Darwin is tricky

[painted wolf]

Nice cherry pick...I suggest you read further than the introduction. Perhaps the results and discussion sections?

A mechanistic picture emerging from the above results is illustrated in Fig. 7. A charge neutral lipid vesicle with zwitterionic headgroups can interact with a charged surface through charge-dipole interaction. In addition to the universally present van der Waals forces, the attractive interaction can come from the positively charged choline group in a lipid molecule with negative surface charge groups on the substrate surface (or from the negatively charged phosphate group with positively charged surface). This attractive interaction induces surface tension on the vesicle and, when sufficiently high, leads to the rupture of adsorbed vesicles and the formation of supported phospholipid bilayer. However, charge neutrality of the whole interface region must be maintained during such interaction. This means that counterions must be present. These counterions must be squeezed into a smaller and smaller space as the two interfaces approach. This is the well-known entropic or osmotic repulsion, the origin of electric double layer interaction (23). Such an entropie repulsion should depend strongly on the size of the counterion based on simple phase space argument: the larger the size of the counterion, the higher the entropic repulsion. When the entropic repulsion is sufficiently high, lipid-surface interaction is weakened and vesicle rupture does not occur. This is exactly what we observe for effects of molecular counterions.

i.e.... what is plasma? A proton without an electron. Yes or no.....

No. Plasma in a cell is a polyphasic colloid made up of salts, water, lipids, amino acids and carbohydrates. In basic terms a liquid mixture of the materials needed for life, in which the organelles of a cell are suspended.

do:wa.....

I'm not sure if this a poor attempt at humor or an insult. Either way it is nonsense.
regardless...

wa:do

 

[Bishadi]

Nice cherry pick...I suggest you read further than the introduction. Perhaps the results and discussion sections?

do you actually think life is an electrical interaction of mass....?

really think about it; your cell phone uses chips that convey electrical impulses at the nano scale (smaller than proteins) and yet even a small magnet destroys all memory and usage of even a single exchange.

No. Plasma

PLASMA..........In physical and chemical usage, plasma refers to an ionized gas, in which a certain proportion of electrons are free, rather than being bound to an atom or molecule. [/quote]

basically live 'protons'.......... exactly what the chemist say is fueling the ATP as well the cell wall exchanges...... not to mention 'spinning' the central stalk...

think

and

The amount of energy needed to remove or add an electron (the electron binding energy) is far less than the binding energy of nucleons. For example, it requires only 13.6 eV to strip a ground-state electron from a hydrogen atom

they said 'protons' with momentum are what spin the stalk..... a proton without an electron is literally 'plasma' in a physics constraint....

biological oxidation of NADH releases that energy in stepwise reactions, capturing it efficiently


In overview:

• [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular]oxidation of NADH and FADH2 leads to ATP synthesis by a process of electron transport (a series of oxidation-reduction reactions) that is coupled to production of a H+ electrochemical gradient across the inner mitochondrial membrane; flow of H+ down the electrochemical gradient and through a protein drives the enzymatic synthesis of ATP[/FONT]

H+ is simply plasma in QM

problem you have is not reading what is being shared and comprhending how it works...

 

[painted wolf]

H+ that moves in a cell is not 'plasma' like that in a star. This is not an ionized gas but a single atom that is quickly bound into another molecule.

I think you have mistaken the properties of elemental Plasma for lone atoms.

In an ordinary gas each atom contains an equal number of positive and negative charges; the positive charges in the nucleus are surrounded by an equal number of negatively charged electrons, and each atom is electrically "neutral." A gas becomes a plasma when the addition of heat or other energy causes a significant number of atoms to release some or all of their electrons. The remaining parts of those atoms are left with a positive charge, and the detached negative electrons are free to move about. Those atoms and the resulting electrically charged gas are said to be "ionized." When enough atoms are ionized to significantly affect the electrical characteristics of the gas, it is a plasma.

*emphasis mine... from: Coalition for Plasma Science - What is a plasma?

Again the H+ ions in a cell are not 'Plasma' as they are not in a gassious state, rather they are single atoms removed from H20 to produce H+ and HO (hydrogen peroxide). The H+ atoms are bound into other molecules such as NADH.

wa:do

 

[Bishadi]

H+ that moves in a cell is not 'plasma' like that in a star.

What's the difference of that H+ with no electron and the H+ with no electron in biology. Seems you hit it on the head; the physics don't jive.

i.e.... that ionized H+ coming from the sun solars flares reacts with the oxygen and nitrogen in the earths atmosphere and what the northern lights are.

are you starting to see yet. Protons are not surrounding organellas 'flowing' through channels; that's resonant energy from reactions that are the catalyst of the atp combining.

Scientist are just recently beginning to see that chemistry cannot perform the proper mechanics of metabolisms.

Department of Chemistry and Center for Biomolecular Simulation, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027, USA.

Using broken-symmetry unrestricted density functional theory quantum mechanical (QM) methods in concert with mixed quantum mechanics/molecular mechanics (QM/MM) methods, the hydroxylation of methane and substituted methanes by intermediate Q in methane monooxygenase hydroxylase (MMOH) has been quantitatively modeled. This protocol allows the protein environment to be included throughout the calculations and its effects (electrostatic, van der Waals, strain) upon the reaction to be accurately evaluated. With the current results, recent kinetic data for CH3X (X = H, CH3, OH, CN, NO2) substrate hydroxylation in MMOH

then they continue with reality..... in other words you can all trust them over me

The results as a whole point to the success of the QM/MM methodology and enhance our understanding of MMOH catalytic chemistry. We also identify systematic errors in the evaluation of the free energy of binding of the Michaelis complexes of the substrates, which most likely arise from inadequate sampling and/or the use of harmonic approximations to evaluate the entropy of the complex. More sophisticated sampling methods will be required to achieve greater accuracy in this aspect of the calculation

Free energy conveyances are like resonant energy crossing a distance....

as well van der waals is being observed

Above the critical temperature the van der Waals equation is an improvement of the ideal gas law, and for lower temperatures the equation is also qualitatively reasonable for the liquid state and the low-pressure gaseous state. However, the van der Waals model cannot be taken seriously in a quantitative sense, it is only useful for qualitative purposes.[1]
In the first-order phase transition range of (p,V,T) (where the liquid phase and the gas phase are in equilibrium) it does not exhibit the empirical fact that p is constant as a function of V for a given temperature.

which also brings in entropy as equlibrium is in question based on 'free energy'

 

[doppelganger]

Much of this is explained in Darwin's lesser known work, On the Origin of Internet Trolls.

 

[Bishadi]

Much of this is explained in Darwin's lesser known work, On the Origin of Internet Trolls.

How you earned your badges... only the peanut gallery would know!

back to homework;

well... it looks like a nobel kind of guy had thunk up what I had been saying on these last few posts a long time ago

both, how energy (ionization) crosses membranes as well how phosphilipid bilayers assemble

My adult scientific career began with graduate study in chemical physics with Harden McConnell at Stanford. I had the idea of elucidating the mechanism of ion transport across biological membranes by nuclear resonance. I thought ion transport must involve rotation of the transport protein in the membrane. Struggling to prove this wrong idea, it occurred to me to study the rotation in the membrane of a lipid molecule, about 1,000 molecular weight, rather than a protein fifty times larger. This led to my discoveries, by nuclear and paramagnetic resonance methods, of phospholipid flip-flop, an exceedingly slow process, and lateral diffusion, exceedingly fast (Kornberg and McConnell, 1971a ; Kornberg and McConnell, 1971b).

Roger D. Kornberg - Autobiography

10-04) 11:47 PDT PALO ALTO -- Stanford University professor Roger Kornberg was awarded the Nobel Prize in chemistry (12/2006) today for his discovery of how DNA stored in genes is copied and used to tell an organism how to live and grow

Seems this guy knew this in 71' but didn't have the math.... to prove it...

so it seems the idea is not unique but guess what..... maybe read the other thread and you might get a hint


and the best George is

"Atheism is a non-prophet organization"

George Carlin

the double edged kind of humor :clap

 

[doppelganger]

How you earned your badges... only the peanut gallery would know!

You're right, unlike you, I don't have an MSU degree. I am shamed. :flirt:

 

[Tau]

Bishadi what exactly are you trying to say?

This thread has meandered all over the shop and your posts generally make about as much sense as an inflatable dartboard, I have never seen such unjustifiable confidence.
I am a chemist, I went to university, Cambridge in fact (Eng), where I live now, I wasn't the most attentive student but I passed my degree got a Bsc and eventually a masters, Painted Wolf is a professional biologist by her own assertion and this is believeable because her posts regarding biology are consistantly accurate and thus indicitive of her extended education, this being my point as your posts however do not pass muster on scientific matters, your hostile and derogatory manner only make you look even more ridiculous.

There is nothing wrong with haughty confidence, but only if it can be backed up.

At one time I thought I knew what you were trying to say, get back to that, don't waste your time with this nonsense pseudo science.

 

[Bishadi]

Bishadi what exactly are you trying to say?

This thread has meandered all over the shop and your posts generally make about as much sense as an inflatable dartboard, I have never seen such unjustifiable confidence.

This thread is to share that Darwin is tricky to understand and why. The you submitted a post suggesting the 1st 2nd and chemistry are all infallible but have no idea what the math is, or how it actually works.

You have simply been returning to accepted paradigm as if absolute................and now I know why

I am a chemist, I went to university, Cambridge in fact (Eng),

You are stuck in the rut like the rest of the 'community'.... in such a way that i seems like Ptolemy's time.... point is, and quite provable.... biology does not work as electrical assemblies of mass as chemistry shares.

the math don't work and that is something you just cannot comprehend

I wasn't the most attentive student

So thinking was not your choice it was all about the paper on the wall to get a job..... fine... but you have no idea what you are talking about when in the relm of real science.

Painted Wolf is a professional biologist

the wolf and i have played before.... and like most of the complacent, each stick with what is comfortable rather that continue on the research front.

There is nothing wrong with haughty confidence, but only if it can be backed up.

already shared material that eliminated any validity that ionized channels operate in the theoretical way taught to chemistry students

what you keep debating is anything against paradigm..... but really have no idea what you are discussing...

and if either you or the wolf was truly honest about reading and doing real science, then maybe this thread could have not been screwed up by ignorance, such to try and rehash entropy, which is like trying say man was made from dust, randomly....

and this thread was sharing that Darwin is not perfected because the math (laws) accepted CANNOT define the progress of evolution in any mathematical constraint.

And chemistry is one of the reasons.

the intellectual community can send people to the moon, but cannot explain a metabolic process within a mathematical framework.

and if you can't agree with that one statement, then is only shares your foolish ignorance.... to me it is like debating the God wrote the bible with a theology nut, they can't believe every word in writting, ever, was done by a mankind....

it just don't make sense to the education they are equiped with

 

[meogi]

Bishadi, please help me with this.

You've spouted the word 'math' or 'mathematics' asking us to do it or check it or whatever. Yet I havn't seen ONE piece of supporting math. Or even anything that resembles math.

Again, entropy, WHATEVER the argument, is a non-issue. We have the sun.

P.S. - You might enjoy looking into Plasma Universe Theory. Maybe.

 

[Bishadi]

Bishadi, please help me with this.

You've spouted the word 'math' or 'mathematics' asking us to do it or check it or whatever. Yet I havn't seen ONE piece of supporting math. Or even anything that resembles math.

Again, entropy, WHATEVER the argument, is a non-issue. We have the sun.

P.S. - You might enjoy looking into Plasma Universe Theory. Maybe.

At what level do you like? As the beginning point starts with Planck.

Can you walk the planck or like your post herein.... completely missing any relevant comprehension.

So answer the question... is an H+ atom literally an atoms in plasma? Yes or No!

Meaning since and H+ is without an electon, isn't that literally Plasma? Just one unit of....... Yes or No!

 

[painted wolf]

a single atom can not be a solid, liquid, gas or plasma. Such states of matter require more than a single atom as the states of matter depend on the interaction of individual atoms.

If you had two or three or more H+ atoms interacting than you may some ground to stand on. As it is the metabolic cycles have only single atoms that are bound quickly to other molecules such as NADP, NAD, FAD and so on.

These are simple oxidation reactions. Unless you are saying that all oxidization reactions in nature are impossible?

acetyl CoA + 3 NAD + FAD + ADP + HPO4-2 ---------------> 2 CO2 + CoA + 3 NADH+ + FADH+ + ATP​

Though, if you could give us a formula for why it won't work I can have my friendly neighborhood physicists take a look at it.

wa:do

 

[Tau]

This thread is to share that Darwin is tricky to understand and why. The you submitted a post suggesting the 1st 2nd and chemistry are all infallible but have no idea what the math is, or how it actually works.

Error reading this sentence Error Code #4 (Does not make any sense whatsoever)

it just don't make sense to the education they are equiped with

You understand almost nothing about me as you do not understand what we are all trying to tell you.

and this thread was sharing that Darwin is not perfected because the math (laws) accepted CANNOT define the progress of evolution in any mathematical constraint.

Absurd, evolution is bounded by many mathematically reduceable parameters for example the rate of molecular change in DNA giving us molecular clocks for the diversion events of the lineages of species, environmental conditions can be approximated into mathematical parameters, extinction rates correlate with geological upheavel.

What within all that diversionary blather is your point Bishadi?

I am done trying to 'share' anything with you my friend you and the Wolf might be playing games, but I don't so cheerio.

 

[Tau]

Meaning since and H+ is without an electon, isn't that literally Plasma? Just one unit of....... Yes or No!

H+
= A positively charged hydrogen nucleus or if you prefer a Proton.

Plasma is a state of matter (like Solid or Liquid), the Sun is composed chiefly of Hydrogen Plasma, or if you prefer ionised hydrogen gas.

So yes and no Bishadi, it is not a Plasma it is the particle of a Plasma

 

[Bishadi]

a single atom can not be a solid, liquid, gas or plasma.

WHY?

What is the difference of one H atom from one of 500?

Such that to take 500 H atoms and hit it with 13.6 eV... we would have one electron ejected from one atom of 500; that within that group, there is still an H+ plasma within the group...... but for some reason you keep side stepping or try what ever you can to contradict me.

Show us why that is not true.

Such states of matter require more than a single atom as the states of matter depend on the interaction of individual atoms.

SO now, all 500 have to be in a state for one to interact?

Or is it that the laws of physics don't follow what you believe is occuring in chemistry?

Is it that the application of physics doesn't apply in biology?

If you had two or three or more H+ atoms interacting than you may some ground to stand on.

It shared in the ATP movie (since its all theoretical, that's all they have) that the Organellas whole surface is supposed to be H+ atoms and they wait in line to go through the channels..... did you not see the movie?

ATP synthase - Movies


Seems all that plasma of H+

If you had two or three or more H+ atoms interacting than you may some ground to stand on.

which has been presented; put my feet on the ground and swept you away

As it is the metabolic cycles have only single atoms that are bound quickly to other molecules such as NADP, NAD, FAD and so on.

But we already on ATP cycles... are you changing because you really don't know where you are at?

what happened?

perhaps the same thing as last time we interacted ........ you give up because it ruins what you understand as true and cannot define an answer to address the items presented.

2 problems you share ......ms painted wolf

not equiped with enough material for such a debate

and have no intent on learning

 

[Tau]

WHY?

What is the difference of one H atom from one of 500?

To define a single atom as a liquid or a gas or whatever is semantically impossible, it has no meaning.

The closest you can get is the temperature of the atom (kinetic energy) which would indicate what state of matter it would be in (all other things being equal) if it wasn't solitary.


These terms solid liquid etc are labels for the various properties that amalgamations of matter at certain energy states manifest.

OK?

 

[Bishadi]

To define a single atom as a liquid or a gas or whatever is semantically impossible, it has no meaning.

Einstein used analogies of a guy standing on a train with a flashlight as well schroadinger was talking about a cat in the box.

We are talking about applying reason to what the math suggest.

IN the math it says, take electron off H atom, Have H+ ..... which is literally what plasma 'is' when you look at the math

The closest you can get is the temperature of the atom (kinetic energy) which would indicate what state of matter it would be in (all other things being equal) if it wasn't solitary.

Doesn't matter how much is there; the state is still the state of the matter.

I suppose BEC is only BEC when on 1000 atoms of rubidium, but go 1001 and all bets are off.... what a crock.

These terms solid liquid etc are labels for the various properties that amalgamations of matter at certain energy states manifest.

OK?

a cop out

as what you suggest then is if no single H+ can be addressed for what it is (a loan proton), then an electron is not to be observed as an isolated part either


can you see the problem; chemistry is a joke

 

[Tau]

Einstein used analogies of a guy standing on a train with a flashlight as well schroadinger was talking about a cat in the box.

We are talking about applying reason to what the math suggest.

IN the math it says, take electron off H atom, Have H+ ..... which is literally what plasma 'is' when you look at the math

Doesn't matter how much is there; the state is still the state of the matter.

I suppose BEC is only BEC when on 1000 atoms of rubidium, but go 1001 and all bets are off.... what a crock.

a cop out

as what you suggest then is if no single H+ can be addressed for what it is (a loan proton), then an electron is not to be observed as an isolated part either


can you see the problem; chemistry is a joke

Ok then genius what are the physical properties that distinguish between a lone proton @ 1 degree Kelvin from another @ 50000 Kelvin (ie other than kinetic energy)?

I am all agog...

As for your last paragraph, I suggest no such thing lol of course a lone H+ particle can be observed, electrons are a bit different though, electrons exist in atoms as uncollapsed wave functions called electron probability clouds, the position and velocity of individual electrons in atoms cannot both be accurately measured because of the uncertainty principle, based on quantum theory.

From Wiki
"The model evolved from the earlier Bohr model, which likened an electron orbiting an atomic nucleus to a planet orbiting the sun. The electron cloud formulation better describes many observed phenomena, including the double slit experiment, the periodic table and chemical bonding, and atomic interactions with light. Although lacking in certain details, the intuitive model roughly predicts the experimentally observed wave-particle duality, in that electron behavior is described as a delocalized wavelike object, yet compact enough to be considered a particle on certain length-scales.
Experimental evidence suggests that the probability density is not just a theoretical model for the uncertainty in the location of the electron, but rather that it reflects the actual state of the electron. This carries an enormous philosophical implication, indicating that point-like particles do not actually exist, and that the universe's evolution may be fundamentally uncertain. The fundamental source of quantum uncertainty is an unsolved problem in physics."

You should notice the bold highlighted part, that will interest you.




Remember Bishadi all theories are ONLY models or representations of some aspect of nature/reality, they may or may not be totally correct or complete, even Newton's laws are mere approximations based on observational evidence gained from the perspective of our scale of reality, at the atomic and galactic levels Newtons laws fail.....the universe is not linear or elucidean.

 

[painted wolf]

can a single atom be a solid, liquid, gas? Plasma is ionized gas. If a single atom can not be a gas, solid or liquid it can not therefore be plasma.
When you look at the math, a single atom can not be classified as any particular state of matter.

A collection of non-aqueous gas-like ions, or even a gas containing a proportion of charged particles, is called a plasma, often called the fourth state of matter because its properties are quite different from solids, liquids, and gases. Astrophysical plasmas containing predominantly a mixture of electrons and protons, may make up as much as 99.9% of visible matter in the universe.[1]

from: Ion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I find it amusing that you say my source from 2006 is outdated, but your cherry picked quote from the 1970's is perfectly usefull.
That you simultaniously say that the animation of the ATP synthesis is useless ("only theoretical") and demonstrates your point. The line up of H+ ions is for demonstration purposes, not a 100% portrayal of the process.
Gas is not built up within the cells of the body, it is bound to other molecules and carried to the lungs for gas exchange reactions.

If you're math is so good then please tell us how QM and Relitivity are recconsiled. How do Quantum States generate?

But we already on ATP cycles... are you changing because you really don't know where you are at?

Krebs cycle is a form of ATP synthesis... You should brush up on your biology.

Now that we know your level of biochemical understanding why don't we brush you up on ATP
I would suggest this as a starting point: Adenosine triphosphate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The amount of energy released can be calculated from the changes in energy under non-natural conditions. The net change in heat energy (enthalpy) at standard temperature and pressure of the decomposition of ATP into hydrated ADP and hydrated inorganic phosphate is −20.5 kJ/mol, with a change in free energy of 3.4 kJ/mol.[6] The energy released by cleaving either a phosphate (Pi) or pyrophosphate (PPi) unit from ATP, with all reactants and products at their standard states of 1 M concentration, are:
ATP + H2O → ADP(hydrated) + Pi(hydrated) + H+(hydrated) ΔG˚ = -30.54 kJ/mol (−7.3 kcal/mol) ATP + H2O → AMP(hydrated) + PPi(hydrated) + H+(hydrated) ΔG˚ = -45.6 kJ/mol (−10.9 kcal/mol)

ATP has multiple ionizable groups with different acid dissociation constants. In neutral solution, ATP is ionized and exists mostly as ATP4−, with a small proportion of ATP3−.[8] As ATP has several negatively-charged groups in neutral solution, it can chelate metals with very high affinity. The binding constant for various metal ions are (given as per mole) as Mg2+ (9 554), Na+ (13), Ca2+ (3 722), K+ (8), Sr2+ (1 381) and Li+ (25).[9] Due to the strength of these interactions, ATP exists in the cell mostly in a complex with Mg2+.[10][8]

wa:do

 

[Bishadi]

Ok then genius what are the physical properties that distinguish between a lone proton @ 1 degree Kelvin from another @ 50000 Kelvin (ie other than kinetic energy)?

We not talking about 5 gazillion K.... no side stepping.......

If it takes 13.6eV to remove and electon from an H atom, then what is that H+ but a loan proton.

As for your last paragraph, I suggest no such thing lol of course a lone H+ particle can be observed,

then what they doing at cern? PLaying football

electrons are a bit different though, electrons exist in atoms as

we removed that electron for the H+ to be wrapping around the organellas for the ATP production...... where you been?

the position and velocity of individual electrons in atoms cannot both be accurately measured because of the uncertainty principle, based on quantum theory.

10 year old can look up wiki, too.... but can you read the EPR and the math to understand what it means and why?

Here is a copy of the 1935 pub...
http://prola.aps.org/pdf/PR/v47/i10/p777_1

From Wiki
suggests that the probability density is not just a theoretical model for the uncertainty in the location of the electron, but rather that it reflects the actual state of the electron. This carries an enormous philosophical implication, indicating that point-like particles do not actually exist,

AH.... funny how they say that, when the chemist suggests, the proton is an H+ dude that goes throught channels, when my whole argument is that the H+ is a resonant energy that coveys across the medium in a resonance rather than some 'proton' as a fixed particle

Remember Bishadi all theories are ONLY models or representations of some aspect of nature/reality, they may or may not be totally correct or complete, even Newton's laws are mere approximations based on observational evidence gained from the perspective of our scale of reality, at the atomic and galactic levels Newtons laws fail.....the universe is not linear or elucidean.

and newton's laws are why entropy is maintained as ONE directional.... but like you said......... they failed........

and chemistry is based on these same premises................ and they fail, ...failed and ...............are a joke...........

life abuses entropy and by understanding energy as em upon mass who can understand that

and until a few real thinkers capture this BOLD FACT.... then people with chemistry degrees will still be making catalyctic reactions with open 'heat' ........... and that is like washing a car window with niagra falls