Does a free radical weigh more than a standard DNA or RNA molecule or cell?
822273
Hi. DNA is a very simple structure that has a very complicated role. Free radicals (oxygen ions, for instance) can damage the DNA in a cell. It would require removal of the cell's DNA to do what you propose. May be better to neutralize free radicals in the first place.
472110
DNA has phosphate sugars so no. ATP stands for adenotriphosphate so no. membranes consists of phospholipids. rna is the same as DNA in constituents with uracil base change and more oxygen.\n\nso none.\n\nin return for the answer can you let me know what you think of my essay...\n\nEvolutionary scientific discoveries unwittingly make the human creation in the book of Genesis feasible to the point of affirmation.\n\nIntroduction\n\nIn the beginning “male and female He created them.” (Genesis 1, 27) This statement has been contested ever since the Age of Enlightenment when human beings with their development of knowledge set about challenging God’s authority in the world around them. Immanuel Kant’s motto “Dare to know” really symbolises the dominant modernistic attitude that was and continues to be embraced by humanity. God has no problem with us gaining knowledge- he invented science and has got it to a perfect art seeing as he spoke all the necessary components into being. Indeed knowledge is God-given to the point that it is one of the fruits of the spirit. Besides, if God really wanted us to remain ignorant of the world he wouldn’t have given us the Word. I therefore want to emphasise that it is only when we think we got here on our own, without God that we come into dispute with God and the truth. But rejection is nothing new to God, who is neither surprised nor shocked by our choices or actions. Before God even created the world he had sent his son to die “it was the Lord’s good plan to crush him” (Isaiah 53, 10) and before he created the universe God knew we would “turn our backs on him and look(ed) the other way.” (Isaiah 53, 3). The fact that Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species caused some controversy and drove people to reject Jesus as the truth was not a ‘heavy blow’ for Him. For one thing, and I say this tongue-in-cheek, if God is anything like me he had probably gotten ‘bored’ of waiting. After all there’s quite a bit of waiting between before the Planck epoch (for those who are interested the Planck epoch is the time between zero and 10-43 seconds of the beginning of the universe) and 1859! Regardless of this publication and the later The Descent of Man (1871) His plan would still prevail over all His creation. The plan had already succeeded before we emerged on day six. Everything else had already been put in place: Jesus’ death and resurrection and all the animals and plants. EVERYTHING! God did NOT need our help or our approval and if he didn’t need it then, he certainly doesn’t need it NOW. What is interesting is that as God allows our knowledge to deepen and technology to improve evidence, particularly genetic and fossilised, appears to be pointing towards the feasibility if not the affirmation of the ‘story’ of Adam and Eve foretold in Genesis.\n\nAssumptions of the Author\n\nBefore I go any further I am making the following interpretations and/or assumptions:\n\n•Evolution (at least in humans) does occur but only within species. I believe that whilst other animals may evolve we wouldn’t as we are God’s chosen creation made in His image. He never changes and thus nor have (or will) we. Within our species implies that if women suddenly found blue-eyed men to be a turn-off generation after generation so that blue-eyed men could not pass on their seed, humans as a species would have less and eventually no blue eyed alleles but they would not in becoming predominately brown or green-eyed become a new species.\n•Evolution in definition is always ‘survival of the fittest’ where the most advantageous traits are passed on to the next generation. By dramatically becoming less hairy- so from having fur (ape) to being bare (Homo sapien)- the human race would have a severe disadvantage in that fur keeps you warm in a cold climate and cool in a hot one. Loss of fur is of course risky in a glacial-inter glacial planet cycle. The only reason for the fact we have no fu
839482
A cell's DNA cannot be removed, but beta cerotene will remove free radicals, which are polyatomic ions that will react with things within the body which they shouldn't because they have a single electron which will readilt react with other ions and compounds to become stable.  DNA is in every cell and definatley cannot be removed.  Removal of parts of DNA result in mutations that are life threatening and con onlt happen at birth or due to radiation.
444407
There are many ways, but free radicals can react with a cell that alters the DNA, which could possible lead to cancer.  Check out the Wiki for more information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_radical
1138247
DNA is deoxyribose nucleic acid. It is a very very big molecule. If you untwist one of your DNA strand into a straight string from the helix. It could actually reach the moon!\n\nOne more factors is that DNA is a very fragile molecule, it could be broken easily outside a biological system.\n\nNext, You will need a template to produce DNA in the process of replication. So, without the template, you couldn't produce the DNA chemically.\n\nThen, you must also produce a useful DNA, it means you must also know the "code of life" in the DNA if you want to produce it chemically
205231
DNA has four bases, the ones you are referring to as chemicals. The names of these bases are Adenine (A), Thymine (T), Cytosine (C) and Guanine (G). In RNA all these bases are also present except T where it is replaced by Uracil (U). So when information is copied from DNA to RNA (mRNA specifically) C pairs with G, G pairs with C, T pairs with A and A pairs with U (since there is no T but U in RNA).\n\nBesides that the chemical composition of DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid) is a Phosphate group, a base(the four bases) and a sugar (Deoxyribose). These three parts together form a nucleotide. A nucleotide without a phosphate group is called a nucleoside. The 'chemicals' you are looking for are Adenine, Thymine, Cytosine and Guanine.
961116
non carbon-based life would be too different from life on earth. a DNA molecule constructed from a Si backbone instead of C would be too heavy and too large to function properly.\n\ncarbon is basically one of the more unique elements on the table, being small and reactive (as opposed to silicon or other group iv's). it can form bonds with itself or many other atoms. this property is responsible for literally millions of chemical compounds(most compounds on earth contain carbon) known to man.\n\ncarbon bonds with oxygen to form carbon dioxide, necessary for the life. silicon dioxide on the other hand, is completely different. SiO2 is sand.\n\nyou could compare carbon with say, water, which is also one of the weirdest compounds known to scientists. yet carbon and water are necessary for all life. i would say that the most interesting elements are the most necessary. silicon is just too normal...
674771
In 1869 Friedrich Miescher, a Swiss researcher, stained a cell nucleus with bromine I think, and found that something in it would stain.  He extracted this something and determined that It was composed of phosphoric acid, nitrogenated organic bases and sugar.\n\nIn 1943 Oswald Avery, a Canadian researcher found that bacteria would transform when washed, when exposed to protease, but not when exposed to deoxyribonuclease.  This led him to conclude that the something Miescher found was by composition supposed to be called deoxyrybonucleic acid and that this DNA was in fact the basic unit of heredity because doexyribonuclease is an enzyme that eats up DNA.\n\nThat's the evidence.\n\nOut genomes aren't made of RNA because that is a single stranded chain. Nothing wrong with that, but it's less sturdy than DNA, which is double stranded and supercoiled and so on.  It's a matter of what is the better means of storing your genetic information.
450990
The mass of a nucleus indicates the number of protons and neutrons present in the nucleus. An element can have more than one isotope eg Carbon 12 and Carbon 14. The former has 6 protons and 6 neutrons, The latter 6 protons and 8 neutrons. \n\nThe atomic weight of an isotope refers to the numbers of protons AND neutrons present. The atomic number of an element refers to the number of protons in all its isotopes.\n\nHydrogen, though normally just a solo proton in its nucleus, does have two isotopes, deuterium, with 1 neutron, and tritium with two neutrons.\n\nA recent question asked about silver, how many of each in its nucleus. Its atomic number is 47, so clearly 47 protons. Naturally-occurring silver is given as having  an atomic weight of 108, so answerers answered 61 neutrons.\n\nHowever there is a subtlety they missed..\n\nNaturally-occurring silver is a mixture of Ag 107 (60 neutrons) and Ag 109 (62 neutrons). (Slightly more than 50% of the former.).\n\nSo the average atomic weight of the two isotopes is 108. But there is no Ag 108 isotope present. The wrong inference was drawn.\n\nSeveral people above are confusing atomic weight and atomic number, and what they each mean. So if you don't understand several of the answers it is because they are jumbled versions of the true picture.
51121
DNA is double stranded with Deoxyribose, and has the nucleic acids Guanine, Cytosine, Thyamine, and Adenine (GCTA)\n\nRNA is single stranded with ribose, and has the nucleic acids Guanine, Uracil, Adenine, and Cytosine (GCUA)\n\nUracil replaces Thyamine
203875
Usually described as about 2 meters for all of the dna in one human cell.  This actually consists of many separate strands of dna.
249790
apart from joke, it is a molecule that has a lone, not paired electron, and therefore highly reactive, eager to combine with  about every other molecule. in the human body you are protected from free radicals by anti-oxidants, so eat healthfully.
52258
This answer is going to have to make many assumptions. For starters, I can't find a source for the weight of a cell, so I will have to base that assumption on the fact that an average size of blood cell is 70 micrometers. Given that and assuming that they have a density if 1g/cm^3, then...\n\n70 micrometers = .007 cm\nVolume of a .007cm sphere = 1.43676E-6 cm^3 = 1.43676E-6 grams\n\nNow we are getting somewhere. Next issue is what is the average molecular weight of the atoms in a blood cell. Basically, the cells have:\nHydrogen (1)\nCarbon (12)\nNitrogen (14)\nOxygen (16)\n\nIn addition to iron, and other metals, but we will discount those as tract amounts.\n\nNow, without knowing more details besides the fact that hydrogen is likely the most common, I will assume an average atomic weight of 8.\n\nSo where were we?\n\nIf 1 mole of atoms weighs 8 grams, than 1.43676E-6 grams would have 1.7959E-7 moles. With one mole eqaul to 6.02E23 aroms....\n\nRoughly 110 Quadrillion atoms.\n\nPS: a Quadrillion is 1000 trillion.
904339
Cells produce energy via cellular respiration. Glucose is broken down in the cytoplasm into pyruvic acid and then further broken down in the mitochondria. Free radicals, mainly methyl, work by bonding to your DNA and effectively turning off genes. If the right (or wrong) combinations of genes are turned off via free radicals, cancer could be the result.
580739
DNA is transcribed into RNA (the so called messenger RNA, mRNA, to be exact). Like almost every other biochemical process, it is made possible by enzymes - in this case RNA-polymerases (we have three types, bacteria only one). It is able to "read" the template - being DNA - and use free nucleotides - the building blocks of nucleic acids - to create a complementary copy of RNA. DNA is a double stranded molecule (the famous double helix), mRNA has a single strand. This process takes place in the cell nucleus.
568406
There isn't one.\n\nNo matter how big something is you can probably make something bigger.\n\nUltrahigh molecular weight polyethylene has a molecular weight of about 5 million (i think g/mol, Wikipedia).  Polymers will continue to get larger, especially since you can make gels, or network polymers.  In this case a significant number of units in the polymer can bond to more than two other units, and the result is a completely cross-linked structure, where EVERY ATOM is connected.  So there is only one huge molecule in a gel.  (Kind of like a network in the case of diamond, one large carbon molecule...but this isn't considered organic). \n\nDNA is huge, typically measured in thousands of base-pairs.  You can add more base pairs to the length to make it bigger...one estimate is 660 million g/mol for a bacterial cell.  Perhaps 1000 or more times larger for mammals.\n\nProteins are also huge, and you can make them bigger by adding more amino acids to the end.  These are measured in 1000's g/mol
385549
a cell is organic, an atom is not.  a cell is made from atoms.