In article <drablos.740901058 at marvin>, drablos at marvin.mr.sintef.no (Finn
>> (... more text deleted ...)
>> So I find these colors very reasonable. But they lead to an interesting
> question. How do you color electrostatic surfaces? Let me explain:
>> In our lab we do a lot of calculations of electrostatic properties of
> macromolecules, and display the results as grids or surfaces, colored
> in red and blue. But there are two opposite views with respect to how
> red and blue colors are used. The "chemistry school" prefer to use
> red for negative charges, as negative charges often are at oxygens,
> and blue for positive charges, because positive charges often are
> found at nitrogens. The "physics school" prefer to use blue for negative
> charges, because blue often is associated with negative temperature,
> negative potential etc, and red for positive charges for similar
> reasons. This can be quite confusing.
>> Is there any consensus on this?
Finn, I think you will find that there is a split about this, and the split
occurs (yes, you've guessed it) across the Atlantic. I always use red for
negative (like my bank balance), and blue for positive. I can't for the
life of me remeber whether this is the american or European way of
I think the concensus you are seeking does not exist...
===> James Petts <===
pettsj at visigoth.demon.co.uk ..oo000oo.. PGP 2.X key on the servers
I feel that if a person can't communicate, the very least he can
do is shut up. -- Tom Lehrer