To make a long story short, once you start down
your own path of growth in your life and
relationships… you’re going to find new meaning
and depth in things that didn’t used to be so
significant.
And this means you’re becoming more AWARE and
CONSCIOUS of the world around you – which is one
of the first steps to creating amazing and lasting
change. Of course, I’m talking about life more in
general here… but the exact same principles
apply to men, dating and relationships.
And, by the way, if you’re getting that anxious
or frustrated feeling right now where giving a man
more of your understanding is the last thing you
want to do… then I’ve got some unfortunate news
for you…
YOU are creating your very own RESISTANCE. That’s right.
YOU are adding to the distance and lack of
understanding that’s taking place.
As much as a man might be wrong, acting distant
or unfair, or hurting your feelings… if YOU are
putting your energy into the negative patterns of
fear, or doing the all too common “demand and
withdraw” behaviors tons of women slip into in
these situations…
Then you’re only adding to the problems and
creating more of the “disconnect” between you two. Ok, so what can you do instead!?
Good question.
First, seek to understand. So, let’s get right to how this works.
Let’s look at the ways men are different when
it comes to relationships, and learn to understand
more and put it to work for you… I promise everything with a man will instantly
start to become clearer and easier once you do.
Difference #1: With A Man, Improving Your
Relationship Is Often As Easy As Improving “The
Now”.
There’s a kind of relationship “shortcut” some
women know about and others don’t.
And women who know what it is and how it works
often have the men they’re with feeling deeply
connected… and ASKING THEM to become more
committed… and share more love.
But there’s a catch to this “trick.”
YOU, as a woman, have to be in the right mental
and emotional state to make these kinds of
“breakthroughs” in your relationship and the way
that you interact with a man.
Why?
Because if you’re not, you’re going to do all
kinds of things to sabotage yourself and get in
the way of your own success here.
You’ll start feeling needy or unappreciated and
want the man to take over and make things happen
for you. Don’t make this mistake and miss out on the
love and connection that’s possible for you in
your relationship.
So, here’s the shortcut you can use with any
man at almost anytime. (I’ve seen this work with
men who were so distant that I would have never
believed it if I hadn’t seen it happen myself.)
When a man is acting distant with a woman in a
relationship, it’s often because he’s “off in his
head” thinking about something else he needs to do
or has to take care of.
And, in case you didn’t know… for most men
it’s so extremely important to be a strong
successful “provider” with a woman, that the
closer he is with a woman, the more his mind
will try and turn to the outside world
(work, etc.) in order to make sure he can protect
and provide for her.
For most men, whether or not they are an
“attractive” person relies heavily on if he’s
financially successful and has a high level of
“social status.”
Of course, a man isn’t often CONSCIOUS that
he’s thinking or behaving this way. These things are part of our “inner biology.”
They are “wired” deep in our brains and affect
us on deep SUBCONSCIOUS levels. So, why am I telling you all of this?
Because you can use it to your advantage and
move straight past the detached, withdrawn, work-
focused man.
You can learn how to “invite” a man into love
and affection with you. And here is where the shortcut comes in.
See, as much as I hate to admit it, and you
might already know this about men… well, we can
be simple-minded. If we have a woman we are close with, like
a girlfriend, the reality is that she has the
power change our mood INSTANTLY.
Especially if she triggers the feeling of
ATTRACTION.
Let me explain how this works…
When a man is detached, unemotional, etc.,
often it’s because his mind is focused on “things”
and not on people or relationships.
Things like sports, work, cars, or whatever
hobby a man happens to be into. And, it’s this “Focus” that often makes a man seem withdrawn, disinterested or inattentive.
But, there IS something a woman can do to
easily get him out of this “Focus” mode to where a
man will be more present, “connected” and
emotionally responsive.
A woman can help a man move his thinking and
attention out of his “mind” and into his body.
(Don’t worry, feelings and emotions will naturally
follow… and if this isn’t making much sense
right now, it will in a second.)
It can start with a soft touch, a playful tap,
or even just a smile. It doesn’t take much, other than attention and
a little patience.
What’s probably the easiest way to do this is
to do what men naturally do to get out of their
heads and into the present moment. They become more physical.
Have you ever watched couples play-fight or
wrestle? For lots of men this is the easiest way they
know to become close and connected with a woman…
as they aren’t even conscious what they’re doing.
They just naturally become more affectionate
and in tune with a woman than they could have ever
figured out how to be by trying to talk to her
about how this all works.
Of course, if you watch a woman do this with a
man and you don’t know what she’s up to… it can
look like she’s just trying to get his attention
in a physical and sexual way.
And some women do this, too.
But, if you’ve been reading my newsletters,
picked up my eBook, or seen a few of my CD or DVD
programs, then you’ve come to recognize that there
is more than one type of ATTRACTION a man can feel
and experience with a woman.
There’s a type of attraction that goes BEYOND
PHYSICAL ATTRACTION and gets a man’s attention on
an emotional and intellectual level.
This is the kind of attraction I’m talking
about creating with a man… where he will move
“out of his head” and become open and attentive in
the present moment with you.
Lots of women try to TALK with a man in order
to get him to be present, loving, affection, etc.
with them. But often times, this completely BACKFIRES.
The reason why is because these women don’t
know this “other” kind of attraction works for a
man.
Don’t make the mistake of thinking that
attraction works the same way for you as it does
for a man… Or that you can try and use Physical Attraction
with a man to get an EMOTIONAL response.
You need to learn how to get the EMOTIONAL
response from a man that you’re looking for…
without demanding it of him in a way that will
only encourage him to WITHDRAW.
Inviting a man out of his Focus, or out of his
“head”, is a simple first step.
Difference #2: Instead Of Discussing, Exploring
And FEELING The Problems In Your Relationship, A
Man Will Often Want To “Starve” Them… Or Try To
Give You The “Logical Solution” As His Way Of
Making Things Better
I’ve got to ask you something. Be honest when
you answer:
Do you think men, or more to the point, the men
you’ve dated in your life, enjoy talking about
their feelings and your relationship as much as
you do?
Or that they enjoy it much at all really? I’m guessing the answer is, “No.” If so, then this is a vital piece of information for you in your relationship. But, what have you done with this knowledge?
Have you tried to MAKE A MAN better at talking
about his feelings in your relationship, and then
become frustrated and upset when it hasn’t gone
the way you had hoped?
And, have you ever wanted to talk about
something important in your relationship, and
brought it up… and then he gave you a short
“detached” answer or he became angry with
you and started telling you what to do?
Is this really the best approach? Think about this for a second… What if, without knowing it, you’ve been asking
a man for the exact thing you DON’T want?
What if, accidentally, the way you were
communicating with him was telling him, in his own
“language”, to STOP SHARING, to CLOSE OFF, and to
be LESS EXPRESSIVE?
Is this possible? What if there was another way to be with a man
that would get you the result you wanted (him
opening up to you more) AND… it made everything
a whole lot easier for YOU?
Think about it for a minute. How do men “typically” react when a woman comes to them with intense emotions and feelings and
wants to talk about them? One of two things usually happens.
1. He gives you a short answer that often seems
cold and uninterested. Kind of like he isn’t
paying attention to you and your FEELINGS.
2. He gets anxious or irritated and instead of
responding with caring and understanding, he seems
angry. In effect, he starts telling you what to do
and to stop bothering him.
Both of these responses have something in
common. Can you guess what it is?
They both show how men tend to want to remove
themselves from any situations they see or
experience as unnecessarily intense or
“emotional.”
I’m not saying that this is a good thing or a
bad thing, by the way. But, it is THE REALITY of how most men think and behave. Which leaves YOU with a choice. You can either learn to work WITH the way
things are…
Or you can keep fighting AGAINST the way things
are and continue the negative, self-defeating
patterns in your love life. And here’s something else to think about –
Given the two different ways that men often respond that I mentioned above… Does a man reacting in one of these ways have to mean that he doesn’t care for a woman or her feelings? And, does a man reacting this way mean he
doesn’t care about his relationship?
In a man’s mind, the answer is NO.
But, what do lots of women do when they are
confronted with a man’s anxious or irritated
response that comes from not knowing what to do
with a woman’s feelings?
Instead of trying a different approach, they
simply take what is NOT working and dial up the
intensity about 20 notches…
Hello!
Duh! (A scientific term that means you’re acting like a dummy.) Stop making your life so difficult for
yourself.
Becoming more intense and “emotionally
demanding” with others rarely builds strong
relationships or gets you what you want.
There is a way to communicate and move to a
more committed and “connected” place with a man
that does NOT involve asking him to do so, trying
to convince him to listen, or demanding that your
relationship grow.
If you’ve tried any of these things, then you
know that they can just turn into an uphill
battle… and trigger the DISTANCE and RESISTANCE
you’re trying to avoid.
These two differences I’ve shared with you here
are just the beginning.
If you want to learn what’s at the foundation
of the differences, where they come from, and the
most important and CRITICAL difference you need to
know to move to a deeper level of connection and
COMMITMENT with a man, then it’s time you checked
out my “From Casual To Committed” program.
If you’ve ever wondered why a man says he wants his “Freedom”… And you know that he wants to love you and be
loved… But he also wants to do things “on his own” first, before he settles down… Then this program is for you.
I go into depth about how these contradictions
are all part of a man’s growth process, what they
mean, and exactly what to do as each one of these
comes up in your relationship.
Oh – and what if you had a “map” of how the
COMMITMENT PROCESS works for a man?
What if you knew what would help a man see and
KNOW that your connection and what you share is
special enough to go deeper into and to commit
himself to on an emotional level?
It’s not that most men aren’t capable of a deep, lasting, emotional commitment. It’s that they don’t know how to get there on their own… and most women don’t know how to help
them.
In fact, most women accidentally push a man
away from the things that will make him want to
discover his emotions, his feelings and the love
he can share with a woman all on his own – because
they try and take over and tell him how to do it
when things aren’t working just right.
Now you can avoid all those mistakes and let a
man find his own way to where he’ll be leading YOU
into a more deeply connected and fulfilling
relationship.
Part of the secret here, I explain and walk you
through an exercise to discover what a man’s
“Love Preference” is.
Each person, including you, has their favorite
way to be complimented, pleased or appreciated. And as you know, feeling honored, respected and appreciated is important for BOTH people in any long-term relationship that is going to LAST.
You’ll also learn why love, connection and
COMMITMENT can be such a CHALLENGE to a man… and
how to help him see things in a new way so he
isn’t fearful or afraid of being in love and
staying with you.
I’ll talk to you again soon… and best of
luck in life and love!
Writer: Christian Carter (ChristianCarter@catchhimandkeephim.rsys1.com)
Are you with a man who came on very strong
in the beginning, but after a while when things
got “too heavy”, he started to push you away?
Is he the kind of man who can be very loving
at times, and yet very spiteful when he senses
any kind of negativity or criticism from you
about something?
If so, you may be involved with a man who is
still stuck in the BOY phase of maturity.
So what if you are – what can you do to get the
MOST out of this relationship, or how do you avoid
ending up with this kind of man in the future? Ever feel like you’d have less of a real “connection” or intimacy with a man if you didn’t
try so hard to keep your relationship “alive”?
And that the man you’re with might not even
notice, let alone know how to help you both grow
and change together when something is “off” in
your relationship?
Are men really so different that they don’t
think about or notice problems in your
relationship? Or is something worse going on here where a man
doesn’t want the relationship to go anywhere and
has given up on it and you?
And…
Have you ever had the sudden realization that
if it wasn’t for YOUR patience, caring and the
attention you pay to him and your relationship,
that you’d just be drifting apart from each other?
That you’d never grow closer… never get to
know each other on a deeper level… and never
become MORE COMMITTED if it wasn’t for what YOU
insist on and struggle to create?
Do you ever wonder why it can seem like a man
just doesn’t care about your relationship and
where it’s headed… even though you know that
somewhere deep down he does love and care about
you?
Well, there’s a reason why these things are so
common with men in relationships… and why they
can be so frustrating to deal with and get past as
a woman.
The truth is, if you’re like most women who are
UNSUCCESSFUL in their long-term relationships,
then your “approach” to your relationship often
depends on a man figuring out how to have a great
relationship FOR YOU.
You know, all that “knight in shining armor”
stuff where a man’s love and unrelenting
commitment to you will make it all work out.
Good luck with that.
There’s a better way…
If you’ve had a few relationships in the past,
then you’ve already learned that putting the fate
of your love life and relationship in the hands of
a man so he can save it is NOT the perfect or ideal
situation.
You’ve figured out that if you’re going to have
a REAL relationship, that a man isn’t going to
have all the answers when things get difficult or
uncertain.
Don’t wait for a man to figure out how love and
a relationship works. And sure… he has to do HIS part and learn
and grow too. He needs to know how to love and be loved, too.
But wouldn’t it be great if you had the
CONFIDENCE that comes from KNOWING that you could
create what YOU WANT in your relationship? What if you never had to wait for a man to “figure it out” to have the love and connection
you want in your life?
It’s likely that you’ve already got a head
start growing up as a woman… which is why it’s
time to put your knowledge and intuition to good
use. You’re about to learn 3 of the most important
ways that men are different when it comes to
relationships… and what to do about it.
And, by the way, if you’ve got a man in your
life who knows how to keep you both close and
connected in your relationship at all times and
you KNOW it’s going to LAST… then you don’t need
to read this email.
Go enjoy your love life with confidence, and
give and share all of yourself freely.
But, if you aren’t 100% CERTAIN that you’re
going to be able to keep a loving relationship…
and you’ve had problems with this in the past…
then it’s time to recognize and learn how to get
past those UNCERTAIN and UNCOMMITTED places with
men and relationships.
Keep reading and you’ll be on your way to
finding the confidence and understanding in your
relationship that only a deep, close, emotional
connection with a man can bring.
“GETTING CLEAR” ON WHAT’S GOING ON WITH MEN WHEN
THEY’RE DISTANT OR UNINVOLVED IN RELATIONSHIPS
Let me tell you a quick story…A man and a woman meet and they have an AMAZING
connection from the start. She quickly falls for him, as he does for her,
and they instantly grow close and start spending
almost all of their time together. When they’re apart, most of the time they’re
thinking about one another.
A few weeks or months pass and things are going
great… but as it happens in life, a few
difficult situations come up in each other’s
lives.Stress and tension starts to build, and as more
issues and situations come up, the closeness,
affection and communication start to change.
The woman begins to notice how the man has
changed and tries to talk to him to bridge the gap
and stay close. But what used to work to bring them together
now only seems to make things worse as he pulls
away when she wants to talk.
And now she’s getting worried.
She asks herself…
“Why is he acting this way?” “What happened to what we had?”
“Did his feelings for me change?” “Did I do something that pushed him away?”
And… “Why doesn’t he seem to notice or care
and do anything about it!?”The man just seems to want to pretend that
everything is fine and ignore what’s happening.When he does talk, he’s short with his words
and unexpressive… not sharing his thoughts or feelings about much at all. He seems “detached” somehow.
And now she feels like if she didn’t do
anything to keep the relationship going, that
they’d simply drift apart and he wouldn’t do
anything about it or even really care.
Ok, end of story.
This story is basically a collection of common
situations and feelings that lots of women
experience.
Let’s talk about it.
The things going on in the story bring up an
important idea – the ways in which men are
“naturally” different from women when it comes to
communicating and interacting in relationships.
And sure, men are the same in lots of ways.
They want love. They want respect. And they want to be heard. But, men are also very different… They’re different in how they think. They’re different in how they feel. They’re different in their beliefs about what
makes for a “good relationship.”
And, they’re different in how they approach and
try to “resolve” relationship issues. (Sometimes
by not trying at all!)
If you want to learn about what’s going on in
the UNCERTAIN situations with men… and how to
think and respond in POSITIVE, HEALTHY,
CONSTRUCTIVE ways for the sake of growing and
improving your long-term relationship…
Then you need to take a deeper look at what men
are REALLY thinking and feeling.
You probably already know from experience that
men will often tell you one thing about how
they’re thinking or feeling… but actually think
and feel another way.
Frustrating, right!?
And, you probably already know from experience
that becoming frustrated or overly “emotional”
with a man doesn’t often get you very far in
becoming closer and growing together in your
relationship.
But, isn’t it important to share and express
your true feelings in any “real” relationship?
Absolutely.
Which leads us to a frustrating PARADOX.
How do you stay “true” to your own feelings and
emotions… while ALSO communicating in a way that
keeps you close and avoids the common male
withdrawal response?
Part of the secret here is to communicate with
a man in a way that speaks HIS language and helps
him have a better understanding of YOU.
Some women end up analyzing themselves to death
over every little thing that happens… what it
means, what they should say, and how the guy is
going to respond. The strange truth is that part of the problem
here IS analyzing things too much… so, when they
show up to talk to the man in their life, she
overwhelms him.
Give me a little nod if you’ve watched your
friends do this… or you can relate in your own
life. It’s time to stop worrying so much and start
doing things that WORK to create the love life you
know you can have.
It’s time for it to finally be easy to
communicate and share love with the man in your
life in the long run.
It’s time for CLARITY.
Let’s talk about what’s going on here and turn
what can seem impossible and complex into
something SIMPLE and CLEAR.
THE TRUTHS ABOUT HOW MEN ARE DIFFERENT – THAT ANY
WOMAN WHO WANTS A LASTING, COMMITTED RELATIONSHIP
WITH A MAN NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT…
Before we get to some real in-depth specifics
about men and relationships here, there’s
something important I want to share…
I have a good friend who has taught me more in
a few years than I would have learned living 20
years not knowing her.
She’s one of the smartest and insightful people
I’ve ever met when it comes to her unique
understanding of HUMAN BEHAVIOR and PSYCHOLOGY…
and how it relates to building long-term
relationships in all areas of life.
Including romantic relationships.
I’ve learned a lot of what I know, or been led
to, in one way or another, by her. Anyway… many years back she shared something
with me. Something that has taken me years to
come to know and understand for myself.
(As you know, someone can tell you something
again and again … but it can take you days,
months or even years to come to understand and
know what THEY mean by it. Or in other words, it
often takes more time that we expect or would like
it to, to raise our own level of CONSCIOUSNESS.)
Let me share what she said with you… She said that when it comes to people and
relationships, there’s a big secret EVERYONE uses
who are able to build and keep close, fulfilling,
trusting relationships in their lives through
thick and thin.
That secret is –
“First, seek to understand.” “Then, seek to be understood.” When I first heard this, it sounded like a
“new-age” kind of thing. I thought I “got” what this meant and what it
was all about.
My mind quickly went to thinking about how much
I already tried to understand others… and how
what came from this wasn’t all it was cracked up
to be.
In my experience I had been a “giver”, and I
often felt at the mercy of others because of it.
ESPECIALLY in relationships. I bet you can relate.
So, the idea of becoming MORE UNDERSTANDING and
listening to others more, made me feel like things
would just be less satisfying and more difficult
in my relationships.
As much as I could see the benefit of listening
and understanding first, it just didn’t seem to
work out so well in real life for me. Actually… the people who were a bit more
“selfish” seemed to be the ones who more often got
what they wanted and had it easy in life.
The reality was that I wasn’t able to see that
the world could work any differently from my
perspective at the time. It was only after years or living, studying,
observing, learning from others and thinking
about my life and the relationships in it that I
started to see things differently.
And one day something “snapped” into place.
I had an AMAZING EXPERIENCE as I was going back
through an old journal of mine and came across
what my friend had said about seeking to
understand first.
I hadn’t thought about this idea in a long
time… and it hit me in different way now that I
was in a different place in my life.
Writer: Christian Carter (ChristianCarter@catchhimandkeephim.rsys1.com)
Intelligence was considered as a concept devoid of emotion and symposium on intelligence over the years repeatedly concluded that the first hallmark of intelligence is high-level mental ability such as abstract reasoning (Sternberg 1997). While Terman (1921; cited in Sternberg 1997: 339), states that “an individual is intelligent in proportion as he is able to carry on abstract thinking”. Therefore, intelligence conceptualized as abstract thinking was demonstrated to predict academic success.
In relating intelligence to second language learning, Brown (1994: 93) states that in the past it was conceived that “the greatest barrier to second language learning seemed to boil down to a matter of memory”, in the sense that if a student could remember something he or she was exposed to, he or she would be a successful language learner because intelligence was traditionally defined and measured in terms of linguistic and logical-mathematical abilities. Based on this, it is clear that intelligence contributes to successful language learning.
Gardner (1993) emphasizes that language is not grammar specific, but it is influenced by other factors that are intelligence-based. The second phase of Gardner’s model introduces the four individual differences which are believed to be the most influential in second language acquisition. These include the variables of intelligence, language aptitude, motivation and situational anxiety (Giles and Coupland 1991). Closely interrelated with these variables is the next phase of the model, referred to as the setting or context in which learning takes place. Two contexts are identified, namely formal instruction within the classroom and unstructured language acquisition in a natural setting. Depending upon the context, the impact of the individual difference variables alters. For example, in a formal setting intelligence and aptitude play a dominant role in learning, while exerting a weaker influence in an informal setting. The variables of situational anxiety and motivation are thought to influence both settings equally.
Howard Gardner’s multiple intelligences theory (MIT) (1983, 1999) is an important contribution to cognitive science and constitutes a learner-based philosophy which is “an increasingly popular approach to characterizing the ways in which learners are unique and to developing instruction to respond to this uniqueness”. MIT is a rationalist model that describes nine different intelligences. It has evolved in response to the need to reach a better understanding of how cognitive individual differences can be addressed and developed in the classroom.
Gardner (1999) and his research associates identified the mathematical-logical, the verbal-linguistic, the musical-rhythmic, the bodily-kinaesthetic, the interpersonal, the intrapersonal, the visual-spatial, the naturalist and the existential intelligences. The following criteria have been used in MIT to find an intelligence: it “entails the ability to solve problems”, it involves a “biological proclivity”, it has “an identifiable neurological core operation or set of operations” and it is “susceptible to encoding in a symbol system … which captures and conveys important forms of information” (Gardner 1999: 15-16). These different intelligences reflect a pluralistic panorama of learners’ individual differences; they are understood as personal tools each individual possesses to make sense out of new information and to store it in such a way that it can be easily retrieved when needed for use. The different intelligences are of neutral value; none of them is considered superior to the others. In their basic form, they are present to some extent in everyone, although a person will generally be more talented in some than in others. Each of these frames is autonomous, changeable and trainable (Armstrong, 1999) and they interact to facilitate the solution of daily problems.
References:
Brown, Douglas (1994): Principles of language learning and teaching. San Francisco.
Gardner, Howard (1993). Frames of mind. The theory of multiple intelligences. 2 th ed. New York.
Giles, H., and Coupland, N. (1991). Language: Contexts and consequences. Open University Press
Sternberg, Robert (1997). The concept of intelligence and its role in lifelong learning and success. American Psychologist 52: 1030–1045.
- I want to reach the moon even if I am failed I will be among the stars.
- Rudeness is the weakest man’s imitation of strength.
- Some of God’s greatest gifts are unanswered prayers.
- Never say anything unless it is kind, necessary and true.
- The air plane takes off against the wind, not with it.
- How can I be what I am not?
Some more to add, soon…
Independent assortment is a basic principle of genetics developed by a monk named Gregor Mendel in the 1860’s. Mendel formulated this principle after discovering another principle now known as Mendel’s law of segregation. This principle states that the alleles for a trait separate when gametes are formed. These allele pairs are then randomly united at fertilization. Mendel arrived at this conclusion by performing monohybrid crosses. These were cross-pollination experiments with pea plants that differed in one trait, for example pod color.
Mendel began to wonder what would happen if he studied plants that differed in two traits. Would both traits be transmitted to the offspring together or would one trait be transmitted independently of the other? From his experiments Mendel developed the principle now known as the law of independent assortment.
Figure A.
After observing the results of the dihybrid cross, Mendel allowed all of the F1 plants to self-pollinate. He referred to these offspring as the F2 generation. Mendel noticed a 9:3:3:1 ratio (Figure B). About 9 of the F2 plants had green pods and yellow seeds, 3 had green pods and green seeds, 3 had yellow pods and yellow seeds and 1 had a yellow pod and green seeds.
Mendel’s Law of Independent Assortment
Mendel performed similar experiments focusing on several other traits like seed color and seed shape, pod color and pod shape, and flower position and stem length. He noticed the same ratios in each case. From these experiments Mendel formulated what is now known as Mendel’s law of independent assortment. This law states that allele pairs separate independently during the formation of gametes. Therefore, traits are transmitted to offspring independently of one another.
Figure B.
Genotype and Phenotype
In Mendel’s experiment with pod color and seed color (Figure A) we see that the genotype or genetic makeup of the F1 plants is GgYy. The phenotypes or expressed physical traits are green pod color and yellow seed color. Both of these traits are dominant.
The F2 generation pea plants (Figure B) show two different phenotypes for each trait. Pod color is either green or yellow and seed color is either yellow or green. There are nine different genotypes that result from this type of experiment. The F2 generation genotypes and phenotypes can be seen in the image above.
Source: www.biology.about.com
Gadjah Mada University
Auditorium, Gadjah Mada University
I had spent my time to study in University of Gadjah Mada (UGM, http://www.ugm.ac.id/eng/) for around 6.5 years or since mid 1995 to early 2003. UGM is the oldest and the biggest-population university in Indonesia. In 2005, it was in the World’s top 200 universities and in the World’s top 100 science universities (The Times Survey, England)
Computational Chemistry Lab.
Maths and Natural Sciences Faculty- I entered university in August 1995. I took my undergraduate program in the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science, Chemistry Department. I had finished the program after 4.5 years. I was not the first student in class but I was one of the fastest graduated students among 120 students. My undergraduate thesis was supervised by DR. Bambang Setiaji (Head of Computational Chemistry Laboratory) & DR. rer. nat. Karna Wijaya, M. Eng.
I took active in many student organizations and had elected as 1 of 2 student senators to represent my faculty in 1998 in University Student Parliament. I was the university representative to speak abour gender issues in IASC (Indonesia-Australia Student Conference)
I got a scholarship from University of Innsbruck (my honor to Prof. Rode, Head of Department of Theoretical Chemistry, University of Innsbruck, http://www-c724.uibk.ac.at/theochem/staff/bmr/) to continue my study to postgraduate program, to work in computational chemistry research.
Maths and Naturals Sciences Faculty
I had finished my master program in similar university as my undergraduate program for 2 years in February 2003. My master thesis was entitled “Monte Carlo Simulation of Cobalt (II) in Water Involving Three Body Potential”. My master thesis was supervised again by DR. Bambang Setiaji and DR. Harno Dwi Pranowo, M. Si (Secretary of Chemistry Department).
In 2003, 3 months after graduation of my master degree, I joined PZ Cussons Indonesia as a New Technologist Supervisor and later was promoted as QC specialist.
PZ Cussons Company International, UKAt the end of 2005, I joined Autochem Industry for a QC/R&D laboratory assistant manager position for a year.
In the early of 2007, I moved to Melbourne Australia, and having new experience to work in some consultant and research group company.
Teaching ESL in 2009 in Oriental English College (OEC), Shenzhen, China was also a challenging experience for me to enter career as professional teacher.
And coming back to Indonesia in July 2009, I enrolled Doctoral program for 1 semester in Biotechnology, in Gadjah Mada University. My research topic is about enzyme biosynthesis using recombinant technology (cloning).
Graduate School, Gadjah Mada University I took leave from my doctoral study and I joined Universal School to teach Chemistry and Biology according to IGCSE Cambridge syllabus in January 2010.
Oriental English College, Shenzhen, China
Universal School, Indonesia
Marriage is a long life journey. In marriage there is up and down as life itself. Love is the key in marriage, but many people make mistakes that love will guarantees good marriage, and they just take it for granted.. If love fades they just get ready to move away.
In my opinion, marriage is not only about love but also commitment and responsibility. love could be the only matter in dating relationship but not in marriage. We have made vow under law, to take care of our partner, to work hard together as team work to support each other in the name of God. There are some pitfalls in marriage that can cause breaking in our marriage relationship as the expert says:
1. Pessimism. We all can become addicted to our pessimism. I once had a male client who wants to save his marriage said to a counsellor, “I know I wont win. You don’t know my wife. She’s very hard-headed, very stubborn. She wont change her mind.” The counsellor said, “Never say never”! But people fall in love with pessimism. That’s one of the strategies that never works…but people always try them!
2. Work too hard at. The expert believes that it’s the hard working that makes it not work. When you criticize, you’re working at improving your partner. When you complain to you’re working at improving them. When you argue, you’re working at improving them. When you are reasoning and when you’re telling them how much you love them, you are trying to change them. You are working at changing them. And it’s that working at
changing them, that is the problem here. You want concrete proof? Stop trying to change your partner. If you want to watch the relationship get better, stop all of that working. Accept, 100%, whatever your spouse thinks, feels, or does. It is always okay. And watch them change and improve themselves.
3. Stress. Stress is a killer and can make our lives more difficult. It can escalate an irritation into a major argument and cause us to do or say things to our partner we don’t mean. Worst of all, often it feels like there’s no escape from stress. Is stress destroying you, your partner and your marriage? You owe it to your partner and yourself to get your stress under control and regain your emotional wellness and inner peace. A healthy marriage starts with a healthy stress free emotional state.
4. Being too serious most of time. Serious talk hurts the relationship most of the time. Small talk, happy talk, friendly talk. Make it brief. You can call your partner. They will not feel pressured if you do that kind of talk or stick to practical things. These strategies do work immediately to reduce the feeling that there is a clash of wills. A partners negative attitudes towards you are being supported by you communicating what you want. Saves your pride. Saves your energy. And you end up getting what you want, much more than arguing or rebelling or disagreeing or pressuring.
So hope we be alert to these sometimes-covered- pitfalls. Hope our marriage can long last…
Source: Dr. Bruce Ruston, How to Save your Marriage and Stop Your Divorce http://www.save-ur-marriage.com/
Judul : Jodoh dari Negeri Seberang; Catatan Cinta Pernikahan Beda Bangsa
Penulis : Rahmadiyanti Rusdi dkk
Penerbit : Lingkar Pena Publishing House
Tahun : 2009
Genre : Pernikahan
Tebal : 240 Halaman
ISBN : 978-979-1367-83-7
By Wisata Buku.com:
Untuk membuka lembaran hidup baru, jalan berliku harus dilalui. Dengan calon pasangan, ada hal-hal yang perlu didiskusikan: pandangan hidup, cita-cita, rencana masa depan, konsep keluarga, sampai pengelolaan ekonomi dan pengasuhan anak, tentu saja berikut tempat tinggal. Dengan keluarga, harus pula presentasi bersama karena akan sukar menempuh biduk lanjutan ini tanpa restu khususnya dari orangtua kedua belah pihak.
Orangtua dahulu (dalam bahasa Sunda) mengatakan bahwa jodoh itu “jorok”. Terjemahan bebasnya, jodoh adalah misteri. Kita tak bisa menggunakan rancangan detail bagaikan arsitek, tak bisa menggunakan pola USP seperti hendak meluncurkan produk baru, tak bisa juga menggunakan analisis statistik regresi atau berpandu pada variabel terikat dan tidak terikat. Karena demikian abstraknya, proses pertemuan dengan sang jodoh mendebarkan sekaligus mengusik emosi. Simak saja tuturan para kontributor dalam buku ini.
Berjumpa belahan hati dari benua yang berjauhan, tak bisa ditampik bila memang sudah garis Yang Maha Kuasa. Istri-istri berkumpul di buku ini menuangkan suka-dukanya, terutama urusan birokrasi karena begitu melekat cap berkelimpahan materi pada orang asing sehingga dianggap “layak” dipersukar dan dikenai tarif yang menggelembung dari biasanya. Padahal palu belum final. Di negeri yang hendak dijadikan kediaman kelak, masih menanti aneka pernik adaptasi. Bukan hanya dengan budaya sekitar, pemahaman keluarga suami terhadap muslim dan sejumlah perbedaan personal yang perlu dijembatani mengingat rata-rata kontributor saling mengenal melalui dunia maya pun harus dilalui seserius mungkin.
Dibandingkan Nikah Sama Bule, yang penyusun dan penerbitnya sama, saya lebih menyukai Jodoh dari Negeri Seberang. Dari segi judul, cenderung berkonotasi “dewasa” karena tidak terlalu gaul. Klop dengan foto di kulit depannya yang indah, mengedepankan kecantikan cinta kala diikat di pelaminan dan menyatakan jelas bahwa kisah-kisah ini benar adanya. Masih dengan sisipan tips dan foto para kontributor beserta keluarga masing-masing, Jodoh dari Negeri Seberang enak dibaca lagi mengandung sejumlah pengetahuan yang dibutuhkan bagi Anda yang bersiap meniti dunia rumahtangga di rantau.
Ingin tahu di mana itu Comoro? Bagaimana mengharmoniskan diri dengan pasangan dari Turki? Bagaimana merenda hari-hari di Tokyo? Apakah pria asal Colombia memang semesra tokoh-tokoh sentral di telenovela? Cari tahu di buku ini
By Haryadi
Sesuai judulnya, buku yang ditulis oleh 11 penulis ini (semuanya wanita), mengisahkan betapa unik dan nano-nanonya melakukan pernikahan dengan warga negara asing. Jangankan dengan warga negara asing yang tentu serba ’asing’ (bahkan Mbak Hani –salah satu penulis buku ini, menyebutnya sebagai Alien, hehe), tak sedikit orang yang berpendapat bahwa menyatukan dua manusia dalam ikatan pernikahan (satu suku, satu bangsa dan negara sekalipun) itu susah. Bukan sebuah hal yang mudah bagi penulis-penulis buku ini, terlebih ketika mereka harus menyatukan perbedaan kultur yang serba baru. Hampir semua penulis di buku ini mengakui hal itu. Bahkan, tak sedikit yang mengaku sempat terkena culture shock
Tulisan pertama yang aku baca berjudul ”Pinangan dari Le Perisien” yang dibuat oleh Mbak Ita . Jujur aja, selain Mbak Dee yang duduk dibangku penyusun, cuma Mbak Ita yang aku kenal. Melalui blognya, cukup banyak tulisan Mbak Ita yang berkisah mengenai pernikahannya dengan Mas Pat. Untungnya, dibuku ini, Mbak Ita menulis hal baru. Asyik sekali mengetahui secara detail ketika Mas Pat melamar mbak Ita diantara rintikan hujan. Aih romantisnya. 🙂
Selanjutnya aku kembali baca dari awal. Tulisan Mbak Suci Al-Sadiq yang berjudul ”From India With Love” bikin aku merinding. Bukan karena serem, tapi karena betapa teguh dan mantapnya keyakinan Mbak Suci untuk memutuskan menikah dengan lelaki yang hanya ia kenal lewat internet.
Aku tidak mau menyebutkan satu persatu kisah penulis yang ada di buku ini. Yang pasti, aku bisa menikmati semua kata demi kata yang sudah dituturkan. Beberapa cerita cenderung sama (misalnya ketika mendapat pertentangan dari orang tua) tapi masing-masing bisa diceritakan dengan cara yang berbeda dan khas. Lebih asyik lagi ketika mengetahui hal-hal unik yang biasa dilakukan suami mereka (berhubungan dengan kebiasaan negara asal suami mereka). Mungkin akan lebih asyik kalo ada satu penulis pria yang menikah dengan wanita WNA. *kaya si Oji itu tuh, hehe* banyak juga, kan, pria Indonesia yang menikah dengan WNA.
Udah lama aku gak beli buku-bukunya LPPH. Kaget, karena secara kualitas fisik, rada menurun dari buku-buku sebelumnya *zaman-zaman Matahari Tak Pernah Sendiri* hmm, mungkin untuk menekan harga kali, ya? asyiknya, masing-masing cerita disertai foto dan keterangan foto (ada satu foto yang tidak diberi keterangan, aku lupa halaman berapa). Dan sayangnya, lumayan banyak kesalahan cetak dibuku ini. Misalnya saja di halaman 136, kata ”kesedihanku” ditulis ”kesedihankuku”. Atau di halaman 115 di paragraf 4. Semoga kedepan hal kecil yang cukup mengganggu ini bisa diperbaiki
Take Home Paper:
Explanation how the nature of DNA in a given organism dictate (almost) the whole features of the organism: physiology, morphology, response to environmental stress etc:
Part I. The Nature of DNA
DNA is sometimes called “the blueprint of life” because it contains the code, or instructions for building organism and ensuring that organism functions correctly. Just like a builder uses a blueprint to build a house, DNA is used as the blueprint, or plans, for the entire organism (the blueprint—a detailed drawing or map which identifies and directs the construction or development of a building or an object). Meanwhile, DNA is the chemical that genes and chromosomes are made of. It stands for deoxyribonucleic acid. DNA is called a nucleic acid because it was first found in the nucleus.
DNA structure: www.biologycorner.com, 2009
It is the chemical component of chromosomes, which are located in the nucleus of every cell. Stretches of DNA (or stretches of chromosomes) code for genes. Chromosomes are microscopic, threadlike strands composed of the chemical DNA (short for deoxyribonucleic acid).
The shape of the DNA molecule is a double-helix (like a twisted ladder). The sides of the ladder are composed of alternating sugars (deoxyribose) and phosphates. The rungs of the ladder are composed of nucleotides. Nucleotides (also called Bases): Adenine, Thymine, Guanine, Cytosine or A, T, G, C Nucleotides pair in a specific way – called the Base-Pair Rule: Adenine pairs to Thymine; Guanine pairs to Cytosine. The rungs of the ladder can occur in any order (as long as the base-pair rule is followed) For instance, a stretch of DNA could be AATGACCAT – which would code for a different gene than a stretch that read: GGGCCATAG. All in all, there are billions of bases (nucleotides) in cells, which code for all the things an organism needs to function
Part II. Replication, Transcription and Translation.
Replication is the process where DNA makes a copy of itself. Why does DNA need to copy? Simple: Cells divide for an organism to grow or reproduce, every new cell needs a copy of the DNA or instructions to know how to be a cell. DNA replicates right before a cell divides. DNA replication is semi-conservative. That means that when it makes a copy, one half of the old strand is always kept in the new strand. This helps reduce the number of copy errors.
DNA replication process: Wikipedia, 2009
In transcription, the codons of a gene are copied into messenger RNA by RNA polymerase. This RNA copy is then decoded by a ribosome that reads the RNA sequence by base-pairing the messenger RNA to transfer RNA, which carries amino acids. Since there are 4 bases in 3-letter combinations, there are 64 possible codons (43 combinations). These encode the twenty standard amino acids, giving most amino acids more than one possible codon. There are also three ‘stop’ or ‘nonsense’ codons signifying the end of the coding region; these are the TAA, TGA and TAG codons.
DNA remains in the nucleus, but in order for it to get its instructions translated into proteins, it must send its message to the ribosomes, where proteins are made. Working together with RNA (RiboNucleid Acid), the DNA directs the correct sequencing of amino acids in proteins during the cell replication process. It is able to do this through biochemical instructions – information – that is encoded on the DNA. The chemical used to carry this message is messenger RNA, it has the job of taking the message from the DNA to the nucleus to the ribosomes.Transcription – RNA is made from DNA. Translation – Proteins are made from the message on the RNA. They follow illustration below:
Only existing proteins, such as from the parent cell, can interpret the DNA blueprint and begin to create an organism.
Part III. The Role of Gene and Protein
In simple terms, DNA controls the production of proteins within the cell. These proteins in turn, form the structural units of cells and control all chemical processes or physiology within the cell. Chromosomes are composed of genes. A gene is a segment of DNA that codes for a particular protein, which in turn codes for a trait. Hence we hear it commonly referred to as the gene for baldness or the gene for blue eyes. It means DNA dictates the morphology of organism We now know that DNA is also found in organelles, the mitochondria and chloroplasts, though it is the DNA in the nucleus that actually controls the cell’s workings (the gene – a segment of DNA that codes for a protein) which in turn codes for a trait (skin tone, eye color, etc), a gene is a stretch of DNA).
Generally, the genes among different organisms are the same with a few sequence differences. These small differences, made throughout evolution at a very slow rate (that is, over billions of years), cause the different aspects of protein production to change. That is, proteins may be made at a slower or faster rate, or at a different time, or with a slightly different shape. These differences in protein production are what make the differences between organisms: you are different from a chimpanzee because your genes are expressed differently. In fact, we share 99.99% of our DNA sequence in common with chimpanzees, but we don’t look or act much like them.
As far as the statement about DNA molecules moving, humans have 46 chromosomes that consist of 22 pairs of identical chromosomes and a pair of sex chromosomes (XX for females and XY for males). Other animals have different numbers of chromosomes, but approximately the same amount and types of genes. So, other organisms have different sizes and shapes of chromosomes to accomodate a similar number and types of genes. Bacteria have a very different way of replicating their chromosomes, and rely on other types of DNA called plasmids to enhance their variety among bacterial species. Plants often have multiple copies of the same genes and same chromosomes to ensure reproduction and large fruit size. Moving the sequence of genes around (not DNA) can change the expression patterns of proteins enough to cause large differences between organisms. In addition, our face is very different from a mouse face due to changes in both gene sequence and chromosomal location.
Genes and proteins: US Department of Energy 2009
The proteins found in the egg and sperm (or other parental cell) jump-start the process and provide the proteins that read and interpret the DNA plans. Then the proteins can make other proteins based on the DNA instructions to make the organism that the DNA instructs it to. These proteins are often the targets of the signal transduction processes that control responses to environmental changes or cellular differentiation and development.
.
The publication below is one of the closest research to my thesis research where the system observed involving Co(II) in water. It was performed by one of our lecturer in Chemistry Department, University of Gadjah Mada. However my thesis research emphasized the use of Monte Carlo Simulation, while this PhD research used QM/MM Molecular Dynamics Simulation.
Ria Armunanto1, Christian F. Schwenk, A. H. Bambang Setiaji1 and Bernd M. Rode
, 
Department of Theoretical Chemistry, Institute of General, Inorganic and Theoretical Chemistry, University of Innsbruck, Innrain 52a, A-6020, Innsbruck, AustriaReceived 20 June 2003; accepted 20 August 2003. ; Available online 22 September 2003.
Abstract
Classical and quantum mechanical/molecular mechanical (QM/MM) molecular dynamics (MD) simulations have been performed to describe structural and dynamical properties of Co2+ in water. The most important region, the first hydration shell, was treated by ab initio quantum mechanics at unrestricted Hartree–Fock (UHF) level using the LANL2DZ ECP basis set for Co2+ and the double-ζ plus polarization basis set for water. For the rest of the system newly constructed three-body corrected potential functions were used. A well-structured rigid octahedron was observed for the stable first hydration shell showing no first shell water exchange process within a simulation time of 11.9 ps. For second hydration shell ligands, a mean residence time of 28 ps was observed. Librational and vibrational motions as well as the ion–oxygen motion were investigated by means of velocity autocorrelation functions showing significant differences between classical and QM/MM results.
Article Outline
- 1. Introduction
- 2. Methodology
- 2.1. Construction of potential functions
- 2.2. Simulation performance
- 2.3. QM/MM molecular dynamics simulation
- 2.4. Velocity autocorrelation functions
- 2.5. Mean residence times and reorientational times
- 3. Results and discussion
- 4. Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- References
1. Introduction
The hydration structure of transition metal ions is of much interest, since they have several key functions in biomolecular systems [1]. The methods used for structural investigations of hydrated metal ions can be classified into three types: scattering methods such as X-ray diffraction (XD) and neutron diffraction (ND), spectroscopic methods such as extended X-ray absorption fine structure (EXAFS) and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), and the tools of theoretical chemistry, including a wide variety of different simulation techniques [2]. Simulation methods such as Monte Carlo (MC), classical molecular dynamics (MD) and hybrid quantum mechanical/molecular mechanical (QM/MM) simulations, have proven to be a strong alternative to experiments in particular for investigations where experiments reach their limitations [3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9]. Classical molecular dynamics simulation methods have been widely used, inter alia to analyze solutions of alkali metal ions and transition metal ions in water or ammonia [5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17], and it has been shown in many cases, that pair potentials are inadequate for such systems [18, 19, 20, 21 and 22]. Non-additive terms (3,4,5,…,n-body) thus play an important role and should, therefore, be included in the potential functions. However, this procedure is usually restricted to three-body terms, as the construction of higher energy surfaces becomes very complicated.
Full ab initio quantum mechanical treatment could include all n-body terms, but is still far beyond current computer capacities. To reduce the time demand without loosing accuracy of the results the system can be partitioned, however, into the region of the ion with its first hydration shell, which is treated quantum mechanically, and the classically described remaining region which uses three-body corrected ab initio evaluated analytical potential functions. This method is referred to as hybrid QM/MM simulation technique.
Ligand exchange rates and residence times of ligands in the coordination shell of ions are important dynamical parameters to understand the reactivity of these ions in chemical and biological systems. The exact structure and in particular the dynamics of hydrated transition metal ions are highly sensitive to the accuracy of simulation techniques, and it has been shown in several cases [7, 8, 23, 24, 25 and 26] that only ab initio QM/MM simulations reach a sufficient level of accuracy. In the present work, we have extended these investigation to hydrated Co2+, in order to obtain structural and dynamical properties of this ion, which plays a quite significant role in solution chemistry and biomolecules.
2. Methodology
2.1. Construction of potential functions
New potential functions for Co2+–H2O and H2O–Co2+–H2O interactions were constructed from ab initio quantum mechanical calculations at unrestricted Hartree–Fock (UHF) level using the double-ζ plus polarization basis set for water and the LANL2DZ ECP basis set for Co2+ [27 and 28]. These energies were fitted to analytical functions using the Levenberg algorithm. Experimental gas phase values were used for the water geometry (O–H=0.9601 Å, H–O–H=104.47°) and kept constant throughout the energy calculations [29]. Oxygen and hydrogen charges were set to −0.6598 and 0.3299, respectively, in agreement with the BJH-CF2 water model [30, 31 and 32] used for water–water interactions in this work. The basis set superposition error (BSSE) [33] in this system is very small amounting 0.183 kcal mol−1. About 2719 ab initio energies points were calculated using the Turbomole program [34, 35 and 36]. The minimum energy for the Co2+–H2O interaction was found to be −86.5 kcal mol−1 at a distance of 2.02 Å. An MP2 calculation yielded nearly the same Co–O distance (2.00 Å) and a slightly lower energy (
2.87 kcal mol−1) showing small electron correlation effects in this system. According to previous results [24 and 37] the usage of UHF calculations with DZP basis set seems a reasonable compromise between accuracy and computational effort, also minimizing possible BSSE errors [37]. The limitation of the method could be seen rather in the size of the QM region and not so much in the QM level of calculation.
The ab initio calculated Co2+–H2O energies were fitted to an analytical function of the following form:
| (1) |
where M denotes Co2+ and i water atoms; A, B, C and D are the optimized parameters summarized in Table 1, and q represents the atomic charges.
A total of 13,631 ab initio energy points were generated to describe the H2O–Co2+–H2O energy surface and to construct a three-body correction function
| ΔEcorr3bd=(EabWMW−EabM−2EabW)−ΔE2bdMW(r1)−ΔE2bdMW(r2)−ΔE2bdWW(r3), | (2) |
where ab and 2bd denote ab initio and two-body energies; MW and WW indicate ion–water and water–water interactions; r1, r2 and r3 correspond to ion–water(1), ion–water(2) and water(1)–water(2) distances, respectively. The obtained three-body correction function is
| ΔE3bdFit=0.54e−0.25(r1+r2)e−0.52r3(CL−r1)2(CL−r2)2, | (3) |
where CL, set to 6.0 Å, is the cut-off limit beyond which three-body terms are negligible.
2.2. Simulation performance
The simulations were performed for one Co2+ and 499 water molecules in an elementary cubic box of 24.6 Å side length, at 298.16 K, which corresponds to a density of 0.99072 g cm−3. Periodic boundary conditions were applied to the simulation box and the temperature was kept constant by the Berendsen algorithm [38 and 39]. The flexible BJH-CF2 water model which includes an intramolecular term was used [30, 31 and 32]. Accordingly, the time step of the simulation was set to 0.2 fs, which allows for explicit movement of hydrogens. A cut-off of 12.0 Å was set except for O–H and H–H non-Coulombic interactions for which it was set to 5.0 and 3.0 Å . The reaction field method was used to account for long-range electrostatic interactions [40].
2.3. QM/MM molecular dynamics simulation
A classical molecular dynamics simulation was carried out for 60.0 ps after 60.0 ps of equilibration using the pair plus three-body function. Subsequently, the QM/MM simulation was performed for 11.9 ps after 4 ps of re-equilibration. The ab initio quantum mechanical treatment was applied to the ion and the full first hydration shell, and for the remaining MM region the same 2 + 3-body potential as in the classical simulation was used. According to the Co–O RDF of the classical simulation, the QM radius was set to 3.8 Å to fully include the first hydration shell. A smoothing function was applied to the transition region between the QM and the MM regions [38]. The force of the system, Fsystem, is defined as
| Fsystem=FMM+S(FQM−FQM/MM), | (4) |
where FMM is the MM force of the full system, FQM the QM force in the QM region, FQM/MM the MM force in the QM region. S denotes the smoothing function [41]. The use of this smoothing function and the algorithm of our QM/MM simulation allows the water ligands to migrate freely between the two regions with a steady transition of forces. In this context, the flexibility of the MM water molecules is another important factor, as this flexibility is thus given for ligands both inside and outside the QM region.
2.4. Velocity autocorrelation functions
The evaluation of spectral properties such as librational and vibrational frequencies of water molecule motions was carried out using velocity autocorrelation functions (VACFs), C(t), defined as
| (5) |
where N is the number of particles, Nt is the number of time origins ti, and denotes a certain velocity component of particle j. The power spectrum of the VACF was calculated by Fourier transformation. A correlation length of 2.0 ps was used to obtain the power spectra with 4000 (classical) and 2000 (QM/MM) averaged time origins. Librational and vibrational frequencies of water molecules were computed using the approximative normal coordinate analysis [42]. Six scalar quantities Q1, Q2, Q3, Rx, Ry, Rz define the symmetric stretching, bending and asymmetric stretching vibrations, and rotations around the three principal axes of the water molecules.
2.5. Mean residence times and reorientational times
The mean residence time (MRT) of water molecules in the second hydration shell of Co2+ was calculated with the following formalism proposed by Impey et al. [43]:
| (6) |
where nion(t) is the number of water molecules which lie initially within the coordination shell and are still there after a time t elapsed. The parameter t* is introduced to avoid counting of water molecules leaving the coordination shell only temporarily and returning to it within t*. The parameter of t* was set to 2.0 ps in accordance with Impey [43].Reorientational time correlation functions (RTCFs) of water molecules were calculated as
| (7) |
where Pl is the Legendre polynomial of lth order and is a unit vector along the three principal axes i defined in a fixed coordinate frame as the rotations above.As exponential decay is assumed for the MRTs and RTCFs, an exponential fit was used
| Cl(t)=aexp(−t/τ), | (8) |
where a and τ are the fitting parameters, and τ describes the corresponding relaxation time.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Structural data
The radial distribution functions (RDFs) of Co2+–O and Co2+–H together with their integration numbers obtained from the classical and the QM/MM simulations are displayed in Fig. 1. Two well-defined peaks are obtained from both simulations indicating first and second hydration shell. The first QM/MM peak is shifted closer to the ion in comparison with the classical peak, reflecting a remarkable influence of higher n-body effects. The sharpness of the first peak corresponds to a highly structured, rather rigid first hydration shell. The zero-value Co–O RDF between the two peaks indicates that no exchange process occurred within the simulation time. The broad second peaks observed in both classical and QM/MM simulations shows a high flexibility of water molecules in this shell. The first peak obtained from the QM/MM simulation is centered at 2.17 Å, while the classical simulation shifts it to 2.27 Å. The second shell peaks are centered around 4.6 Å in both simulations, but with a broad plateau in the classical case. These results are in good agreement with Co–O distances of the first and second hydration shell obtained by EXAFS, XD and ND experiments [2 and 44]. The average Co–O distance obtained from the QM/MM simulation (2.17 Å) is only slightly higher than XD (2.09 Å) and EXAFS (2.08 Å) data, the difference being probably due to concentration effects [2].
Fig. 1. Co–O and Co–H radial distribution functions and their corresponding integration numbers obtained from QM/MM (solid line) and classical (dotted line) MD simulations.
Coordination number distributions of hydrated Co2+ obtained from the classical and the QM/MM simulation are displayed in Fig. 2. The obtained six-coordinated complex in the first hydration shell (100% occurrence) is in agreement with EXAFS data [2 and 44], whereas the classical simulation gives a slightly lower value (5.9). Classical pair plus three-body simulations often allow a correct description of rough structural data as first shell coordination numbers. However, the too repulsive three-body potential apparently causes a small shift of the first hydration shell to a larger distance. This rather small difference between classical and QM/MM result in the first coordination shell then induces larger deviations in the second shell caused by different ligand orientations in the first shell and polarization effects of first shell ligands not accounted for by the classical potentials. The classical simulation thus strongly overestimates the second shell coordination number yielding a value of 22.7 whereas the QM/MM value of 15.9 is closed to the value of 14.8 estimated from XD [2]. The classical simulation thus also yields a broader coordination number distribution (18–28), while the QM/MM simulation gives values between 11 and 19.
Fig. 2. Coordination number distributions of Co2+ in water obtained from (a) QM/MM and (b) classical MD simulations.
The angular distribution function (ADF) of O–Co2+–O angles is shown in Fig. 3. The ADF obtained from the QM/MM simulation displays two peaks located at 90° and 180°. The first peak located at 91° is caused by two neighboring oxygens, and is in good agreement with the angle deduced from mass spectroscopic analysis (90°) [2 and 44]. The second peak culminates at 173° indicating an octahedral arrangement of the water molecules in the first shell of Co2+ (Fig. 4), in agreement with XD data (see Table 3). The small artificial peak at 70° in the classical simulation is caused by short-lived sevenfold coordinated intermediates which have not been obtained in the QM/MM simulation.
Fig. 3. Angular Distribution Function of O–Co2+–O angles observed from classical (dotted line) and QM/MM (solid line) MD simulations.
Fig. 4. Octahedral structure of the first hydration shell of Co2+ in water.
Table 3. Structural parameters of the first hydration shell of Co2+ in water
Two further angles were defined to describe the orientation of the water molecules relative to the ion (θ and tilt). The θ angle is the angle between the O–Co vector and the water plane, while the tilt angle is defined as the angle between the O–Co vector and dipole vector of the water molecule. The QM/MM simulation yields a θ value of 171° and a tilt value of 8° (see Table 2), whereas the classical simulation shows slightly lower θ angles and nearly no tilt.
The hydration energy values of −550 and −547 kcal mol−1 obtained from classical and QM/MM simulation are considerably lower than the experimentally estimated value of −487 kcal mol−1 [45]. This difference is probably caused by the specific assumptions necessary to assign single-ion values to thermocalorimetric measurements of salts [45].
3.2. Dynamical data
3.2.1. Librational and vibrational motions
The power spectra of VACFs for the librational motions Rx, Ry, Rz and the vibrational motions Q1, Q2, Q3 obtained from the classical and the QM/MM simulations are displayed in Fig. 5 and their frequencies are summarized in Table 4. The order of Rz<Rx<Ry is found in the second hydration shell and the bulk for QM/MM as well as classical simulation. In the first shell the QM/MM order is different (Rz<Ry<Rx), as already observed in previous simulations [7 and 23]. The Rz value in the first hydration shell (QM/MM simulation) is only slightly red-shifted since the rotation around the dipole axis is not energetically restricted. In contrast, the Rx QM/MM frequency is strongly blue-shifted due to the ligand fixation by the ion, as in the case of Ni2+ [7], Ca2+ [23], Fe2+ and Fe3+ [52]. The Ry value is nearly unchanged. The order Rx>Ry obtained from the QM/MM simulation contradicts the classical result, revealing some inadequacy of the 2 + 3-body function. In the second hydration shell, the librational motions of the classical and the QM/MM simulation are rather similar, showing slightly higher values in the QM/MM case. The frequencies of the bulk phase are in good agreement with the values obtained for pure liquid water (BJH model) as listed in Table 4.
Fig. 5. Power spectra of rotational modes Rz, Rx, Ry and vibrational modes Q2, Q1, Q3 for water molecules in the first hydration shell obtained from QM/MM (solid line) and classical (dotted line) MD simulations.
Table 4. Librational and vibrational frequencies of water molecules in the first and second hydration shell of Co2+ in water and bulk
In comparison with the bulk, the stretching frequencies Q1 and Q3 of the first hydration shell from the QM/MM simulation are blue-shifted, whereas the bending frequency Q2 is red-shifted in accordance with previous simulations of other hydrated ions [7, 23, 24 and 52]. In contrast, the classical simulation fails to reproduce these effects, giving red-shifted stretching modes Q1 and Q3, and a nearly unchanged bending mode Q2. The frequency difference () between Q1 and Q3 is 76 cm−1 in the QM/MM case, similar to Ni2+ [7] and V2+ [24] shifts.
The RTCF values of first (τ1) and second (τ2) order in the dipole moment direction of a water molecule are summarized in Table 5. The correlation function for l=1 is related to infrared line shapes and l=2 to Raman line shapes and NMR relaxation time [2]. The QM/MM results exhibit significantly larger relaxation times in comparison with classical data stressing once more the important role of many-body effects. Strongly increased relaxation times were only observed for the first hydration shell, outside of which the ion’s influence is rather weak. The bulk water relaxation times obtained from both simulations are in good agreement with previous simulations [24 and 51] and experimental data [2].
The power spectra of the Co2+–O stretching motion obtained from classical and QM/MM simulations are displayed in Fig. 6. The stretching frequency from the QM/MM and the classical simulations are 305 and 290 cm−1, respectively. The corresponding QM/MM force constant of 69 N m−1 is similar to the ones obtained from previous QM/MM MD simulations of Mn2+ and V2+ [24] with values of 59 and 70 N m−1. The peak forms of the stretching vibration reflect some further inappropriate description of the dynamics in the first shell by the classical treatment.
Fig. 6. Power spectra of Co2+–oxygen vibrational modes obtained from QM/MM MD (solid line) and classical (dotted line) simulations.
3.2.2. Ligand exchange processes
The mean residence time of water molecules (τ) in the second hydration shell has been calculated from the QM/MM simulation with t*=2.0 ps according to Impey [43]. A mean residence time of 28 ps in the second hydration shell was found, corresponding to the seven observed exchange processes during the 12 ps simulation. No experimental data for residence times of water ligands in the second hydration shell of Co2+ are available. In the first hydration shell no water exchange process was observed as a simulation time of 12 ps is by far too short compared to the experimental residence time of 10−7 s [2 and 53].
4. Conclusion
The inclusion of many-body effects appears mandatory in order to describe the hydration structure of Co2+ and its dynamical properties properly. The structural results clearly demonstrate that although rough structural properties as first shell coordination numbers are reproduced correctly, accurate ligand orientations are only available after including many-body terms through a quantum mechanical treatment. Therefore, the evaluation of the much more sensitive spectroscopic and dynamical data also requires this level of accuracy, and the inclusion of a larger number of water ligands in the surroundings of the ion appears desirable in further simulations.
Acknowledgements
Financial support for this work by the Austrian Science Foundation (FWF) (project P16221-N08) and a scholarship of the Austrian Federal Ministry for Foreign Affairs for R.A. are gratefully acknowledged.
References
1. J.A. Cowan. Chem. Rev. 93 (1998), p. 1067. Full Text via CrossRef
2. H. Ohtaki and T. Radnai. Chem. Rev. 93 (1993), p. 1157. Full Text via CrossRef
3. H.H. Loeffler, J.I. Yagüe and B.M. Rode. Chem. Phys. Lett. 363 (2002), p. 367. SummaryPlus | Full Text + Links | PDF (114 K)
4. H.H. Loeffler, J.I. Yagüe and B.M. Rode. J. Phys. Chem. A 106 (2002), p. 9529. Full Text via CrossRef
5. J.I. Yagüe, A.M. Mohammed, H.H. Loeffler and B.M. Rode. J. Phys. Chem. A 105 (2001), p. 7646. Full Text via CrossRef
6. C. Kritayakornupong, J.I. Yagüe and B.M. Rode. J. Phys. Chem. A 106 (2002), p. 10584. Full Text via CrossRef
7. Y. Inada, H.H. Loeffler and B.M. Rode. Chem. Phys. Lett. 358 (2002), p. 449. SummaryPlus | Full Text + Links | PDF (165 K)
8. Y. Inada, A.M. Mohammed, H.H. Loeffler and B.M. Rode. J. Phys. Chem. A 106 (2002), p. 6783. Full Text via CrossRef
9. T. Yang, S. Tsushima and A. Suzuki. J. Phys. Chem. A 105 (2001), p. 10439. Full Text via CrossRef
10. R. Rey and J.T. Hynes. J. Phys. Chem. 100 (1996), p. 5611. Full Text via CrossRef
11. S. Obst and H. Bradaczek. J. Phys. Chem. 100 (1996), p. 15677. Full Text via CrossRef
12. K. Hermansson and M. Wojcik. J. Phys. Chem. B 102 (1998), p. 6089. Full Text via CrossRef
13. S.H. Lee and J.C. Rasaiah. J. Phys. Chem. 100 (1996), p. 1420. Full Text via CrossRef
14. S. Hannongbua, T. Ishida, E. Spohr and K. Heinzinger. Z. Naturfosch. 43a (1988), p. 572.
15. C.S. Babu and C. Lim. J. Phys. Chem. B 103 (1999), p. 7958. Full Text via CrossRef
16. J.R. Rustad and B.P. Hay. J. Chem. Phys. 102 (1995), p. 427. Full Text via CrossRef
17. G. Chillemi, P. D’Angelo, N.V. Pavel and N.S.V. Barone. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 124 9 (2002), p. 1968. Full Text via CrossRef
18. L.A. Curtiss, J.W. Halley, J. Hautmann and A. Rahman. J. Chem. Phys. 86 (1987), p. 2319. Full Text via CrossRef
19. H.D. Pranowo and B.M. Rode. J. Phys. Chem. A 103 (1999), p. 4298. Full Text via CrossRef
20. G.W. Marini, K.R. Liedl and B.M. Rode. J. Phys. Chem. A 103 (1999), p. 11387. Full Text via CrossRef
21. G.W. Marini, N.R. Texler and B.M. Rode. J. Phys. Chem. 100 (1996), p. 6808. Full Text via CrossRef
22. N.R. Texler and B.M. Rode. J. Phys. Chem. 99 (1995), p. 15714. Full Text via CrossRef
23. A. Tongraar, K.R. Liedl and B.M. Rode. J. Phys. Chem. A 101 (1997), p. 6299. Full Text via CrossRef
24. C.F. Schwenk, H.H. Loeffler and B.M. Rode. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 125 (2003), p. 1618. Full Text via CrossRef
25. C.F. Schwenk, H.H. Loeffler and B.M. Rode. J. Chem. Phys. 115 23 (2001), p. 1080.
26. C.F. Schwenk, H.H. Loeffler and B.M. Rode. Chem. Phys. Lett. 349 (2001), p. 99. SummaryPlus | Full Text + Links | PDF (129 K)
27. P.J. Hay and W.R. Wadt. J. Chem. Phys. 82 (1985), p. 270. Full Text via CrossRef
28. T.R.J. Dunning. J. Chem. Phys. 53 (1970), p. 2823. Full Text via CrossRef
29. K. Kuchitsu, T. Morino and M. Maeda. Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 49 (1976), p. 701.
30. F.H. Stillinger and A. Rahman. J. Chem. Phys. 98 (1978), p. 129.
31. P. Bopp, G. Jancsó and K. Heinzinger. Chem. Phys. Lett. 98 (1983), p. 129. Abstract | Abstract + References | PDF (461 K)
32. G. Jancsó, P. Bopp and K. Heinzinger. Chem. Phys. 85 (1984), p. 377. Abstract | Abstract + References | PDF (957 K)
33. E.R. Davidson and B. Feller. Chem. Rev. 86 (1986), p. 681. Full Text via CrossRef
34. R. Ahlrichs, M. Bär, M. Häser and C. Kölmel. Chem. Phys. Lett. 162 (1989), p. 165. Abstract | Abstract + References | PDF (421 K)
35. R. Ahlrichs, M. von Arnim, Methods and Techniques in Computational Chemistry: METECC-95 STEF, Cagliari, 1995
36. M. von Arnim and R. Ahlrichs. J. Comput. Chem. 19 (1998), p. 1746. Full Text via CrossRef
37. R. Armunanto, C.F. Schwenk and B.M. Rode. J. Phys. Chem. A 107 (2003), p. 3132. Full Text via CrossRef
38. M.P. Allen and D.J. Tildesley, Computer Simulation of Liquids. , Oxford University Press, Oxford (1987).
39. H.J. Berendsen, J.R. Grigera and T.P. Straatsma. J. Phys. Chem. 91 (1983), p. 6269.
40. D.J. Adams, E.M. Adams and G.J. Hills. J. Mol. Phys. 38 (1985), p. 387.
41. G.D. Markham, J.P.G.C.L. Bock, M. Trachtman and C.W. Bock. J. Phys. Chem. 100 (1996), p. 3488. Full Text via CrossRef
42. P. Bopp. Chem. Phys. 106 (1986), p. 205. Abstract | Abstract + References | PDF (740 K)
43. R.W. Impey, P.A. Maden and I.R. McDonald. J. Phys. Chem. 87 (1983), p. 5071. Full Text via CrossRef
44. P. D′Angelo, V. Barone, G. Chillemi, N.S.W. Meyer-Klaucker and N.V. Pavel. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 124 9 (2002), p. 1958.
45. Y. Marcus. J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans. 183 (1987), p. 339. Full Text via CrossRef
46. A.P. Scott and L. Radom. J. Phys. Chem. 100 (1996), p. 16502. Full Text via CrossRef
47. D.J. DeFrees and A.D. McLean. J. Chem. Phys. 82 1 (1985), p. 333. Full Text via CrossRef
48. M.M. Probst, E. Spohr, K. Heinzinger and P. Bopp. Mol. Simulat. 7 (1991), p. 43.
49. W.F. Murphy and H.J. Bernstein. J. Phys. Chem. 76 (1972), p. 1147. Full Text via CrossRef
50. D. Eisenberg and W. Kauzmann, The Structure and Properties of Water. , Oxford University Press, Oxford (1969).
51. P. Bopp, W. Dietz and K. Heinzinger. Z. Naturfosch. 34a (1979), p. 1424.
52. T. Remsungnen and B.M. Rode. Chem. Phys. Lett. 367 (2003), p. 586. SummaryPlus | Full Text + Links | PDF (313 K)
53. L. Helm and A.E. Merbach. Coord. Chem. Rev. 187 (1999), p. 151. Abstract | PDF (2446 K)
Corresponding author. Tel.: +435125075160; fax: +435125072714
1 Present address: Chemistry Department, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Austrian-Indonesian Center for Computer Chemistry, Gadjah Mada University, Jogjakarta Indonesia.
Chemical Physics
Volume 295, Issue 1 , 15 November 2003, Pages 63-70
My Work and Study Highlights 
