Things I love

Jun 10 2011 Published by under Uncategorized

...like when the science works. You know, when somebody publishes something, and you try it too. Because you want to build off their observations and the knowledge they added, taking it in a direction that will shed light on your own problem. A problem you've been working on for a long time, bullheadedly continuing to fight it.

And damn it if it doesn't work the first time you try it! Hot diggity dog.

Of course I did the actual control first. I know, I know, imagine that. I'm good that way. Now it's onto the real test.

On the other hand, hey you Series Resistance....SCREW YOU!

 

6 responses so far

  • DrugMonkey says:

    The fact that you are pleasantly surprised when you can replicate something in the literature is a tad worrisome.

    • Genomic Repairman says:

      sometimes that can be a function of incomplete M&M sections as I have seen before in the past.

  • Nat says:

    And in this case I had already confirmed the basic concept. I was particularly happy in this experiment because I was using 2 expression constructs and a drug I had never used before. Not having to painstakingly optimize the conditions for each of those is a joy. Even more so because for my purpose it's to confirm my other observations using a different approach.

    As for M&M sections, I was surprised here because the group is often quite specific about their conditions, but in this experiment they were a tad more mum (but they were also working with a different group whose track record in this respect is...meh to say the least).

  • namnezia says:

    Dude, the fact that you are talking to your series resistance means you need to get out more.

  • dsks says:

    "You know, when somebody publishes something, and you try it too. Because you want to..."

    ...PROVE THE SMELLY BA$TARD$ FRACTALLY WRONG! W00T!

    "...build off their observations and the knowledge they added, taking it in a direction that will shed light on your own problem."

    ... Well, yeah, I guess that motivation can work, too, if your data isn't quite gelling with the whole "Ha! You're rubbish and we're awesomez so suck it!" hypothesis.

  • Nat says:

    These two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. What I'm building off of one group, I'll use to prove the a different group are total chumps who don't know their asshole from their elbow.

    Needless to say, they don't know jack shit about series resistance, or the Unholy Trinity of Series Resistance Errors, nothing about Hodgkin and Huxley's alpha, nor the Gospel according to Chow and Armstrong.