<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_01_172216</id>
	<title>Tracking Water Molecules Could Unlock Secrets</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1267467720000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>ScienceDaily is reporting that several new discoveries about the <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/100227215943.htm?utm\_source=feedburner&amp;utm\_medium=feed&amp;utm\_campaign=Feed:+sciencedaily+(ScienceDaily:+Latest+Science+News)">simple molecule of water</a> have kicked off a surge in research that scientists believe could lead to solving some of the world's most tricky problems from agriculture to cancer.  <i>"Understanding how individual water molecules maneuver in a system to form fleeting tetrahedral structures and how changing physical conditions such as temperatures and pressures affect the amount of disorder each imparts on that system may help scientists understand why certain substances, like drugs used in chemotherapy, are soluble in water and why some are not.  It could also help understand how this changing network of bonds and ordering of local tetrahedrality between water molecules changes the nature of protein folding and degradation. 'Understanding hydrophobicity, and how different conditions change it, is probably one of the most fundamental components in understanding how proteins fold in water and how different biomolecules remain stable in it,' says Kumar. 'And if we understand this, we will not only have a new way of thinking about physics and biology but also a new way to approach health and disease.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>ScienceDaily is reporting that several new discoveries about the simple molecule of water have kicked off a surge in research that scientists believe could lead to solving some of the world 's most tricky problems from agriculture to cancer .
" Understanding how individual water molecules maneuver in a system to form fleeting tetrahedral structures and how changing physical conditions such as temperatures and pressures affect the amount of disorder each imparts on that system may help scientists understand why certain substances , like drugs used in chemotherapy , are soluble in water and why some are not .
It could also help understand how this changing network of bonds and ordering of local tetrahedrality between water molecules changes the nature of protein folding and degradation .
'Understanding hydrophobicity , and how different conditions change it , is probably one of the most fundamental components in understanding how proteins fold in water and how different biomolecules remain stable in it, ' says Kumar .
'And if we understand this , we will not only have a new way of thinking about physics and biology but also a new way to approach health and disease .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ScienceDaily is reporting that several new discoveries about the simple molecule of water have kicked off a surge in research that scientists believe could lead to solving some of the world's most tricky problems from agriculture to cancer.
"Understanding how individual water molecules maneuver in a system to form fleeting tetrahedral structures and how changing physical conditions such as temperatures and pressures affect the amount of disorder each imparts on that system may help scientists understand why certain substances, like drugs used in chemotherapy, are soluble in water and why some are not.
It could also help understand how this changing network of bonds and ordering of local tetrahedrality between water molecules changes the nature of protein folding and degradation.
'Understanding hydrophobicity, and how different conditions change it, is probably one of the most fundamental components in understanding how proteins fold in water and how different biomolecules remain stable in it,' says Kumar.
'And if we understand this, we will not only have a new way of thinking about physics and biology but also a new way to approach health and disease.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319736</id>
	<title>Cat's Cradle</title>
	<author>1s44c</author>
	<datestamp>1267472580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Has anyone mentioned ice-9 yet?</p><p>That could solve a few problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anyone mentioned ice-9 yet ? That could solve a few problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anyone mentioned ice-9 yet?That could solve a few problems.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320058</id>
	<title>The Abyss?</title>
	<author>RockClimbingFool</author>
	<datestamp>1267473780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We could save ourselves some time and just ask the sea creatures at the bottom of the ocean how they do it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We could save ourselves some time and just ask the sea creatures at the bottom of the ocean how they do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We could save ourselves some time and just ask the sea creatures at the bottom of the ocean how they do it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319702</id>
	<title>Re:Physics anyone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267472400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>No. The point of quantum mechanics was the quantization, with all those little quanta (discrete particles). Hence the name. The uncertainty principle, moreover, has a numeric quantity behind it which describes <i>exactly how much</i> you can hope to measure <i>in a specific measurement</i>. The physics of hydrophobia/hydrophilia and molecular biology in the aggregate is quite discoverable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
The point of quantum mechanics was the quantization , with all those little quanta ( discrete particles ) .
Hence the name .
The uncertainty principle , moreover , has a numeric quantity behind it which describes exactly how much you can hope to measure in a specific measurement .
The physics of hydrophobia/hydrophilia and molecular biology in the aggregate is quite discoverable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
The point of quantum mechanics was the quantization, with all those little quanta (discrete particles).
Hence the name.
The uncertainty principle, moreover, has a numeric quantity behind it which describes exactly how much you can hope to measure in a specific measurement.
The physics of hydrophobia/hydrophilia and molecular biology in the aggregate is quite discoverable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320296</id>
	<title>Oh ya, and then there's this.</title>
	<author>sunking2</author>
	<datestamp>1267474800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We need more grant money or we'll have to get real jobs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We need more grant money or we 'll have to get real jobs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We need more grant money or we'll have to get real jobs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320096</id>
	<title>Biological processes depend on temperature...</title>
	<author>madhatter256</author>
	<datestamp>1267473960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since biological processes (and I mean all of them from the molecule level to the baby-making level) depend on temperature, it is obvious that knowing how water works at this molecular level can in fact solve many variability in medicine.</p><p>If you think about it... our body maintains itself at a constant temperature as much as possible... there's a reason for that... for the biological processes within the body to react efficiently.</p><p>This can lead to different types of medicines that are most effective at certain temperatures.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since biological processes ( and I mean all of them from the molecule level to the baby-making level ) depend on temperature , it is obvious that knowing how water works at this molecular level can in fact solve many variability in medicine.If you think about it... our body maintains itself at a constant temperature as much as possible... there 's a reason for that... for the biological processes within the body to react efficiently.This can lead to different types of medicines that are most effective at certain temperatures .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since biological processes (and I mean all of them from the molecule level to the baby-making level) depend on temperature, it is obvious that knowing how water works at this molecular level can in fact solve many variability in medicine.If you think about it... our body maintains itself at a constant temperature as much as possible... there's a reason for that... for the biological processes within the body to react efficiently.This can lead to different types of medicines that are most effective at certain temperatures.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31324354</id>
	<title>Re:Who vets these articles???</title>
	<author>Rutulian</author>
	<datestamp>1267448100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Seriously, how did this get on the front page?</p></div><p>It's because a lot of people really want to believe in homeopathic medicine, even though it completely contradicts most of our current scientific models. If there is any possibility that "water has memory" people will jump on it....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , how did this get on the front page ? It 's because a lot of people really want to believe in homeopathic medicine , even though it completely contradicts most of our current scientific models .
If there is any possibility that " water has memory " people will jump on it... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, how did this get on the front page?It's because a lot of people really want to believe in homeopathic medicine, even though it completely contradicts most of our current scientific models.
If there is any possibility that "water has memory" people will jump on it....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319528</id>
	<title>The scientists then went on to create Ice Nine</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267471800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And freeze all the worlds oceans. Kurt Vonnegut could not be reached for comment, because he is dead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And freeze all the worlds oceans .
Kurt Vonnegut could not be reached for comment , because he is dead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And freeze all the worlds oceans.
Kurt Vonnegut could not be reached for comment, because he is dead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320150</id>
	<title>Re:Finally a cure for DHMO poisoning</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267474140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Perhaps this might lead to finally finding a cure for <a href="http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html" title="dhmo.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html</a> [dhmo.org] </p></div><p>Mod Parent Up. This isn't "Funny".</p><p>My Grandfather, a Navy man of 23 years, died from overexposure of DHMO. They tried to remove it from his system; there was nothing that could be done.</p><p>I'll never forgive the government for making him work basically knee-deep in the stuff for the entire time he was in the service. It was almost inevitable.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps this might lead to finally finding a cure for http : //www.dhmo.org/facts.html [ dhmo.org ] Mod Parent Up .
This is n't " Funny " .My Grandfather , a Navy man of 23 years , died from overexposure of DHMO .
They tried to remove it from his system ; there was nothing that could be done.I 'll never forgive the government for making him work basically knee-deep in the stuff for the entire time he was in the service .
It was almost inevitable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps this might lead to finally finding a cure for http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html [dhmo.org] Mod Parent Up.
This isn't "Funny".My Grandfather, a Navy man of 23 years, died from overexposure of DHMO.
They tried to remove it from his system; there was nothing that could be done.I'll never forgive the government for making him work basically knee-deep in the stuff for the entire time he was in the service.
It was almost inevitable.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320580</id>
	<title>Polywater</title>
	<author>tomhudson</author>
	<datestamp>1267475880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I find interesting is that this opens up at least the possibility of that old sci-fi standby (really old - I haven't seen a reference to it in modern sci-fi) of polywater.
</p><p>Polywater is supposed to be one of those "unobtaniums", theoretically impossible - but then again, bees have been "proven" not to be able to fly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I find interesting is that this opens up at least the possibility of that old sci-fi standby ( really old - I have n't seen a reference to it in modern sci-fi ) of polywater .
Polywater is supposed to be one of those " unobtaniums " , theoretically impossible - but then again , bees have been " proven " not to be able to fly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I find interesting is that this opens up at least the possibility of that old sci-fi standby (really old - I haven't seen a reference to it in modern sci-fi) of polywater.
Polywater is supposed to be one of those "unobtaniums", theoretically impossible - but then again, bees have been "proven" not to be able to fly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320154</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm...</title>
	<author>Lil'wombat</author>
	<datestamp>1267474200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe.  Check out this explanation:</p><p><a href="http://www.howdoeshomeopathywork.com/" title="howdoeshom...hywork.com">http://www.howdoeshomeopathywork.com/</a> [howdoeshom...hywork.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe .
Check out this explanation : http : //www.howdoeshomeopathywork.com/ [ howdoeshom...hywork.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe.
Check out this explanation:http://www.howdoeshomeopathywork.com/ [howdoeshom...hywork.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320270</id>
	<title>Re:Physics anyone?</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1267474740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed, on the quantum scale it's a "thingette" or "nanothing". Physicists are still arguing over the correct nomenclature.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed , on the quantum scale it 's a " thingette " or " nanothing " .
Physicists are still arguing over the correct nomenclature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed, on the quantum scale it's a "thingette" or "nanothing".
Physicists are still arguing over the correct nomenclature.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319466</id>
	<title>The short version?</title>
	<author>Drethon</author>
	<datestamp>1267471620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So is he saying if we better understand why some things disolve in water (and particular interest, water in our blood stream) and why some don't we will better handle diseases?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So is he saying if we better understand why some things disolve in water ( and particular interest , water in our blood stream ) and why some do n't we will better handle diseases ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So is he saying if we better understand why some things disolve in water (and particular interest, water in our blood stream) and why some don't we will better handle diseases?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320138</id>
	<title>Study was peer-reviewed by Harold</title>
	<author>SendBot</author>
	<datestamp>1267474080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Understanding hydrophobicity, and how different conditions change it, is probably one of the most fundamental components in understanding how proteins fold in water and how different biomolecules remain stable in it," says Kumar.</p><p>When asked by a reporter, Kumar said the idea came to him while hitting the bong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Understanding hydrophobicity , and how different conditions change it , is probably one of the most fundamental components in understanding how proteins fold in water and how different biomolecules remain stable in it , " says Kumar.When asked by a reporter , Kumar said the idea came to him while hitting the bong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Understanding hydrophobicity, and how different conditions change it, is probably one of the most fundamental components in understanding how proteins fold in water and how different biomolecules remain stable in it," says Kumar.When asked by a reporter, Kumar said the idea came to him while hitting the bong.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321268</id>
	<title>Who vets these articles???</title>
	<author>TeethWhitener</author>
	<datestamp>1267435320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Seriously, how did this get on the front page?  I suppose it's an interesting article, <i>to theoretical chemists</i>, but that's about it.  <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/106/52/22130.full.pdf+html" title="pnas.org">Here's</a> [pnas.org] the paper from PNAS (heh).
</p><p>
You may notice a few things if you read it.  First, it's an MD (molecular dynamics) simulation.  Read: classical equations of motion with an empirically-derived force field (just to head off the quantum gibberish).  Second, you'll notice that the paper doesn't mention anything about agriculture or cancer (or much in between), but instead seems to focus on topics as vital to our way of life as orientational entropy and the Widom temperature of water.  Third, if you read the last few paragraphs (if you can make it that far), you'll see that a referee brought to the authors' attention that the work presented in their paper <i>had essentially already been done</i> about 15 years ago.  Fourth, and perhaps most telling, is that this study is published in PNAS.  This journal has an interesting quirk in that if you're a member of the Academy, you get to choose who referees your paper.  Trust me, I've seen first-hand how some ancient Academy members use this policy to publish some serious garbage in that journal.
</p><p>
Now I'm not saying that Kumar <i>et al</i>'s paper is not an important contribution to the field of theoretical water chemistry.  I am, however, saying that it's not nearly interesting enough to be on the front page of Slashdot.  Not sure why ScienceDaily picked it up either.  I keep telling myself that when I have time, I'm going to start a lit review blog in this field so that the general (geeky) public has a little better handle on the stuff going on in physical chemistry that's actually interesting.  Well see if it ever happens.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , how did this get on the front page ?
I suppose it 's an interesting article , to theoretical chemists , but that 's about it .
Here 's [ pnas.org ] the paper from PNAS ( heh ) .
You may notice a few things if you read it .
First , it 's an MD ( molecular dynamics ) simulation .
Read : classical equations of motion with an empirically-derived force field ( just to head off the quantum gibberish ) .
Second , you 'll notice that the paper does n't mention anything about agriculture or cancer ( or much in between ) , but instead seems to focus on topics as vital to our way of life as orientational entropy and the Widom temperature of water .
Third , if you read the last few paragraphs ( if you can make it that far ) , you 'll see that a referee brought to the authors ' attention that the work presented in their paper had essentially already been done about 15 years ago .
Fourth , and perhaps most telling , is that this study is published in PNAS .
This journal has an interesting quirk in that if you 're a member of the Academy , you get to choose who referees your paper .
Trust me , I 've seen first-hand how some ancient Academy members use this policy to publish some serious garbage in that journal .
Now I 'm not saying that Kumar et al 's paper is not an important contribution to the field of theoretical water chemistry .
I am , however , saying that it 's not nearly interesting enough to be on the front page of Slashdot .
Not sure why ScienceDaily picked it up either .
I keep telling myself that when I have time , I 'm going to start a lit review blog in this field so that the general ( geeky ) public has a little better handle on the stuff going on in physical chemistry that 's actually interesting .
Well see if it ever happens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Seriously, how did this get on the front page?
I suppose it's an interesting article, to theoretical chemists, but that's about it.
Here's [pnas.org] the paper from PNAS (heh).
You may notice a few things if you read it.
First, it's an MD (molecular dynamics) simulation.
Read: classical equations of motion with an empirically-derived force field (just to head off the quantum gibberish).
Second, you'll notice that the paper doesn't mention anything about agriculture or cancer (or much in between), but instead seems to focus on topics as vital to our way of life as orientational entropy and the Widom temperature of water.
Third, if you read the last few paragraphs (if you can make it that far), you'll see that a referee brought to the authors' attention that the work presented in their paper had essentially already been done about 15 years ago.
Fourth, and perhaps most telling, is that this study is published in PNAS.
This journal has an interesting quirk in that if you're a member of the Academy, you get to choose who referees your paper.
Trust me, I've seen first-hand how some ancient Academy members use this policy to publish some serious garbage in that journal.
Now I'm not saying that Kumar et al's paper is not an important contribution to the field of theoretical water chemistry.
I am, however, saying that it's not nearly interesting enough to be on the front page of Slashdot.
Not sure why ScienceDaily picked it up either.
I keep telling myself that when I have time, I'm going to start a lit review blog in this field so that the general (geeky) public has a little better handle on the stuff going on in physical chemistry that's actually interesting.
Well see if it ever happens.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320106</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267474020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Homeopathy <b>FTEF</b>

</p><p>FTFY, HAND!</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Homeopathy FTEF FTFY , HAND !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Homeopathy FTEF

FTFY, HAND!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320364</id>
	<title>Re:Hmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267475040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If by FTW, you mean a one part in a trillion tincture of win that follows the homeopathic principle dilution produces the opposite.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If by FTW , you mean a one part in a trillion tincture of win that follows the homeopathic principle dilution produces the opposite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If by FTW, you mean a one part in a trillion tincture of win that follows the homeopathic principle dilution produces the opposite.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319732</id>
	<title>The Cancer card...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267472520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When in search of funding, linking your research to cures for cancer increases your odds of funding approval.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When in search of funding , linking your research to cures for cancer increases your odds of funding approval .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When in search of funding, linking your research to cures for cancer increases your odds of funding approval.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319844</id>
	<title>Stevia + Water = Pure H2O = The Cure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267472940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's like this, the evidence for stevia keeps piling up. Farrah's PhD confirmed it, now its getting validated everywhere. Trust and believe. If you're not on the stevia bandwagon yet? Basically, you mix stevia and water in a blender, ok, this creates a soap of all that toxic shit, ok, and you get that out through cold fission, ok. All provable. Now you're left with what I like to call Pure H20, the cure for the human body. Oh for sure, homeboy. If you think, ok, that i'm 40 years old, and I couldn't explode you? With hands? lol. You're living in fantasy mang. And it's like this, ok, the surge of interest in water is all part of the stevia revolution and you better be on that train when it comes, cause I'm gonna pay it forward and others will too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's like this , the evidence for stevia keeps piling up .
Farrah 's PhD confirmed it , now its getting validated everywhere .
Trust and believe .
If you 're not on the stevia bandwagon yet ?
Basically , you mix stevia and water in a blender , ok , this creates a soap of all that toxic shit , ok , and you get that out through cold fission , ok. All provable .
Now you 're left with what I like to call Pure H20 , the cure for the human body .
Oh for sure , homeboy .
If you think , ok , that i 'm 40 years old , and I could n't explode you ?
With hands ?
lol. You 're living in fantasy mang .
And it 's like this , ok , the surge of interest in water is all part of the stevia revolution and you better be on that train when it comes , cause I 'm gon na pay it forward and others will too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's like this, the evidence for stevia keeps piling up.
Farrah's PhD confirmed it, now its getting validated everywhere.
Trust and believe.
If you're not on the stevia bandwagon yet?
Basically, you mix stevia and water in a blender, ok, this creates a soap of all that toxic shit, ok, and you get that out through cold fission, ok. All provable.
Now you're left with what I like to call Pure H20, the cure for the human body.
Oh for sure, homeboy.
If you think, ok, that i'm 40 years old, and I couldn't explode you?
With hands?
lol. You're living in fantasy mang.
And it's like this, ok, the surge of interest in water is all part of the stevia revolution and you better be on that train when it comes, cause I'm gonna pay it forward and others will too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320722</id>
	<title>Col Ripper was right!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267476600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are tampering with our precious bodily fluids!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are tampering with our precious bodily fluids !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are tampering with our precious bodily fluids!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319460</id>
	<title>Physics anyone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267471620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wasn't the whole point of the whole quantum mechanics thingie that you cannot measure things this precise?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Was n't the whole point of the whole quantum mechanics thingie that you can not measure things this precise ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wasn't the whole point of the whole quantum mechanics thingie that you cannot measure things this precise?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31339050</id>
	<title>Forget Ice, Where's My Whiskey9 ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267539060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Spaketh the sage : "I drink 'cause it's liquid. If it wer.... " etc. n'so on...</p><p>g'night.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spaketh the sage : " I drink 'cause it 's liquid .
If it wer.... " etc .
n'so on...g'night .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spaketh the sage : "I drink 'cause it's liquid.
If it wer.... " etc.
n'so on...g'night.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319800</id>
	<title>In other news</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267472820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Understanding complex issue X can increase our ability to cure cancer and HIV, thereby making X-research eligible for the ocean of cancer-related research funding.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/Mister Cynical</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Understanding complex issue X can increase our ability to cure cancer and HIV , thereby making X-research eligible for the ocean of cancer-related research funding .
/Mister Cynical</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Understanding complex issue X can increase our ability to cure cancer and HIV, thereby making X-research eligible for the ocean of cancer-related research funding.
/Mister Cynical</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31324446</id>
	<title>Re:Who vets these articles???</title>
	<author>Rich0</author>
	<datestamp>1267448700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agree with you on PNAS - they're generally considered a top-tier journal with the exception of anything written by NAS members.  So, the irony is that the articles written by no-names in that journal are often the better ones.  That isn't to say that NAS members can't write good stuff - only that skipping the review stage allows them not to in some cases.</p><p>That said, water structure is an interesting topic.  I had a professor in college going back 15 years that was doing work in this area.  The college didn't have a lot of funding so the methods were fairly classical.  If you look at the properties of simple compounds that have a mix of hydophilic and hydrophobic character you'll find that they behave as if their size in solution is much larger than you'd otherwise expect.  This is because the water molecules surrounding the hydrophobic regions become ordered and contribute to the apparent size of the molecule.  A simple viscosity measurement will demonstrate this fairly well.</p><p>Now, just measuring viscosity doesn't tell you exactly what is happening at the molecular level, but it does go to show you that you can do fairly advanced work without a $10M grant.  Moderately more expensive techniques can generate more experimental constraints, and it sounds like modelling is getting to the point where perhaps we can use those constraints to make some models.</p><p>For a more direct look at this sort of thing I once heard a talk by a guy who was immersing protein crystals in organic solvents.  This would actually stabilize loosely-bound water molecules associated with the protein so that you could detect them in an X-Ray crystal structure (sometimes 2 layers deep).  The obvious downside is that this really isn't observing the system under normal conditions.  Crystallography is a lot more expensive than a viscometer, but it still is a relatively cheap field.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agree with you on PNAS - they 're generally considered a top-tier journal with the exception of anything written by NAS members .
So , the irony is that the articles written by no-names in that journal are often the better ones .
That is n't to say that NAS members ca n't write good stuff - only that skipping the review stage allows them not to in some cases.That said , water structure is an interesting topic .
I had a professor in college going back 15 years that was doing work in this area .
The college did n't have a lot of funding so the methods were fairly classical .
If you look at the properties of simple compounds that have a mix of hydophilic and hydrophobic character you 'll find that they behave as if their size in solution is much larger than you 'd otherwise expect .
This is because the water molecules surrounding the hydrophobic regions become ordered and contribute to the apparent size of the molecule .
A simple viscosity measurement will demonstrate this fairly well.Now , just measuring viscosity does n't tell you exactly what is happening at the molecular level , but it does go to show you that you can do fairly advanced work without a $ 10M grant .
Moderately more expensive techniques can generate more experimental constraints , and it sounds like modelling is getting to the point where perhaps we can use those constraints to make some models.For a more direct look at this sort of thing I once heard a talk by a guy who was immersing protein crystals in organic solvents .
This would actually stabilize loosely-bound water molecules associated with the protein so that you could detect them in an X-Ray crystal structure ( sometimes 2 layers deep ) .
The obvious downside is that this really is n't observing the system under normal conditions .
Crystallography is a lot more expensive than a viscometer , but it still is a relatively cheap field .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agree with you on PNAS - they're generally considered a top-tier journal with the exception of anything written by NAS members.
So, the irony is that the articles written by no-names in that journal are often the better ones.
That isn't to say that NAS members can't write good stuff - only that skipping the review stage allows them not to in some cases.That said, water structure is an interesting topic.
I had a professor in college going back 15 years that was doing work in this area.
The college didn't have a lot of funding so the methods were fairly classical.
If you look at the properties of simple compounds that have a mix of hydophilic and hydrophobic character you'll find that they behave as if their size in solution is much larger than you'd otherwise expect.
This is because the water molecules surrounding the hydrophobic regions become ordered and contribute to the apparent size of the molecule.
A simple viscosity measurement will demonstrate this fairly well.Now, just measuring viscosity doesn't tell you exactly what is happening at the molecular level, but it does go to show you that you can do fairly advanced work without a $10M grant.
Moderately more expensive techniques can generate more experimental constraints, and it sounds like modelling is getting to the point where perhaps we can use those constraints to make some models.For a more direct look at this sort of thing I once heard a talk by a guy who was immersing protein crystals in organic solvents.
This would actually stabilize loosely-bound water molecules associated with the protein so that you could detect them in an X-Ray crystal structure (sometimes 2 layers deep).
The obvious downside is that this really isn't observing the system under normal conditions.
Crystallography is a lot more expensive than a viscometer, but it still is a relatively cheap field.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320128</id>
	<title>Funding needed for research on ...</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1267474080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>... the behavior of H2O - C2H5OH solutions. Please expedite. I'm making a run for supplies ASAP.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... the behavior of H2O - C2H5OH solutions .
Please expedite .
I 'm making a run for supplies ASAP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... the behavior of H2O - C2H5OH solutions.
Please expedite.
I'm making a run for supplies ASAP.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319500</id>
	<title>Ice 9</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267471740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or they could unlock the secret of creating Ice 9.</p><p>We are all doomed!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or they could unlock the secret of creating Ice 9.We are all doomed !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or they could unlock the secret of creating Ice 9.We are all doomed!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31325124</id>
	<title>Re:Physics anyone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267453320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually the term is Scuzzywumple.  It got its name from a quote by Feynmn in a conversation he was having with with a German experimentalist colleague in which he was relating his many paths idea and went into a tangent about Langston Hughs and Dr Seus that ended in a rather hilarious anecdote involving a made up furry creature and the number of neck ties one could expect to find in California.  Its sort of a famous story amongst physics types, as it is rather hilarious.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually the term is Scuzzywumple .
It got its name from a quote by Feynmn in a conversation he was having with with a German experimentalist colleague in which he was relating his many paths idea and went into a tangent about Langston Hughs and Dr Seus that ended in a rather hilarious anecdote involving a made up furry creature and the number of neck ties one could expect to find in California .
Its sort of a famous story amongst physics types , as it is rather hilarious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually the term is Scuzzywumple.
It got its name from a quote by Feynmn in a conversation he was having with with a German experimentalist colleague in which he was relating his many paths idea and went into a tangent about Langston Hughs and Dr Seus that ended in a rather hilarious anecdote involving a made up furry creature and the number of neck ties one could expect to find in California.
Its sort of a famous story amongst physics types, as it is rather hilarious.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31325774</id>
	<title>try some tea instead</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267458660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://hitchhikers.wikia.com/wiki/Infinite\_Improbability\_Drive" title="wikia.com" rel="nofollow">http://hitchhikers.wikia.com/wiki/Infinite\_Improbability\_Drive</a> [wikia.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //hitchhikers.wikia.com/wiki/Infinite \ _Improbability \ _Drive [ wikia.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://hitchhikers.wikia.com/wiki/Infinite\_Improbability\_Drive [wikia.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31327122</id>
	<title>Duplicate</title>
	<author>redGiraffe</author>
	<datestamp>1267472880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This article on Homeopathy was posted last week, who was checking submissions?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This article on Homeopathy was posted last week , who was checking submissions ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This article on Homeopathy was posted last week, who was checking submissions?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320730</id>
	<title>Re:Finally a cure for DHMO poisoning</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267476600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jesus, some people use this in pools to keep the balance??</p><p>YES, AND LET'S JUST USE LAVA TO CLEANSE OUR SKIN.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jesus , some people use this in pools to keep the balance ?
? YES , AND LET 'S JUST USE LAVA TO CLEANSE OUR SKIN .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jesus, some people use this in pools to keep the balance?
?YES, AND LET'S JUST USE LAVA TO CLEANSE OUR SKIN.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319690</id>
	<title>Water structure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267472340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, on its 125th anniversary Science Magazine listed "What is the structure of water?" as one of the 100 questions that will keep scientists busy this century.</p><p>http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/309/5731/78b</p><p>Simple as it might seem, water is one of the most complex fluids, because of the long range order created by hydrogen bonds.</p><p>Trust me. I am betting 5 years of f*ck*ng PhD work on water structure and dynamics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , on its 125th anniversary Science Magazine listed " What is the structure of water ?
" as one of the 100 questions that will keep scientists busy this century.http : //www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/309/5731/78bSimple as it might seem , water is one of the most complex fluids , because of the long range order created by hydrogen bonds.Trust me .
I am betting 5 years of f * ck * ng PhD work on water structure and dynamics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, on its 125th anniversary Science Magazine listed "What is the structure of water?
" as one of the 100 questions that will keep scientists busy this century.http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/309/5731/78bSimple as it might seem, water is one of the most complex fluids, because of the long range order created by hydrogen bonds.Trust me.
I am betting 5 years of f*ck*ng PhD work on water structure and dynamics.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319612</id>
	<title>Re:Physics anyone?</title>
	<author>skgrey</author>
	<datestamp>1267472100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ten points for bringing up quantum mechanics and measuring precision, negative a thousand points for referring to it as a "thingie".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ten points for bringing up quantum mechanics and measuring precision , negative a thousand points for referring to it as a " thingie " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ten points for bringing up quantum mechanics and measuring precision, negative a thousand points for referring to it as a "thingie".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319448</id>
	<title>Oh they're all wet.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267471560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, someone had to say it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , someone had to say it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, someone had to say it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319716</id>
	<title>Re:Physics anyone?</title>
	<author>The\_Wilschon</author>
	<datestamp>1267472460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not certain, but I suspect that this is an instance of a relatively new field called "mesoscale physics".  This deals with systems on scales between the atomic or single molecule level and the thermodynamic level.  Quantum effects are significant, but not as dominant as in atomic (and smaller) physics, but you don't have the advantage of having enough particles to use average statistical behaviour in place of a complete description (ie no thermodynamic limit).  It is very very difficult, and it is only recently that we have the tools to begin tackling these sorts of problems.  We had one faculty member working on this in my department, but she has recently departed for another university.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not certain , but I suspect that this is an instance of a relatively new field called " mesoscale physics " .
This deals with systems on scales between the atomic or single molecule level and the thermodynamic level .
Quantum effects are significant , but not as dominant as in atomic ( and smaller ) physics , but you do n't have the advantage of having enough particles to use average statistical behaviour in place of a complete description ( ie no thermodynamic limit ) .
It is very very difficult , and it is only recently that we have the tools to begin tackling these sorts of problems .
We had one faculty member working on this in my department , but she has recently departed for another university .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not certain, but I suspect that this is an instance of a relatively new field called "mesoscale physics".
This deals with systems on scales between the atomic or single molecule level and the thermodynamic level.
Quantum effects are significant, but not as dominant as in atomic (and smaller) physics, but you don't have the advantage of having enough particles to use average statistical behaviour in place of a complete description (ie no thermodynamic limit).
It is very very difficult, and it is only recently that we have the tools to begin tackling these sorts of problems.
We had one faculty member working on this in my department, but she has recently departed for another university.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31322158</id>
	<title>Re:Polywater</title>
	<author>maestroX</author>
	<datestamp>1267438500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What I find interesting is that this opens up at least the possibility of that old sci-fi standby (really old - I haven't seen a reference to it in modern sci-fi) of polywater.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Polywater is so last century<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District\_9" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">cat food</a> [wikipedia.org] is the future!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What I find interesting is that this opens up at least the possibility of that old sci-fi standby ( really old - I have n't seen a reference to it in modern sci-fi ) of polywater .
Polywater is so last century ... cat food [ wikipedia.org ] is the future !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I find interesting is that this opens up at least the possibility of that old sci-fi standby (really old - I haven't seen a reference to it in modern sci-fi) of polywater.
Polywater is so last century ... cat food [wikipedia.org] is the future!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31324532</id>
	<title>False statement in TFA</title>
	<author>NCatron</author>
	<datestamp>1267449060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"...to improving chemotherapy drugs whose side effects arise from their solubility or insolubility in water."</p><p>This is absolutely not true.  The side effect is inherent to the molecular structure of the molecule, not its solubility or lack thereof.  (If it's insoluble it doesn't get into the body, and hence doesn't have a side effect... but then it has no effect at all.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...to improving chemotherapy drugs whose side effects arise from their solubility or insolubility in water .
" This is absolutely not true .
The side effect is inherent to the molecular structure of the molecule , not its solubility or lack thereof .
( If it 's insoluble it does n't get into the body , and hence does n't have a side effect... but then it has no effect at all .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...to improving chemotherapy drugs whose side effects arise from their solubility or insolubility in water.
"This is absolutely not true.
The side effect is inherent to the molecular structure of the molecule, not its solubility or lack thereof.
(If it's insoluble it doesn't get into the body, and hence doesn't have a side effect... but then it has no effect at all.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31322934</id>
	<title>I knew Vonnegut knew more than he was letting on</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267441380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is Ice-9! We're doomed!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is Ice-9 !
We 're doomed !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is Ice-9!
We're doomed!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31323784</id>
	<title>Re:tetra = 5?</title>
	<author>robotkid</author>
	<datestamp>1267445100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>every water molecule fleetingly interacts with its four nearest neighbors, forming a tetrahedron</p></div><p>So that's why I haven't cured cancer yet- I didn't realized the tetrahedrons in water need to have five points!</p></div><p>The water model consists of 5 points.  You could think of it as one for each of the (2) hydrogens, one for the oxygen, and two for the lone pairs that cause water to be V-shaped instead of linear.

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water\_model#5-site" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water\_model#5-site</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>every water molecule fleetingly interacts with its four nearest neighbors , forming a tetrahedronSo that 's why I have n't cured cancer yet- I did n't realized the tetrahedrons in water need to have five points ! The water model consists of 5 points .
You could think of it as one for each of the ( 2 ) hydrogens , one for the oxygen , and two for the lone pairs that cause water to be V-shaped instead of linear .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water \ _model # 5-site [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>every water molecule fleetingly interacts with its four nearest neighbors, forming a tetrahedronSo that's why I haven't cured cancer yet- I didn't realized the tetrahedrons in water need to have five points!The water model consists of 5 points.
You could think of it as one for each of the (2) hydrogens, one for the oxygen, and two for the lone pairs that cause water to be V-shaped instead of linear.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water\_model#5-site [wikipedia.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321652</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321938</id>
	<title>Re:Physics anyone?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267437600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know a really cute physics student I'd like to teach about thingies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know a really cute physics student I 'd like to teach about thingies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know a really cute physics student I'd like to teach about thingies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319994</id>
	<title>Futurama</title>
	<author>kannibal\_klown</author>
	<datestamp>1267473540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Wasn't the whole point of the whole quantum mechanics thingie that you cannot measure things this precise?</p></div><p>No Fair!  You changed the outcome by measuring it.<br>- Prof Farnsworth, Futurama</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Was n't the whole point of the whole quantum mechanics thingie that you can not measure things this precise ? No Fair !
You changed the outcome by measuring it.- Prof Farnsworth , Futurama</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wasn't the whole point of the whole quantum mechanics thingie that you cannot measure things this precise?No Fair!
You changed the outcome by measuring it.- Prof Farnsworth, Futurama
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319480</id>
	<title>Man.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267471680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I fucking love living in "the future".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I fucking love living in " the future " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I fucking love living in "the future".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319530</id>
	<title>Hmm...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267471860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Homeopathy FTW?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Homeopathy FTW ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Homeopathy FTW?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31323744</id>
	<title>Re:Polywater</title>
	<author>amirulbahr</author>
	<datestamp>1267444860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What I find interesting is that this opens up at least the possibility of that old sci-fi standby (really old - I haven't seen a reference to it in modern sci-fi) of polywater.</p></div><p>How?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Polywater is supposed to be one of those "unobtaniums", theoretically impossible - but then again, bees have been "proven" not to be able to fly.</p></div><p>Do you even know the story about Polywater.  It's not a theoretical anything.  The idea came about because of shoddy experiments that introduced contamination.  It really does boggle the mind how stupid ideas can persist in peoples minds and continue to be regurgitated.

</p><p>Read <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywater" title="wikipedia.org">about it</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What I find interesting is that this opens up at least the possibility of that old sci-fi standby ( really old - I have n't seen a reference to it in modern sci-fi ) of polywater.How ? Polywater is supposed to be one of those " unobtaniums " , theoretically impossible - but then again , bees have been " proven " not to be able to fly.Do you even know the story about Polywater .
It 's not a theoretical anything .
The idea came about because of shoddy experiments that introduced contamination .
It really does boggle the mind how stupid ideas can persist in peoples minds and continue to be regurgitated .
Read about it [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I find interesting is that this opens up at least the possibility of that old sci-fi standby (really old - I haven't seen a reference to it in modern sci-fi) of polywater.How?Polywater is supposed to be one of those "unobtaniums", theoretically impossible - but then again, bees have been "proven" not to be able to fly.Do you even know the story about Polywater.
It's not a theoretical anything.
The idea came about because of shoddy experiments that introduced contamination.
It really does boggle the mind how stupid ideas can persist in peoples minds and continue to be regurgitated.
Read about it [wikipedia.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319610</id>
	<title>Finally a cure for DHMO poisoning</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267472100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps this might lead to finally finding a cure for <a href="http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html" title="dhmo.org">http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html</a> [dhmo.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps this might lead to finally finding a cure for http : //www.dhmo.org/facts.html [ dhmo.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps this might lead to finally finding a cure for http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html [dhmo.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320448</id>
	<title>maybe they'll rediscover "polywater"</title>
	<author>peter303</author>
	<datestamp>1267475400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywater" title="wikipedia.org"> Polywater </a> [wikipedia.org] was the "cold fusion" of the 1960s.  There is a new age fad called <a href="http://www.greenplanetparadise.com/Water\%20Movie\%20-\%20Water\%20The\%20Great\%20Mystery\%20DVD" title="greenplanetparadise.com"> structured water  </a> [greenplanetparadise.com]too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Polywater [ wikipedia.org ] was the " cold fusion " of the 1960s .
There is a new age fad called structured water [ greenplanetparadise.com ] too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Polywater  [wikipedia.org] was the "cold fusion" of the 1960s.
There is a new age fad called  structured water   [greenplanetparadise.com]too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321874</id>
	<title>Wow, I bet the Homeopathy people will invest</title>
	<author>gurps\_npc</author>
	<datestamp>1267437360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why they must deeply desire to understand what water does, right?  <b> Unless of course they know their 'science' is bogus.</b></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why they must deeply desire to understand what water does , right ?
Unless of course they know their 'science ' is bogus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why they must deeply desire to understand what water does, right?
Unless of course they know their 'science' is bogus.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321652</id>
	<title>tetra = 5?</title>
	<author>v.dog</author>
	<datestamp>1267436640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>every water molecule fleetingly interacts with its four nearest neighbors, forming a tetrahedron</p></div><p>So that's why I haven't cured cancer yet- I didn't realized the tetrahedrons in water need to have five points!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>every water molecule fleetingly interacts with its four nearest neighbors , forming a tetrahedronSo that 's why I have n't cured cancer yet- I did n't realized the tetrahedrons in water need to have five points !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>every water molecule fleetingly interacts with its four nearest neighbors, forming a tetrahedronSo that's why I haven't cured cancer yet- I didn't realized the tetrahedrons in water need to have five points!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321254</id>
	<title>The top priority should be.......</title>
	<author>voodoo cheesecake</author>
	<datestamp>1267435260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To use this research for water and wastewater treatment, the basis for civilization. For instance, chlorine is used to disinfect water but is not 100\% effective. Chlorine leaves behind disinfection by-products which are a common cause of taste and odor problems in municipal water supplies. The EPA says there must be a chlorine residual of 5mg/L at the farthest point in the distribution system. Chlorine combines with many organic molecules to form carcinogens, (chloramines). Chlorine is not needed after it leaves the distribution system. There really needs to be an effective and economical alternative! If chlorine is used to kill organisms then why are we drinking it? Also, there are many organisms that survive the treatment process whether they are immune to chlorine or not. These organisms form colonies in the distribution system and feed off of each others wastes and have to be removed by stuffing a foam bullet down a supply line. Then there's also the issue of sediments contaminating your water from the iron and copper pipes which distribute it. Also, look at the corrosion of your hot water pipes. This is because the lime used to treat water falls out of suspension at warmer temperatures, but is still suspended in the cold water you drink. Wastewater treatment is a tricky business that we largely depend on microbes to do the dirty work. This process has to be closely monitored since what is in the wastewater is never constant unless you are treating industrial wastewater. A good portion of industrial, medical and food processing outfits are fined for the wastes they produce, but only pass that cost on to the consumer. Hopefully one day there will be a method effectively and economically discriminate contaminants at any point of discharge, whether wastewater or at the tap. Until then, waste the first 30 seconds of water from your tap or at least until the chlorine smell goes away.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To use this research for water and wastewater treatment , the basis for civilization .
For instance , chlorine is used to disinfect water but is not 100 \ % effective .
Chlorine leaves behind disinfection by-products which are a common cause of taste and odor problems in municipal water supplies .
The EPA says there must be a chlorine residual of 5mg/L at the farthest point in the distribution system .
Chlorine combines with many organic molecules to form carcinogens , ( chloramines ) .
Chlorine is not needed after it leaves the distribution system .
There really needs to be an effective and economical alternative !
If chlorine is used to kill organisms then why are we drinking it ?
Also , there are many organisms that survive the treatment process whether they are immune to chlorine or not .
These organisms form colonies in the distribution system and feed off of each others wastes and have to be removed by stuffing a foam bullet down a supply line .
Then there 's also the issue of sediments contaminating your water from the iron and copper pipes which distribute it .
Also , look at the corrosion of your hot water pipes .
This is because the lime used to treat water falls out of suspension at warmer temperatures , but is still suspended in the cold water you drink .
Wastewater treatment is a tricky business that we largely depend on microbes to do the dirty work .
This process has to be closely monitored since what is in the wastewater is never constant unless you are treating industrial wastewater .
A good portion of industrial , medical and food processing outfits are fined for the wastes they produce , but only pass that cost on to the consumer .
Hopefully one day there will be a method effectively and economically discriminate contaminants at any point of discharge , whether wastewater or at the tap .
Until then , waste the first 30 seconds of water from your tap or at least until the chlorine smell goes away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To use this research for water and wastewater treatment, the basis for civilization.
For instance, chlorine is used to disinfect water but is not 100\% effective.
Chlorine leaves behind disinfection by-products which are a common cause of taste and odor problems in municipal water supplies.
The EPA says there must be a chlorine residual of 5mg/L at the farthest point in the distribution system.
Chlorine combines with many organic molecules to form carcinogens, (chloramines).
Chlorine is not needed after it leaves the distribution system.
There really needs to be an effective and economical alternative!
If chlorine is used to kill organisms then why are we drinking it?
Also, there are many organisms that survive the treatment process whether they are immune to chlorine or not.
These organisms form colonies in the distribution system and feed off of each others wastes and have to be removed by stuffing a foam bullet down a supply line.
Then there's also the issue of sediments contaminating your water from the iron and copper pipes which distribute it.
Also, look at the corrosion of your hot water pipes.
This is because the lime used to treat water falls out of suspension at warmer temperatures, but is still suspended in the cold water you drink.
Wastewater treatment is a tricky business that we largely depend on microbes to do the dirty work.
This process has to be closely monitored since what is in the wastewater is never constant unless you are treating industrial wastewater.
A good portion of industrial, medical and food processing outfits are fined for the wastes they produce, but only pass that cost on to the consumer.
Hopefully one day there will be a method effectively and economically discriminate contaminants at any point of discharge, whether wastewater or at the tap.
Until then, waste the first 30 seconds of water from your tap or at least until the chlorine smell goes away.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31322398</id>
	<title>Re:Polywater</title>
	<author>c6gunner</author>
	<datestamp>1267439280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Polywater is supposed to be one of those "unobtaniums", theoretically impossible - but then again, bees have been "proven" not to be able to fly.</p></div><p>People like you make my head hurt.</p><p>It's just mind-boggling to me that such an obvious and completely asinine urban legend is STILL being repeated some 70 years after it was first invented.  I can understand young children repeating everything they're told<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... but judging by your user number, you're probably older than I am.  Stop and think before you speak!</p><p><div class="quote"><p>What I find interesting is that this opens up at least the possibility of that old sci-fi standby (really old - I haven't seen a reference to it in modern sci-fi) of polywater.</p> </div><p>No, it doesn't.  As Feynman said, if pollywater were possible, we'd have an animal that doesn't eat.  It would just drink normal water and excrete polywater, living off of the energy released in the process.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Polywater is supposed to be one of those " unobtaniums " , theoretically impossible - but then again , bees have been " proven " not to be able to fly.People like you make my head hurt.It 's just mind-boggling to me that such an obvious and completely asinine urban legend is STILL being repeated some 70 years after it was first invented .
I can understand young children repeating everything they 're told ... but judging by your user number , you 're probably older than I am .
Stop and think before you speak ! What I find interesting is that this opens up at least the possibility of that old sci-fi standby ( really old - I have n't seen a reference to it in modern sci-fi ) of polywater .
No , it does n't .
As Feynman said , if pollywater were possible , we 'd have an animal that does n't eat .
It would just drink normal water and excrete polywater , living off of the energy released in the process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Polywater is supposed to be one of those "unobtaniums", theoretically impossible - but then again, bees have been "proven" not to be able to fly.People like you make my head hurt.It's just mind-boggling to me that such an obvious and completely asinine urban legend is STILL being repeated some 70 years after it was first invented.
I can understand young children repeating everything they're told ... but judging by your user number, you're probably older than I am.
Stop and think before you speak!What I find interesting is that this opens up at least the possibility of that old sci-fi standby (really old - I haven't seen a reference to it in modern sci-fi) of polywater.
No, it doesn't.
As Feynman said, if pollywater were possible, we'd have an animal that doesn't eat.
It would just drink normal water and excrete polywater, living off of the energy released in the process.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320088</id>
	<title>Please</title>
	<author>tsa</author>
	<datestamp>1267473900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>...could lead to solving some of the world's most tricky problems from agriculture to cancer.</i> <br>
&nbsp; <br>Please please PR people, come with something more original next time. The solving cancer thing is so old, nobody believes that anymore. And I never knew agriculture was a problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...could lead to solving some of the world 's most tricky problems from agriculture to cancer .
  Please please PR people , come with something more original next time .
The solving cancer thing is so old , nobody believes that anymore .
And I never knew agriculture was a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...could lead to solving some of the world's most tricky problems from agriculture to cancer.
  Please please PR people, come with something more original next time.
The solving cancer thing is so old, nobody believes that anymore.
And I never knew agriculture was a problem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31322466</id>
	<title>Re:Physics anyone?</title>
	<author>thomst</author>
	<datestamp>1267439640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"And a bird, you cannot change". -- Yoda Skynard</p></div><p>"And this bird, change you cannot". -- Yoda Skynnard</p><p>Fixed that for you!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" And a bird , you can not change " .
-- Yoda Skynard " And this bird , change you can not " .
-- Yoda SkynnardFixed that for you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"And a bird, you cannot change".
-- Yoda Skynard"And this bird, change you cannot".
-- Yoda SkynnardFixed that for you!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31324300</id>
	<title>There were clues...</title>
	<author>meburke</author>
	<datestamp>1267447680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I struggled through the article (I'm not a physicist although I studied lots of Physics 35 years ago), and realized I was able to understand it because I twice struggled through reading R. Buckminster Fuller's, "Synergetics" Vols I and II. His key point on systems practically begins with a tetrahedron <a href="http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/s04/p0100.html#402.00" title="rwgrayprojects.com">http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/s04/p0100.html#402.00</a> [rwgrayprojects.com] , but his description of close-packing atoms and molecules is pretty vivid.</p><p>(Anyone trying to visit the site above: Do not be discouraged. It is full of totally interesting concepts and well-worth the effort. It helps to have a reading method such as described in Mortimer Adler's, "How to read a Book", <a href="http://www.amazon.com/How-Read-Book-Touchstone-book/dp/0671212095" title="amazon.com">http://www.amazon.com/How-Read-Book-Touchstone-book/dp/0671212095</a> [amazon.com] which is also worth the effort.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I struggled through the article ( I 'm not a physicist although I studied lots of Physics 35 years ago ) , and realized I was able to understand it because I twice struggled through reading R. Buckminster Fuller 's , " Synergetics " Vols I and II .
His key point on systems practically begins with a tetrahedron http : //www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/s04/p0100.html # 402.00 [ rwgrayprojects.com ] , but his description of close-packing atoms and molecules is pretty vivid .
( Anyone trying to visit the site above : Do not be discouraged .
It is full of totally interesting concepts and well-worth the effort .
It helps to have a reading method such as described in Mortimer Adler 's , " How to read a Book " , http : //www.amazon.com/How-Read-Book-Touchstone-book/dp/0671212095 [ amazon.com ] which is also worth the effort .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I struggled through the article (I'm not a physicist although I studied lots of Physics 35 years ago), and realized I was able to understand it because I twice struggled through reading R. Buckminster Fuller's, "Synergetics" Vols I and II.
His key point on systems practically begins with a tetrahedron http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/s04/p0100.html#402.00 [rwgrayprojects.com] , but his description of close-packing atoms and molecules is pretty vivid.
(Anyone trying to visit the site above: Do not be discouraged.
It is full of totally interesting concepts and well-worth the effort.
It helps to have a reading method such as described in Mortimer Adler's, "How to read a Book", http://www.amazon.com/How-Read-Book-Touchstone-book/dp/0671212095 [amazon.com] which is also worth the effort.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319678</id>
	<title>Re:Physics anyone?</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1267472340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Molecules are pretty huge in terms of quantum mechanics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Molecules are pretty huge in terms of quantum mechanics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Molecules are pretty huge in terms of quantum mechanics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321752</id>
	<title>Re:Man.</title>
	<author>ConceptJunkie</author>
	<datestamp>1267436880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wish I could, but no matter how long I wait, it's always the present.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish I could , but no matter how long I wait , it 's always the present .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish I could, but no matter how long I wait, it's always the present.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319480</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31322466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31324446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31324354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31323744
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321752
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31322158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319716
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31325124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31322398
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320580
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31323784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319678
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_01_172216_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_172216.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319610
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320730
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_172216.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319448
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_172216.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31323784
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_172216.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319530
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320364
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_172216.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319800
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_172216.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320296
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_172216.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321752
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_172216.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320580
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31322398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31322158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31323744
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_172216.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319690
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_172216.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319736
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_172216.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319702
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319612
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320270
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31325124
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31322466
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321938
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319678
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319716
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319994
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_172216.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31321268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31324354
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31324446
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_172216.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320058
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_172216.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31320088
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_01_172216.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_01_172216.31319732
</commentlist>
</conversation>
