Science TR071

vladglenin · 07-05-2011 09:08AM

Guys this micro exam is on at 2 right?

SligoBrewer · 07-05-2011 12:02PM

Yeah.

I'm so ****ed for it! Spent all last night looking at herpes, and think I flailed up the bunch of coldsores I got from my girlfriend when I was 15. The irony.

Rebecca

NeuroCat · 07-05-2011 12:03PM

The microbiology exam was at 9.
What did you guys think of the paper. Loved the bacteriophage question. The mating switch in saccharomyces cerevisae was pretty good aswell.

Thumbs up!
Not looking forward to petrology though

vladglenin · 07-05-2011 12:07PM

NeuroCat wrote: »

The microbiology exam was at 9.
What did you guys think of the paper. Loved the bacteriophage question. The mating switch in saccharomyces cerevisae was pretty good aswell.

Thumbs up!
Not looking forward to petrology though

You've got to be kidding me. The exam was on at 9? Are you joking?

NeuroCat · 07-05-2011 12:10PM

The exam was on at 9. It's over. Sorry wish I was kidding but I'm not.

celtic723 · 07-05-2011 01:20PM

Exam was good i thought.

Is there any biologists in the world that argue that a virus is actual living?

I'd like to read up on it or hear some takes on what people in microbiology think.

I myself think the criteria to define a living organism needs to be refined.

07-05-2011 01:36PM

Viruses are zombies.

I thought that was made clear in the lecture slides.

celtic723 · 07-05-2011 01:40PM

true-or-false wrote: »

Viruses are zombies.

I thought that was made clear in the lecture slides.

:pac::pac::pac::pac:

I don't agree that they're non- living.

They're really microscopic people dressed in funny icosohedrally shaped outfits.

SligoBrewer · 07-05-2011 02:35PM

vladglenin wrote: »

You've got to be kidding me. The exam was on at 9? Are you joking?

Why did you tell me 9? :rolleyes:
Hello Supplementals.

Craguls · 07-05-2011 06:30PM

celtic723 wrote: »

Exam was good i thought.

Is there any biologists in the world that argue that a virus is actual living?

I'd like to read up on it or hear some takes on what people in microbiology think.

I myself think the criteria to define a living organism needs to be refined.

The genetics lecturers told us that anything that replicates via the central dogma can be classed as living.

07-05-2011 08:42PM

Yeah but genetics lecturers would say that. Every lecturer we have thinks that their subject is THE most important thing in the world, of course a genetics lecturer would classify living/non-living according to their subject of choice.

A metabolism lecturer would probably tell us that it's whether they have a proper metabolism or not. A neuroscientist would probably classify it as whether it has a reconisable brain/thought processes or not.

I'd lean more towards living myself, but I'm open to convincing.

celtic723 · 07-05-2011 09:04PM

Craguls wrote: »

The genetics lecturers told us that anything that replicates via the central dogma can be classed as living.

That's good so 'coz i mentioned it in my essay. Gave my opinion on the criteria for classifying living/non living and said it needed refining.

Cheers!

Craguls · 07-05-2011 09:53PM

true-or-false wrote: »

Yeah but genetics lecturers would say that. Every lecturer we have thinks that their subject is THE most important thing in the world, of course a genetics lecturer would classify living/non-living according to their subject of choice.

A metabolism lecturer would probably tell us that it's whether they have a proper metabolism or not. A neuroscientist would probably classify it as whether it has a reconisable brain/thought processes or not.

I'd lean more towards living myself, but I'm open to convincing.

While I can see your point, would you not agree that reproduction/replication is probably the most fundamental trait of a biological organism? Otherwise they couldn't continue to exist.

You could argue as well that the ability to replicate in itself is a metabolic process also given the frequenct use of signal cascades, and that the nervous system evolved from a complex, specialised signal cascade system if you consider things from a reductionism point of view but all of these things couldn't exist if the organism itself can't reproduce.

07-05-2011 10:53PM

Craguls wrote: »

While I can see your point, would you not agree that reproduction/replication is probably the most fundamental trait of a biological organism? Otherwise they couldn't continue to exist.

You could argue as well that the ability to replicate in itself is a metabolic process also given the frequenct use of signal cascades, and that the nervous system evolved from a complex, specialised signal cascade system if you consider things from a reductionism point of view but all of these things couldn't exist if the organism itself can't reproduce.

Sure! I see your point completely. But I still think it's something that will be biased by someones areas of interest. Which is totally understandable, I mean it's not like someone's going to form an opinion based on something they're not interested by. Considering we're omitting viruses, how many living things could continue to exist if you zapped out their plasma membrane? That doesn't mean a micelle is alive though.

Out of interest (if you don't mind) how far up on your list of moderatorships is Genetics??? I'm betting definitely in your top 5...

Craguls · 07-05-2011 11:07PM

Touché...

true-or-false wrote: »

Out of interest (if you don't mind) how far up on your list of moderatorships is Genetics??? I'm betting definitely in your top 5...

4th actually..... (Damn I'm predictable) Although, Immunology, Mol Med, and Neuro come beforehand...... followed by cell bio.

Go for plant sciences 1 in the end?

NeuroCat · 07-05-2011 11:30PM

Funnily enough, I was actually pondering that question myself today. Virology is such an interesting field. There are bound to be any number of journals published on the topic of classification alone, definately will be a point of interest if I survive these exams.

A_Border_Bandit · 09-05-2011 01:36AM

Anyone else finding Geology a bit of a pain in the ar$e? It's not that difficult, it's just so information heavy, especially as Sanders the schnake makes you source practically all your own notes.

NeuroCat · 09-05-2011 08:23AM

Anyone else finding Geology a bit of a pain in the ar$e? It's not that difficult, it's just so information heavy, especially as Sanders the schnake makes you source practically all your own notes.

I dunno how much help it will be, but this handout was emailed to us by him. It contains all the lectures on kitchen physics and solutions to the questions:
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0BwFO1vQO75YcNjg1MjUyNzAtZDA5NS00ZjIyLThkMDUtYzIwNWY5MDZhNWY5&hl=en&authkey=COW-0t0D

I can't wait till geology is over. I only took it because I heard from 2nd years last year that chemistry was a nightmare. *sigh* I liked chemistry

09-05-2011 09:29AM

Craguls wrote: »

Go for plant sciences 1 in the end?

Yeah, I figure all I have to do is find a magical compound in a plant that cures cancer, HIV, the common cold and is gives you a tan. I'll be rich and botany will no longer be seen as flaky

Seriously though, I think it's lulled me into a false state of security for exams, I'm doing pretty badly and I think it's because I'm only studying enough to pass. Only starting chem2 today....

NeuroCat · 09-05-2011 09:56AM

Seriously though, I think it's lulled me into a false state of security for exams, I'm doing pretty badly and I think it's because I'm only studying enough to pass. Only starting chem2 today....

Join the club, I'm aiming for neuroscience and I'll be lucky if I even pass this year

hoping my C.A marks count for something.

Scrappychimow · 09-05-2011 12:04PM

Do people answer one question per book in the exam?
What does it mean fasten the books together if you use more than one?

Scrappychimow · 09-05-2011 12:09PM

Also what the hell is section D on the MCQ paper all about?

09-05-2011 12:56PM

Scrappychimow wrote: »

Do people answer one question per book in the exam?
What does it mean fasten the books together if you use more than one?

Yeah, you do each question separately in different answer books. Each lecturer has different questions on the exam, so you do for example question 1 in one answer book and question 2 in another, so that they can be given separately to whoever's correcting them.

If you use 2 or more books, you use a treasury tag (a piece of string with metal on either end) to fasten them together. There's a little hole in the top left of the book, and the tag goes through it to keep the booklets together. It's all there on the table for you.

Scrappychimow · 09-05-2011 03:28PM

Thanks,what section D on the MCQ paper ?
Do we get paper for rough work for the mcq section?

celtic723 · 09-05-2011 05:43PM

I am so ****ed for tomorrow's SF Chemistry exam.

I'm actually chemically retarded. I hate the subject with a passion and i've no motivation to study it.

Tomorrow is going to be awful.

A_Border_Bandit · 09-05-2011 11:59PM

NeuroCat wrote: »

I dunno how much help it will be, but this handout was emailed to us by him. It contains all the lectures on kitchen physics and solutions to the questions:
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0BwFO1vQO75YcNjg1MjUyNzAtZDA5NS00ZjIyLThkMDUtYzIwNWY5MDZhNWY5&hl=en&authkey=COW-0t0D

I can't wait till geology is over. I only took it because I heard from 2nd years last year that chemistry was a nightmare. *sigh* I liked chemistry

Thanks a bunch NeuroCat! I'm only seeing this now but I had it already. And really, neuroscience? Your name didn't give it away at all :pac:

Today was rough. I think half the class studied and the other half didn't, and nothing what people studied came up. So they felt crap and were only able to do so much. Whereas the people who didn't study were able to answer as much as the people who had studied and they felt pretty confident! ... If you follow me?

Sanders reinforced his "schnakey-ness" by only putting down one question in a supposedly optional section meaning we all had to do it! :mad:

sjms · 10-05-2011 02:54PM

Hi guys,

I am a former TR071er and I am applying for a job, related to geography. The thing is I cannot remember what modules I took in geography in 1st and 2nd year... Can anybody tell me what the modules in each were?

Appreciate it!

NeuroCat · 10-05-2011 04:50PM

I didn't take Geography, but I assume the modules have remained the same. These links may be of some use:
First year modules:
http://www.tcd.ie/Science/PDF/JuniorFreshmanBooklet201011.pdf

Second year modules:
http://www.tcd.ie/Science/PDF/SeniorFreshman20112012.pdf

Carl Sagan · 10-05-2011 07:07PM

I've really no idea whether or not I've passed or failed all of my exams. Not a good feeling.

Will definitely study a lot more in SF if I get in.

amacachi · 10-05-2011 07:09PM

Carl Sagan wrote: »

I've really no idea whether or not I've passed or failed all of my exams. Not a good feeling.

Will definitely study a lot more in SF if I get in.

If you made an effort in the exams for biology you'll pass. I got a breakdown of my marks last year and couldn't believe them. I only remembered doing one essay but got marks for two, that'll tell you what great quality my answer in the other one was. :pac:

Science TR071

Comments