Reply With Quote
I agree.
Good.
So if I were to be able to follow a molecule of water for a billion years in this glass of water, would that molecule always be H2O, or would it occasionally break apart and then become an OH-, float around for a while, then bump into an H30+ and go back to its former iden y as an H2O molecule? --RG
Yes or no, is this or is this not an accurate description?
I agree.
My you are stubborn. I was refraining from having to say it.
Molecular genetics, or reaction kinetics cannot be constrained to a model of statistical chance and probability. And yet you keep insisting on trying to define those fields with that language alone... tsk, tsk, tsk....
Example A.
Polyurethane... does this compound exist. Yes. Does it exist in nature... No. Can one assume then that given all the time in the universe that this polymer would arise on its own? No. There is no natural mechanism for it. The polymer was designed and created by humans...
Your model however wishes to imply that many planets out there have just the right conditions to make it happen... it's pure speculation on your part. You then insist that having infinite universes to do it in will increase your odds... you think so without realizing how unique and improbable this universe actually is, and how the use of said factor in your calcs is again speculative. You further wish to simplify the problem by assuming that reaction kinetics are not relevant. Your simple 'poker' model in no way reflects the reality of the subjectmatter at hand.
So when I read,
The message I'm really reading is that you are reluctant to address the flaws in your model.
Yeah, well, you'll be saying much worse if you continue trying to reason with him. That's why I have Random Guy on ignore.
That's nice and all... but none of this addresses the afterlife... nor does it factor in the fact that if GOD did exist, and has revealed enough of His Nature to establish a moral code, that we are and would be held accountable for our actions according to said code.
Without an establishment of moral guidelines... what is 'just' and 'moral' for one man, may not be for another. Moralistic relativism is inherently incompatible with the existence of GOD... think about it.
The interpretation of GOD's 'moral code' therefore, is what should be (and is) subject for much debate.
Also, Plato's thinking was incomplete because it ignored the above permutation; one that should have been derived by that very same logic.
They would exchange protons once every 11 hours.
Actually, dissociation and association are taking place constantly every few femtoseconds because of electrical field fluctuations, but on great occasion this fluctuation will coincide with the disruption of a hydrogen bond network, so that rapid recombination cannot occur.
This is assuming ambient pressures, of course.
Last edited by Extra Stout; 09-12-2006 at 05:22 PM.
Honestly, I would love to, had I the time to adequately do so. I have to fit this in when I can, and since the beginning of the semester, and since my wife has gone back to work, requiring me to pull more weight around the house, that time is limited.
Honestly, economics interests me more than this thread, so I have thus far limited myself timewise for this thread, for that you have my sincere apologies. You deserve better.
Once every eleven hours, now we are getting somewhere. So following this molecule around would be something that I could set my watch by? Like a radium clock? It would exchange protons every 11 hours for a billion years?
No. The 11 hours is an average.
This has got to be one of the most entertaining threads in the history of this forum.
An average then. That would imply a mean would it not?
As opposed to a mode? OK. (Since this would be a perfect normal distribution, it would be the median too.)
And here are the properties which RG has yet to factor in....
Temperature, Pressure, Electric Field Strength, Radiation Field Strength (gamma, x-ray, ultra-violet etc...)
Unless all of these parameters are fixed, every one of those glasses of water will be different.
A perfect normal distribution. Doesn't that only happen in random phenomena?
Last edited by RandomGuy; 09-13-2006 at 09:01 AM. Reason: Corrected a grammatical error.
Then when the parameters are changed, will each glass of water have a mean time too, depending on those factors?
There will be a mul ude of permutations you would have to consider... many of which would change the state of the water into ice, or vapor. Not surprisingly, upon conversion to vapor the molecules would never behave the same. Which reminds me... I forgot to mention time.
The dynamics of these parameter permutations would probably yield more non-steady states than steady ones. Only the steady ones would subscribe to your 'normal distribution' theory.
It has to do with the sample size as opposed to the "randomness." In 11 hours, that water molecule will have undergone something like 1E19 electron field fluctuations, and 1E16 hydrogen bond rearrangements.
Which beckons the question??? Is anything in nature completely steady?
Oh, all these numbers are assuming standard temperature and pressure. As pressure increases, the mean time for dissociation decreases.
Scientists make simplifying assumptions.
And why simple statistical models don't reflect reality.
Then when the parameters are changed, will each glass of water have a mean time too, depending on those factors? --RG
I will take that is "yes", right?
A perfect normal distribution. Doesn't that only happen in random phenomena? --RG
And these field fluctuations are perfectly predictable phenemona?
Each field fluctuation represents a seperate occurance that may or may not produce an OH- or H3O+ ?
Nope. They are subject to random variations. There is that "random" word again.
Well, to the degree that quantum theory can explain them, yes.
Well, strictly speaking, each field fluctuation does produce an OH- and and H30+. The hydrogren bonds create sort of a "wire" where the electrons can flow back and forth analogous to what they do in metal. The bonds along the "wire" are kind of a hybrid between a covalent bond and a hydrogen bond shared among all the molecules in that "wire." You know how in a benzene ring the bonds are neither single nor double, but a hybrid?
So all the molecules in that "wire" are halfway between being ions and not. But then every picosecond or so, the hydrogen bond networks shift, and one of the molecules somewhere in the middle of the old wire ends up either with an extra proton or ends up a proton short.
And all these "shifts" are caused by the excitement of electrons by their interaction with the environment.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions