Comments for the power of goo

Comment on Re: How to pronounce Angewandte, Makromolekulare and Chemie by zhouli

zhouli — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 06:47:17 +0000

thanks

Comment on Are DNA-polymer-conjugates finally taking off? by kayesdee

kayesdee — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 21:40:17 +0000

gekfluka, as you already know, published yields are somewhat untrustworthy, often enough. And especially in this field, 30% is quite nice, but sounds high.

Don't have the paper at hand, but my key point still is valid: this is by far not mainstream chemistry yet. If it ever will reach into the stages of chumping out real products.

Comment on Are DNA-polymer-conjugates finally taking off? by gekfluka

gekfluka — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 16:39:58 +0000

I was very excited to discover this field of DNA block copolymers when I first read the paper from Alemdaroglu et al.

I would just like to add that I was unable to reproduce the synthesis with the same yield (they describe around 30% and I got only 1%), did they tell us everything about that?

Comment on Personality traits often associated with innovators by kayesdee

kayesdee — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 17:07:32 +0000

Oh, how unfair! I edited the post so you at least get the current state of the discussion.

Comment on Personality traits often associated with innovators by Andrew Sun

Andrew Sun — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 09:39:38 +0000

Friendfeed has been BLOCK/CENSORED by China government.

Comment on Re: How to pronounce Angewandte, Makromolekulare and Chemie by kayesdee

kayesdee — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:10:17 +0000

Hey, thanks for the compliment. What can happen when you don't try to make your own theme, but just take one of them free and available ones from wordpress.org

Or is it the sidebars that change the impression?

And: yes, we are trying to post more often. Is that not correct merkwuerden? (speaking of who: it is time for you to get an avatar. those deliric graphics are just a placeholder!)

Comment on Lost in transit? by kayesdee

kayesdee — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:07:44 +0000

And the nice thing is: you get different images when you come often

Comment on Polymer chemistry - wtf? by kayesdee

kayesdee — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:07:08 +0000

Exactly. What I really like is the focus on concepts. It is not so much a textbook or for that matter, a text to be read. It is a site that needs to be explored, where you can discover things

Comment on Polymer chemistry - wtf? by Andrew

Andrew — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:04:39 +0000

This website's master does has a true insight of the essence of polymer. In the tour section, he/she chooses to emphasize the only one unique nature of polymer science - molecular weight! If polymer science were only about the synthesis, processing and application it, it would not be anything special but a crossover of organic synthesis, and rheology. What makes polymer unique is that they are CHAINS, lots of. The viscoelasticity and many other strange properties originated from this nature. This allows polymer science to connect with such heated scientific tags as nonlinear, self-similar, multi-scaler and complexity. I guess the webmaster is doing polymer physics or more fashion 'soft condensed matter' physics research.

Wikipedia isn't emphasizing the unique nature of polymer enough.

Comment on Lost in transit? by Andrew

Andrew — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 16:51:30 +0000

Those strawberries are lovely.

Comment on Re: How to pronounce Angewandte, Makromolekulare and Chemie by Andrew

Andrew — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 15:53:02 +0000

Thank you! And nice looking of your blog. The old one simply looked like a no-one-ever-visit blog. Now it seems different.

Comment on Re: How to pronounce Angewandte, Makromolekulare and Chemie by kayesdee

kayesdee — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 14:29:21 +0000

Lol. You never know what too much formaldehyde can do to you.

Comment on Re: How to pronounce Angewandte, Makromolekulare and Chemie by Kutti

Kutti — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 14:24:05 +0000

Wow, didn´t know that your voice changed that much since we´ve last met each other

Comment on Polymer chemistry - wtf? by kayesdee

kayesdee — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 12:33:57 +0000

Yep, I like it. Especially considering its historic relevance. This was before wikipedia!

And still: the content selection is a good reference.

So, yes: I like it.

Comment on Polymer chemistry - wtf? by Egon Willighagen

Egon Willighagen — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 17:25:04 +0000

So, what’s up with that webpage? Do you like it, or not? Is it crap? Why not use Wikipedia?

Comment on Polymer Chemistry is the Home Depot of Chemistry? by merkwuerden

merkwuerden — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 12:23:45 +0000

It is not only true but right to call Polymer chemistry the "Home Depot" of Chemistry. Take a look at the materials you can buy at Home Depot or any other Home Depot style outfit for example: there is nothing that does not contain functional polymers or is made using polymers, even the plaster and concrete contain admixtures, well except for the distilled water, however you get it in a polythene bottle so in a way it should count.

So now I am off to exploring some other aspect of goo, the literal power in goo.....

Comment on Polymer Chemistry is the Home Depot of Chemistry? by kayesdee

kayesdee — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 16:54:27 +0000

Good to know there is one reader of this blog. It will be reactivated, even though this is a painful process.

I really liked the analogy. A lot of what polymer chemistry can be is “home depot”. And, being in industry, working on stuff that is close to technical problems, this often is even more so.

If there is interest in these “viewpoints”, we could rant on about it. If.

Comment on Polymer Chemistry is the Home Depot of Chemistry? by Andrew Sun

Andrew Sun — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 09:04:26 +0000

I swear I will reply to every post of this blog.

With regard of this quote, it did represent some feeling around polymer chemists. But 'polymer chemistry' is sometimes misused to call the whole polymer science. If it was not here and meant 'polymer synthesis' I think it is now that frustrating. I feel that we know more 'why' in synthesis than in polymer physics.

Comment on New digital rights management in scientific literature by merkwuerden

merkwuerden — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 07:30:02 +0000

This is true. It is worse and these guys even make ridiculous demands with respect to the software to be used to access these files. Special plugins that are a nightmare to get installed in a tightly controlled corporate IT ecosystem.

That is one way to alienate your customers:

Treat them like thieves and they will turn to thieving as it will be the only resort left to them to use and gain access to information they are actually willing to pay for!

After all they start to compete with a freebie without these restrictions and want to get money for it.... so offer a good product and don't annoy your customers.

Else people will find ways arround.... They always have...

Comment on Are we all seeking truth? Even science is far from it. by alex

alex — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:17:30 +0000

So true. I observed several sensational papers in Nature and Science which appeared to be completely wrong just few years later. It become increasingly easy to make big (and not really confirmed) claims in those journals, of couse only for some priviliged people. However it is almost impossible to publish any comment which cast doubts on those claims and if these claims are retracted (not so aften) it is done very low tone, so low that most of people are not aware of retractions for several more years. In most of cases the claim is not at all retracted, just…it is not reproducible for unknown reasons by anyone after. Who cares if people published those claims already got their grants, promotions, chairs and departments. Science is business for too many scientists and what is the most inportant in business? Profit taking…oh God…