Think American Idol is bad?

How about Bulgarian Idol:


I think this proves without a doubt that people who can't sing but believe they can exist everywhere in the world. And sadly, this also proves that people enjoy listening to people who can't sing as a form of humor.

Now, I wish someone would humor me in fixing my Igor Pro algorithms and teach me the art of user interface. I'll bake you cookies?

Looks Can Be Decieving

I leave for a trip to John Hopkins University in a couple of hours. To keep everyone easily entertained, I present some funny Ameriquest commercials:

I'm About to Make Something Cool

Spring break is approaching, and that means projects are around the corner. First up for discussion on this blog is the project for my synthesis class. I will be synthesizing N_ε-2-(2-(2-methoxyethoxy)ethoxy)acetyl- L-Lysine-N-carboxyanhydride (see figure). [1]
I like long names for chemical species whose synthesis is actually relatively easy.[2] The only precautions are anhydrous conditions for the recrystallization of your final product and a step that needs to be done under inert atmosphere. And all the other QC controls, like not sneezing into the solution container.

The choice isn't random. The professor of the synthesis lab wants to use the N-carboxyanhydride as a monomer for poly(N_ε-2(2-(2-methoxyethoxy)ethoxy)acetyl-lysine). This homopolypeptide is α-helical in water at ambient temperature. If I remember correctly, he wants to use it as a chiral medium for other compounds in his work. Though that isn't the only application of such a polymer, as reading [1] shows.

All the products are white solids or clear oils, so the synthesis will be boring to view. But it will empower me with the ability to say: "Yes, I did a synthesis. Yes, I hated it. That's why I'm a physical chemist".


--------------------------------------------
[1] Bellomo, E.; Davidson, P.; Imperor-Clerc, M.; Deming, T. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 9101-9105. DOI: 10.1021/ja047932d
[2] See the supplemental materials to Bellemo et al. above.

Trouble Brewing in OK

According to this editorial which was forwarded to me, public education in Oklahoma may be in a world of hurt if the legislatures don't consider the ramifications of their actions.

The editorial is concerning HB 2211, or the "Religious Viewpoints Antidiscrimination Acts". I like the title. Religion, despite my feelings toward it, shouldn't be discriminated against. We all have a right to believe in whatever we desire.

However, unlike race and sex, which are variables determined by genetics and thus are not determined by our conscious, religion isn't free from criticism and being simply wrong about the universe. Yes, I can "respect" your belief that a flying spaghetti monster created a mountain, a tree, and a midget. That doesn't mean it is correct, and since it isn't correct in light of other evidence determined through the scientific method, that position isn't science. It's "correct" relative to your mindset, which if you believe in such things is the mindset of a disadvantaged two-year old[1].

With that being said, the Oklahoma bill disturbs me. Parts of it seem redundant, others seem like unnecessary hurdles. For an example of redundancy, consider this tidbit:

Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions. Homework and classroom assignments shall be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance and against other legitimate pedagogical concerns identified by the school district. Students shall not be penalized or rewarded on account of the religious content of their work.

Is this necessary? It seems like common sense that if a student was to write "JESUS LOVES YOU" or "GOD HATES FAGS" for every blank in a short-essay question, s/he would be penalized for not answering the question as per standard academic practice. It is the equivalent of getting the answer wrong, because s/he did get the answer wrong. "Goddidit" makes no sense in a question about chemistry, biology, American history, or world literature[2]. It makes no sense in civics, geography, music theory, or mathematics. What is the purpose of this clause but only being redundant?

The editorial claims it gives a back door for students supplying incorrect answers without being penalized. I disagree. They will still be penalized for giving non-answers or wrong answers. Unless I'm not reading it correctly, I don't see the fear of students being able to undermind sound science with fables about forbidden fruits, talking snakes, mud, a tower of turtles, lightning, hammers, beer, midgets, and any other object associated with creation mythologies. If they don't supply the correct answer, they don't get credit for the question.

I admit that I know very little about the consequences of the rest of the bill, which desires to allow students to speak religiously if they so desire without censorship. Perhaps the editorial is right in this department. I never attended public school, so my experience in (a secular, pluralistic) private school has no barings in this conversation. But in high school, if a student got on his/her soapbox and ranted about God/Jesus/Buddha/Mohamed, I did what I do now: ignored them.

Ultimately, who cares? So what if you think I'm going to hell/not enlightened/won't get virgins[3]. I think you're a fuckwit for believing in the writings of ancient goat herders. Yet somehow the world continues on despite our differences.

Eh, a good rant to let out the stress of week-before-spring-break syndrome. Now, I must finish optimizing my gaussians to stick them into my algorithm.

-----------------------------
[1] Okay, that was mean to disadvantaged two-year olds, but the one-year-olds sued me last year over a previous comment. Here's hoping the toddler lobby is too busy whining about dropping binky to notice my snide comments.
[2] I guess that depends on the story being read.
[3] Dammit! Okay, maybe I want those, but I'm too lazy to work for them.

Art Exhibit at APS Meeting

More than likely, all my physics friends and professors are off gallivanting in New Orleans at the APS March Meeting. What lucky bastards. I'm stuck in Baton Rouge doing chemistry and finishing chemistry-related projects while others are having fun listening to cool, new physics. I'll have my revenge in April.

But for those who are lucky enough to be in New Orleans (and are sober enough to check your email/regular blogs), please entertain yourselves at an interesting art exhibit. The exhibit is called "Modern Physics and the Mystery of Reality" and was a collaborative work between several physicists at Louisiana State University and a collection of art faculty from around the state. A full description can be found on page 6 of the bulletin you lucky bastards get. Go...now! Or whenever it's open.

Chemical Sex: Close, but Not Quite

There's been a lot of sex humor on my mind lately, and my friend reminding me about the infamous Toma et al. abstract image doesn't help:

I don't think that's quite what the scope of the article is. In fact, I'd venture to say that it is a bit no where near the scope of the article.

A more accurate model of the ruthenium (Ru) polypyridine (ppy) complex attacking the trans-1,4-bis[2-(4-pyridyl)ethenyl]benzene (BPEB) ligand would definitely be a double-headed dildo attacking two scrotums. I mean, there is an equilibrium arrow missing on the left where one "hole-shaped" molecular blob (the Ru-ppy complex) will continue falling off of one side of the dildo (BPEB), if we wish to be consistent with the contents of the paper.

Well, now that just ruined my night.

I Admit: I Support Mike Gravel

Yes, I am very disgruntled about party politics. Yes, I want change: I've had the (dis)pleasure of coming to age in the Bush era. However, i want real and effective change. I don't just want to splash water on my face in the morning and feel refreshed. There are real issues with real problems that need real solutions.

I feel like Mike Gravel, though not very popular, does offer the real solutions I'm looking for. That's my two cents in the political environment.

Another reason why European commercials >> American commercials

From bitchphd

Spam for the Future!

Okay, not as creative as ASCII spam, but I have to give them credit for making me chuckle.


Imagine a spam email that remains at the top of your inbox because the date was changed to a very far future date. How about Jan. 18th, 2038? Sounds good to me!


Hopefully, by that time in my life (eg. when I'm 51) I would already have a life insurance policy and have had been to Cancun at least once. But thanks for thinking of me, spammers :-)

Plane Rides and Bucky Balls

I thoroughly enjoyed the trip to UIUC, and I thoroughly unenjoyed the trip back. It seems Baton Rouge is the most difficult city to fly into, but the easiest to fly out of. Curses for being stuck in Dallas-Ft. Worth due to missing the final flight to Baton Rouge from mechanical errors in Chicago.

The visit to UIUC has renewed an interest of mine in fullerenes, aka Buckyballs. Okay, actually it has renwed an interest in large molecule diffraction.

Like any good researching student, I have downloaded the relevant papers in PDF and will read them between four and five months later.