This follows the success of last year’s ideal Yorkshire puddings (popovers to our American friends) – and the decree that they cannot be named so unless they rise to four inches or higher. Chemist, author and roast dinner expert John Emsley has issued a new recipe for nutrionally-balanced, chemically-perfect and extremely tasty gravy in the tradional fashion… sort of.

It combines some traditional elements with some chemistry magic – most controversial is the inclusion of soya sauce, normally associated with Eastern cuisine but here included in the quintessential Englishman’s Sunday roast.

Here’s John’s recipe:

Ingredients

The juices from a roast joint of meat, preferably beef
Flour
Vegetable water (cabbage)
Iodised salt
Teaspoon of dark soya sauce.
Pepper
Gravy browning if you prefer a darker gravy.

Method

The joint should be cooked on a bed of halved onions, carrots and celery on to which juices from the meat will slowly trickle. When the meat is cooked, remove it from the roasting tin along with the vegetables. Sprinkle a small amount of plain flour over the meat juices and fat. Stir to form a dough (roux) gradually adding the water in which vegetables have been cooked, preferably cabbage water. Ensure all the meat juices and Marmite-like deposits on the bottom of the roasting dish have dissolved. Then add iodised salt to taste and a teaspoon of dark soya sauce (rather than gravy browning) or a little red wine . Simmer to reduce the volume of liquid to the right consistency, stirring occasionally.

Chemical and nutritional composition of gravy

Protein from the collagen of the meat.
Vitamins, and especially B1, B6, folic acid, riboflavin and nicotinic acid.
Carbohydrate from the flour and gravy browning. Gravy browning is caramelised sugar and can be bought, or it can be made using the recipe in Mrs Beeton’s Book of Household Management published in 1859. This says to heat sugar until it caramelises but does not become too dark.
Minerals such as sodium and iodine.
Monosodium glutamate (MSG) from the soya sauce which brings out the meaty (umami) flavour.

What do you think? Share your own best gravy recipes in the comments…

So when flooded with queries from the public and RSC staff regarding the efficacy of conkers as a spider repellent, we shook ourselves dry and led the charge on a public scientific endeavour – to prove or dismiss the old wives’ tale that spiders really do hate conkers. For the best evidence (one way or the other) we’re offering a prize of £300.

We hypothesise that if it works there must be some chemistry in it. So the call went out to the public, through the illustrious pages of the Daily Telegraph, The Times and Daily Mail, various radio stations, and BBC Breakfast – and the public have responded with eyewitness accounts, photos, videos and even scientific experiments!

Let’s start with our own experiments. RSC staffer Will Russell cleared his busy schedule to spend part of his weekend taunting spiders with conkers and a control object (a table-tennis ball). The results were somewhat inconclusive – each spider reacted differently. Some good scientific methodology here: repeat experiments, a “control”, and the will to do a science experiment on the weekend.

Even Will’s rigorous experiments could not compare to those of Years 5 and 6 of Roselyon School in Cornwall, aided by teacher Mr Ferguson. The budding young scientists designed their own experiments with clearly-defined parameters for success, and demonstrated three of them on camera. They concluded that spiders weren’t bothered by conkers for the most part. Their video is below and well worth watching.

As I wade through the hundreds of letters and photos I’ve been sent, I’ll add more to the overall body of evidence. Below is a gallery of some of the more enlightening photos that we’ve been sent.

The media has happily announced the scientific community’s plans to colonise the Moon, with the recent discovery of significant quantities of water hidden away in Moondust (or whatever it’s called).

A refuelling station, or a full-blown colony for lunar settlers, seems almost within grasp… sort of.

Mark Henderson wrote a great piece in today’s Times titled “Water, water everywhere, but the Moon is still drier than a desert.” I read this as I was putting the finishing touches to my incredibly nerdy spreadsheet, and it verified my own calculations that colonising the Moon is still further away than we’d all hope.

Given that water is contained only within the top few millimetres of soil on the Moon’s surface (source: The Times), that there is a litre or so of water in each metre cubed of soil (source: Science) and that the average colonist would need roughly 4 litres per day to survive in relative comfort (source: a Battlestar Galactica discussion forum), I came up with the following rather arresting stats:

• For each “colonist”, a football pitch’s worth of soil would need to be processed every 16 hours
• This is 12 metric tons of soil
• For a year this is 6510 metric tons, or 545 football pitches
• After this time, at maximum walking speed on the Moon and assuming you worked outwards from your initial location, it would take you 13.4 minutes to walk the two-thirds of a mile to the edge so you could brush your teeth that morning
• It would take 10 million years for that person to use all the water on the Moon
• By this time he would be very lonely and probably not smell very fresh

This is all based on many variables pulled from all over the net, and some I’ve just made up – for example it’s based on 75% extraction efficiency. Who knows if that’s entirely over- or under-estimating what would be realistic?

It also completely ignores other uses for that water, as suggested by the media, such as being electrolysed for use as rocket fuel.

The spreadsheet is on Google Docs so anyone can have a go. Please feel free to fiddle about, and let me know if any of it’s completely wrong or you have better ideas. Any better estimations of the variables would be welcome, but one thing’s for sure: we aren’t going to have self-sustaining colonies up there any time soon.

link to the Google Docs Spreadsheet

A few of the favourites:

“It’s the water. The abundance of rain keeps people in and the best drinking water in the world keeps their minds refreshed and alert.” (via text).

“Scotland produces eminent scientists because claymores tend to discourage competition.” (via Twitter, @agoldson)

“Most came from working class. Learning was a commitment. Dedication & survival meant succeeding in ur chosen field.” (via text)

Praising the stoicism, intelligence or dedication of the Scottish people was a common theme. Also there were frequent references to the inclement weather – a heartfelt response from many Scots entering the competition.

So it’s only fitting that the winning entry is from a Scottish chemist, who had this to say:

“The weather keeps them in the lab during the day, whilst the whisky provides the inspiration at night.”

A poetic, succinct and quite possibly accurate submission from @littleghoti, who will soon be the proud owner of a black iPhone 3GS on O₂ Pay & Go.

O₂ is of course a chemist’s favourite mobile operator. Except maybe methyl Orange.

Monday afternoon’s plenary lecture was given by Prof. Dame Louise Johnson, who after her talk was awarded an honourary fellowship of the Royal Society of Chemistry.

Professor Dame Louise Johnson receives her Royal Society of Chemistry honourary fellowship from RSC President Dave Garner

In the evening Harry Kroto led a great Café Scientifique, talking about what he calls the “GooYouWiki World”, and a lot else besides! The house was full (sorry to those we had to turn away!) and everyone was up for questions and debate in the relaxed atmosphere of the Tron Theatre.

Café Scientifique at the Tron Theatre, Glasgow, with Harry Kroto

We talked a lot about education, particularly in the context of getting the best teaching resources to the teachers that need them most. Harry was keen to explain the benefits of the GeoSet project, too, where students can upload videos and synchronised presentations. “I’ve revolutionised marking,” Harry proudly proclaimed. “While other teachers have a huge stack of essays or papers to mark, I’m sitting at my table with a coffee watching the students on my laptop.”

Harry Kroto at the Tron Theatre

42nd IUPAC Congress Opening Ceremony, The Clyde Auditorium, SECC

Awards were made, by President Jin, to the winners of the IUPAC Prizes for Young Chemists from 2008 and 2009. Congratulations to Emilie Banide, Christopher Thomas Rodgers, Akinori Saeki, Andrea Rae Tao and Scott Warren (2008), and to Faisal Aldaye, Christopher Bettinger, Xinliang Feng, Xing Yi Ling and Shengqian Ma (2009).

The 2008 and 2009 winners of the IUPAC Prizes for Young Chemists

The bit that really stole the show, however, was when we were asked to follow the piper to the reception. Baffled looks abound, but the unmistakable sound came hauntingly through the curtains, and out stepped a kilted piper to lead us to the Glasgow Science Centre.

A traditionally-dressed piper leads the chemist congregation from the Clyde Auditorium

That was yesterday… this morning we had the pleasure and honour of being addressed by the inimitable Sir Harry Kroto. His enthusiastic, heartfelt talks are always a highlight, and today he discussed (among much else) his concept of “three senses”: common sense, uncommon sense (science) and nonsense (too common). And as he said himself: “common sense has been replaced by common NONsense – what we need is UNcommon sense, ie science!”

Sir Harry greets the adoring crowd

We’re so taken with the prodigious scientific output of Scotland that we want to celebrate it by giving away a new Apple iPhone 3GS – the latest and greatest incarnation of Alexander Graham Bell’s telephone. He’s Scottish too. All you have to do is tell us (in 140 chars or fewer, naturally) the reason Scotland produces so many great scientists (via email, blog comment or preferably Tweet). More on Scottish scientists and full competweetion rules later in the post.

The "Armadillo", SECC Glasglow

The 42nd IUPAC Congress is being held in Glasgow at the SECC, a fabulous-looking conference centre on the riverside. The Clyde Auditorium, known affectionately as the “armadillo” building, features heavily on TV. I’m ashamed to say the place I saw it most frequently was on Britain’s Got Talent.

If it were Britain’s Got Scientific Talent, I’d have to bet that the number of Scots to get through to the final would be a lot higher than its toe-curlingly embarrassing ITV counterpart. A probably incomplete list can be found on Wikipedia here, but I thought I’d round up a few highlights of Scottish science, medicine and engineering before telling you how to get your mitts on an iPhone. If you’re desperate to get to the competweetion, just scroll down… but you’re missing out.

I’m biased, so let’s start with the chemists. Joseph Black worked as a doctor and chemist in Glasgow and Edinburgh in the 18th century. He discovered and developed the concepts of latent and specific heat, which led to the theories of thermodynamics we use today. He was also the discover of “fixed air” – later to be called carbon dioxide. This was the first instance of someone proving air was not a single element, but made of a mixture of different gases – a true turning point in chemistry and science in general.

So important was Black to science that the RSC is honouring him with a Chemical Landmark during the IUPAC Congress. RSC Chemical Landmark plaques are given to remember influential people and places in chemistry.

Another great Scottish chemist was Thomas Graham, a 19th century professor of chemistry. The first president of the Chemical Society of London (which would eventually become the Royal Society of Chemistry), Graham is best remembered for this work on the diffusion of gases – resulting in Graham’s Law – and of his invention of the dialyzer, the device upon which dialysis treatment is based. Interestingly he was also the last-ever Master of the Mint, a post he held for the final 15 years of his life.

Although of course I could talk about chemistry forever, Scottish science is far more wide ranging. It’s estimated that throughout the 18th century more than 75% of doctors in London were Scottish or trained in Scotland. Thomas Addison (Addison’s disease et al) William Cullen (taught Joseph Black) and of course Alexander Fleming (penicillin) are but a few of the many medical practitioners and researchers to originate from Scotland.

It’s in our nature as chemists to try to steal famous physicists for our banner, but shall we let them keep a few? Physics-minded Scots of note: James Dewar (Dewar flask), James Maxwell (thermodynamics and electromagnetism), Charles Wilson (cloud chamber) and Lord Kelvin (of degrees Kelvin fame, among much else).

What an embarrasssingly unrepresentative list this is – but you just can’t cover everyone. I missed out some excellent chemists (James “Paraffin” Young, Noble gas discoverer William Ramsay) and other very notable names (popular science writer Mary Somerville, Robert Brown and eponymous Motion). So many inventions used today for all sorts of purposes came from Scotland: the television (John Logie Baird), radar (Robert Watson-Watt), John Napier (logarithms), and of course the telephone (Alexander Graham Bell).

Which leads us nicely onto our competweetion: to win an Apple iPhone 3GS, just tell us what it is about Scotland that provides so many world-leading scientists. Is there something in the water? Your answer HAS to be 140 characters or fewer, meaning it should fit in a tweet.

You can enter in the following ways:

• Preferred way: Twitter. Begin a tweet with #scotsci and it will be counted as an entry.
• If you really can’t abide Twitter, post your answer as a comment to this post or email it to me at edwardsj at rsc dot org. Even if you comment or email, your entry still has to be 140 characters or fewer!

We’ll count all entries up until the end of 1st September. The prize will be one Apple iPhone 3GS 32GB on O₂ Pay&Go, with 12 months’ free web and WiFi. The new iPhones use some excellent chemistry in their oleophobic screen coatings, which resists those annoying fingerprints that plague all touchscreen devices.

Limonene: natural and organic

An enlightening cutting from Tuesday’s London Lite just hit my desk: a review of “six of the best chemical-free deodorants.” Oh ho ho, I thought to myself. More chemical-free myths to debunk on the blog, trying to explain that, while natural and organic, limonene smells the same whether you get it from a citrus fruit or a separating funnel. For the record its molecular structure is to the left. Looks like a chemical to me, but what do I know?

So in this list there are a few of the standard “all-natural, 100% chemical-free” deodorants – the ones with ingredients lists like this. My favourite of the non-chemicals on this particular list is eugenol, which has the delightful alternative name eugenic acid.

But, even better than the chemical-containing 100%-chemical-free deodorants of a standard body-spray nature, there are two that really made me laugh – and think.

Tawas Crystal Deodorant is “a natural crystal of potassium alum, (nothing to do with aluminium) formed from non toxic minerals in mother earth.”

Umm. ChemSpidey-sense tingling, I performed a quick search on everyone’s favourite free chemical information source that revealed, of course, the chemical formula of potassium alum is KAl(SO₄)₂. Nothing to do with aluminium? Where did they think the name came from?

Perhaps the winner, though, is the Zielonka Bodystick. This comes closest to the “chemical-free” claim, as it doesn’t use a spray or wipe of chemicals to neutralise odour or act as an astringent (normally aluminium-based, to close pores and reduce sweating).

Instead the product comprises a steel stick in a plastic case. When wetted and rubbed under-arm, the steel “acts as a catalyst to the process of converting odour chain molecules into bland non-odour chains through the introduction of the alloy smell killer in conjunction with air and water.”

Whoa there – that’s swinging dangerously close to actual science. I’m almost convinced! I can believe that a nickel-iron-based alloy could catalyse… well something, anyway. What are these non-odour chains, though? Zielonka explains:

“If you then break the organic string, you are then only left with individual pearls and subsequently the pattern disappears. This, if you break the ‘odour chain’ then the scent disappears as well. Because odours are organic substances, no hazardous waste is created, except what could be regarded as below the measurable level of ‘odour compost’.”

Aha… so because the catalysed products are organic, they’re not hazardous. Off the top of my head I can think of quite a few small organic molecules I’d rather not wipe under my armpits, one being methanol (with which I have some experience, cleaning high-vacuum equipment in the Stavros lab at Warwick).

The helpful and polite lady at the end of the phone for Natural Figure, distributor of the Zielonka Bodystick, didn’t have the exact mechanism of the catalysis to hand. I’ve put in a few requests by email to the supplier and the manufacturer to see if I can find out more.

I’m intrigued, though – is there any way this could work? I don’t want to write it off until I’m shown some really bad pseudo-science as proof. Any nickel/steel catalysis experts out there want to voice an opinion?

As Marion (Leigh) showers, a shadowy figure is seen through the shower curtain. The curtain is thrown back by the faceless figure, knife poised to strike, and Marion lets rip that famous bloodcurdling scream, as her attacker repeatedly stabs her to the backdrop of the now infamous orchestral stings.

It’s been recreated and parodied many times, but for some reason no-one has focused on the most important issue: such an indulgent shower is wasting a lot of water and setting a bad example.

Research we conducted previously with Ipsos MORI said that Britons (especially women) were among the most negligent showerers in Europe, with our French, German and Spanish neighbours being far more concerned about the amount of water wasted and composition of various soaps and gels we wash down the plughole.

So to draw attention to the plight, and attempt to remedy it, we’re looking for someone to fill the shoes… err… the role of Janet Leigh, and take part in a tasteful remake of the scene, to be titled Shower Murder.

The film will be a sixty-second video showing how one can shower effectively in one minute without wasting water. If you feel you’re the one for the role, send an email with a passport photo to elliotts at rsc dot org.

These exams are for all students wishing to enter the high school. I must admit the translation isn’t perfect, but the aim of each question is clear. And quite revealing.

As reported by The Daily Telegraph this morning (story here), Dr Richard Pike, RSC’s chief executive, said: “In Britain most of the questions with some sort of mathematics or problem solving are very straight forward. With the Chinese ones you’ve got to think a little bit further, you can’t just stick down the answer.”

While a similar gradation of questions – from an easy start to difficult finish – can be seen in the new GCSEs, the curve is much steeper for the Chinese exams. Many of the longer answers require much critical thinking and problem-solving skill; compare this with the hand-holding a student gets in GCSE exam questions and you’ll see clearly the different levels of understanding required.

At the same time there are many topically-relevant questions, such as questions about the 2008 Olympics (although these are often quite heavily politicised.)

So why not have a look yourselves? Here are download links to the papers:

Download the chemistry paper here

Download the maths paper here

We’ll post the answers next week. If you have any opinions please do leave your thoughts in the comments below. If you can’t see the comments box, click here.