaters will take questions from the audience. We anticipate a full auditorium for this broad topic that appeals to many students, regardless of where they stand on the debate.
This event is co-sponsored by Campus for Christ at U of T and University of Toronto Secular Alliance.
We expect this debate to be full and will prioritize seating for university students. If you are not a student at this university, please attend the Thursday debate at York University as there will be more room there. Cost is $10 for non-students.
1. I can't make it. My mid-term is tonight. Please post a message telling us how it went.
