[ccp4bb] For a laugh.. ( Ratio of Number of Reflections to Number of restrained )

- Protein crystallography

Main steps:

- Protein purification
- Crystallisation

Special:

- Programs for crystallography
- X-ray detectors

Basic tutorials:

   - Chemistry
   - Protein
   - Peptide
   - Amino Acids

Xtal community:

- CCP4BB

CCP4bb navigation

CCP4bb <-- 1999 <-- November 1999 <-- 30 November 1999

Previous message:
Subject: senior postdoctoral position
From: M Huang mhuang1 {- at -} BIDMC {- dot -} HARVARD {- dot -} EDU
Date: 2008-09-08

Next message:
Subject: truncate ignorance
From: Phoebe Rice price {- at -} UCHICAGO {- dot -} EDU
Date: 2008-09-08

Subject: For a laugh.. ( Ratio of Number of Reflections to Number of restrained )
From: Partha Chakrabarti ppchak {- at -} GMAIL {- dot -} COM
Date: 2008-09-08

Since we learn a lot from this BB, here is a new view.. ;)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Rajan Pillai
Date: Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Ratio of Number of Reflections to Number of
restrained Parameters
To: Partha Chakrabarti

Dude no offense, your response is just another classic example where
people try to prove knowing much, without even knowing what they know
and what they don't. As a request, please do not assume this
scientific newsgroup as any other newsgroups on yahoo or orkut for
your past time. It helps to maintain the purpose of this newsgroup.

On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Partha Chakrabarti wrote:
>
> Dude, no offenses.. but I believe that person is a native speaker and
> a developer in CCP4.. people who usually understand York if you say
> Y.. and teach people for free..
>
> if you care to read, there is a refinement program called restrain..
> also probably regarding rotation function etc.. check out the
> acknowledgment of Blundell Johnson..
>
> It helps to keep that arrogance at the doorstep..
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Rajan Pillai wrote:
> > The question was well crafted. It behooves on part of the respondent to
> > understand the question or clarify before answering.
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Ian Tickle
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Agreed - but it wasn't entirely clear from the original question that
> >> this was the purpose of the calculation. Assuming that is the case then
> >> it surely behoves subscribers as far as possible to ask the right
> >> questions, or at least explain their reasons for needing to perform the
> >> calculation: it should not be assumed that others will understand what
> >> you meant to say, as opposed to what you did say!

CCP4bb navigation

CCP4bb <-- 1999 <-- November 1999 <-- 30 November 1999

Previous message:
Subject: senior postdoctoral position
From: M Huang mhuang1 {- at -} BIDMC {- dot -} HARVARD {- dot -} EDU
Date: 2008-09-08

Next message:
Subject: truncate ignorance
From: Phoebe Rice price {- at -} UCHICAGO {- dot -} EDU
Date: 2008-09-08