Chemical Selection; Selection And Evolution At The Nanoscale

[exchemist]

I’d like the input of someone with practical, working knowledge of chemistry (I had the 4 hrs lecture + 4 hrs lab I was advised was the minimum for a well-rounded undergrad science education, and so long ago I’ve forgotten even the few essentials I learned then), but isn’t heat capacity per mol as much a measure of the size of the molecule as its heat capacity, so not very useful in comparing the gross thermal properties of different substances?

 

For example, from the table in the linked Wikipedia article, the heat capacity of a big hydrocarbon like C₂₅H₅₂ (paraffin wax) is about 900 J/mol/K, while C₈H₁₈ (octane), which has a similar specific heat (2.22 vs 2.5 J/g/K) , has 228 J/mol/K. Both are much greater than 75.327 for H₂O, but neither are as good as a always-liquid-phase heat carrier than H₂O.

 

From the Wikipedia table, I also noticed that liquid H₃N (ammonia) has a higher specific heat than liquid H₂O, 4.7 vs 4.1813 J/g/K. Ammonia is an amazingly versatile molecule. Though clearly not as versatile and essential as water in biological organism (it plays a major role as a plant nutrient component, minor roles in animal protein synthesis and metabolism, but is familiar to physiologists and medical people mostly as a symptom and cause of disease), it not only a versatile solvent, but it burns powerfully (4 NH₃ +3 O₂ → 2 N₂ + 6 H₂O + 2.112 x 10^-18 J). Water is pretty amazing, but ammonia can be used in plant fertilizer, as a refrigerant (the space-side of the ISS’s cooling systems are mainly ammonia-using), and as a rocket fuel (the highest-performance version of the X-15 – the one that could reach space – used an ammonia+oxygen rocket motor)!

Yes you are right in a way. For everyday purposes specific heat per gram is a more useful concept.

 

I imagine Wellwisher, sorry H Bond, is trying to make a point about the number and strength of H-bonds per molecule in water, versus other molecules. Liquid ammonia has a number of similarities to water, not least its high degree of H-bonding. 

 

But I know H Bond of old and generally do not get drawn into his lengthy and sometimes questionable expositions of chemistry and physics. :)

[OceanBreeze]

I’d like the input of someone with practical, working knowledge of chemistry

 

From the Wikipedia table, I also noticed that liquid H₃N (ammonia) has a higher specific heat than liquid H₂O, 4.7 vs 4.1813 J/g/K. Ammonia is an amazingly versatile molecule. 

 

You want practical working knowledge?  I can tell you this much, the sand on the beach gets a lot hotter than the water, for the same amount of exposure to the sun’s rays. Water may not have the absolute highest heat capacity, but it is definitely among the highest of all known substances. If I remember from my oceanography studies, the heat capacity of water is used as a reference of 1 (on one particular scale of units) with all other substances being lower, with the single exception of liquid ammonia.

 

I would much prefer to do my sailing on a sea of water than one of liquid ammonia. :eek:

[HydrogenBond]

I’d like the input of someone with practical, working knowledge of chemistry (I had the 4 hrs lecture + 4 hrs lab I was advised was the minimum for a well-rounded undergrad science education, and so long ago I’ve forgotten even the few essentials I learned then), but isn’t heat capacity per mol as much a measure of the size of the molecule as its heat capacity, so not very useful in comparing the gross thermal properties of different substances?

 

For example, from the table in the linked Wikipedia article, the heat capacity of a big hydrocarbon like C₂₅H₅₂ (paraffin wax) is about 900 J/mol/K, while C₈H₁₈ (octane), which has a similar specific heat (2.22 vs 2.5 J/g/K) , has 228 J/mol/K. Both are much greater than 75.327 for H₂O, but neither are as good as a always-liquid-phase heat carrier than H₂O.

 

From the Wikipedia table, I also noticed that liquid H₃N (ammonia) has a higher specific heat than liquid H₂O, 4.7 vs 4.1813 J/g/K. Ammonia is an amazingly versatile molecule. Though clearly not as versatile and essential as water in biological organism (it plays a major role as a plant nutrient component, minor roles in animal protein synthesis and metabolism, but is familiar to physiologists and medical people mostly as a symptom and cause of disease), it not only a versatile solvent, but it burns powerfully (4 NH₃ +3 O₂ → 2 N₂ + 6 H₂O + 2.112 x 10^-18 J). Water is pretty amazing, but ammonia can be used in plant fertilizer, as a refrigerant (the space-side of the ISS’s cooling systems are mainly ammonia-using), and as a rocket fuel (the highest-performance version of the X-15 – the one that could reach space – used an ammonia+oxygen rocket motor)!

In terms of comparing different substances, using moles instead mass (grams) is a better way to compare substances at the nanoscale. In your example, I would compare one molecule of a paraffin C25H52, to one molecule of H2O; side-by-side. True the paraffin molecule has more heat capacity, but it is also a much larger molecule. The water molecules are tiny in comparison, but they are very absorbent when it comes to the amount of energy density they can absorb for something so small. 

 

If we are looking at the macro-scale; bioreactor, specific heat in terms of grams is a better way to do this, since this is easier to measure. Counting atoms and moles can get a little cumbersome. One can use a scale and your done. 

 

 

In terms of comparing ammonia and water, ammonia does have a higher specific heat, but it also has a much lower boiling point. When you measure the specific heat of liquid ammonia, you are putting heat into a cold material. When you measure the specific heat of liquid water, you are adding heat to something at higher temperature. I used both measures BP and specific heat to help normalize.  

 

If we burn ammonia in oxygen one of the products is H2O. Water contains less internal energy compared to ammonia since it is a terminal product of combustion. The extra energy in ammonia is partially connected to its lower BP. Ammonia is potentiated; full of energy, in the liquid state, much more than water. Water exists way below the energy baseline of ammonia. This is reflected in the higher BP of water.  In terms of solvents for life, ammonia by being more energetic, makes it a better organic solvent; energized. It is less likely to impose order, compared to the low energy floor defined by liquid water. Water can absorb a lot of energy at higher temperature. 

[HydrogenBond]

The potential in the water is equal to the sum of its dissolved and surface interface parts. 

If we have pure water, the water molecules will hydrogen bond forming extended water structures. These can also form cooperative resonance for added stability. As we add materials to the water, different materials will impact water differently. The water will alter its structuring, to minimize energy, based on the material and the concentration, and how these impact the water.

As an example, although sodium; Na+ and potassium; K+, cations both have a single positive charge, water responds differently to each cation in terms of its structuring. Sodium ions will bind to the oxygen of water stronger than the hydrogen of water can bind via hydrogen bonding. The impact of sodium is to create more order in water; kosmotropic. Potassium ions, although they also having a single positive charge, bind to the oxygen of water weaker than water binds to itself. This tends to disrupt the structures of water; chaotropic, adding potential energy.

When cells pump and exchange sodium and potassium cations, the sodium ions accumulate on the outside and potassium ions accumulate on the inside. The purpose of this is to set up two distinct aqueous environments; with a water potential gradient between the two zones (order and disorder). The exterior sodium cation induction makes water more friendly to organic food materials. The reduced food material will add energy to water, due to the induction of surface tension. This is compensated by the order in water, induced by the sodium. Inside the cell, the potassium ions, by created chaos in water structuring, helps to loosen up the protein girdles, so the protein are more bioactive; move between conformations.

If you remove the outer membranes from modern cells, so there is no cationic pumping mechanism, the naked interiors of the cell, will still concentrate potassium ions. They will extract potassium from the environment, up to normal cell concentrations. This is due to the potassium ions and the protein surfaces, balancing each other out, relative to minimizing water potential. The water is able to lower potential, due to the protein surfaces, by drawing in potassium ions.

In terms of evolution (blue sky theory), if you had an empty volume, surrounded by a simple membrane with cation pumping and exchange, one could use this to extract specific protein from the environment, selected to compensate for the interior K+. The K+ and protein will form a team needed to minimize water potential. This is not random but based on energy in the water.

Many scientists believe the cation pumps are no longer needed, but are there simply as a failsafe. However, active cationic pumping, by increasing the membrane potential higher, is still helpful for driving extractions in both directions; inputting and exporting materials.

 

[HydrogenBond]

Yes you are right in a way. For everyday purposes specific heat per gram is a more useful concept.

 

I imagine Wellwisher, sorry H Bond, is trying to make a point about the number and strength of H-bonds per molecule in water, versus other molecules. Liquid ammonia has a number of similarities to water, not least its high degree of H-bonding. 

 

But I know H Bond of old and generally do not get drawn into his lengthy and sometimes questionable expositions of chemistry and physics. :)

 

If you look at that chart for heat capacity, look at the heat capacity of hydrogen gas per gram compared to ammonia and water. 

 

Hydrogen 14.3  

Ammonia  4.7

Water 4.18

 

Hydrogen gas is over three times as large as either.  If you look at hydrogen gas per mole, hydrogen is less than both. At the nanoscale it is better to look at single units due to such anomalies. 

[HydrogenBond]

The current theories in evolution and biology do not take into account the ability of water to impose order within the organic materials of life. Water self bonds in extended structures; four hydrogen bonds, which can become further stabilized with cooperative hydrogen bonding. The impact of adding organics to water is to add energy to the stabilized water structuring. The high heat capacity of water, in light of its ability to form extended structures at moderately high temperature, results is the organics needing to compromise, to the water, in terms of their secondary, tertiary and quaternary structures. The result are a wide range of distinct phases appearing in the cell; organelles of life. These phases in the cell, are not random, but rather occur at distinct phase boundaries. There is not yet a cellular phase diagram, but this would show the same behavior as other phase diagrams; distinct boundaries based on temperature, pressure, composition, etc., 

 

As an early evolutionary example, if we added lipids to water, as steam, the lipids will become soluble in the steam to form a single phase. As we cool the solution and liquid water appears, two phases appear; water and membrane. This is repeatable because it is based on minimizing system energy. If we add things to the membrane, we can get a different phase diagram. 

 

Another classic example of a phase boundary and order imposed by water, is protein folding. Below are the energy landscape diagrams of a generic unfolded (left) and folded protein (right). 

 

 

 

The peaks on the left energy landscape diagram are hydrophobic moieties along the protein chain. These add energy to the water, which is being resisted by the water, due to its  ability to absorb energy and maintain order. The protein will need to make the first move with the protein folding these hydrophobic moieties into the core, so these residues have less water surface contact. The diagram on the right shows the perfectly folded protein with a deep low energy well. 

 

Classical theory assumes that protein, due to being held together with weak binding forces, should show average folds due to the thermal vibrations at ambient conditions; statistical model. Yet, direct observations of protein folds show these are not governed by statistics. The reason for the difference between conventional theory and experimental observation is classical theory does not take into account the reality of water and how water can impose order. The classic theory assumes water forms an ideal solution. Water is anything but ideal. 

 

Ideality of solutions is analogous to ideality for gases, with the important difference that intermolecular interactions in liquids are strong and cannot simply be neglected as they can for ideal gases. Instead we assume that the mean strength of the interactions are the same between all the molecules of the solution.

 

Water is not an ideal solution, therefore one cannot ignore the intermolecular interaction between water and organics, since these can differ very widely from water-water and organic-organic interactions. Protein in an ideal solution of water would be governed by statistics, but sine water is not ideal the dice become loaded and statistics does not apply. 

Edited December 29, 2016 by HydrogenBond

[exchemist]

Here we go......[cue circus music and clowns]  :)

[CraigD]

Water self bonds in extended structures; four hydrogen bonds, which can become further stabilized with cooperative hydrogen bonding.

HBond, are you claiming that H₂O molecules in liquid state (water) don’t move around :QuestionM Surely you’re not :Exclamati

 

Such a claim contradicts the definition of liquid. A substance in which molecules for extended structures is a solid, and such structures are know as crystalline. H₂O in a solid state (ice) behaves like this, and commonly has a regular crystalline structure.

 

Here we go......[cue circus music and clowns] :)

HBond does seem to come back to vague claims about water with troubling regularity. :(

 

I know of only one well-developed discipline foundationed on the idea that liquid water contains useful information, and it also claims that water has many magic-like properties unknown to science: homeopathy. It’s practically without exception considered a pseudoscience, entirely lacking in experimental or credible theoretical support.

 

HBond, though I fear are and will continue to persist in your essentially homeopathic beliefs, I wish you’d abandon them. Water is certainly important in biology, astrophysics, chemistry, and many other scientific disciplines, but homeopathy isn’t a scientific or credible discipline, nor one I think any science enthusiasts should embrace, in any of its traditional or nouveau forms.

[Turtle]

...

HBond, though I fear are and will continue to persist in your essentially homeopathic beliefs, I wish you’d abandon them. Water is certainly important in biology, astrophysics, chemistry, and many other scientific disciplines, but homeopathy isn’t a scientific or credible discipline, nor one I think any science enthusiasts should embrace, in any of its traditional or nouveau forms.

It's not about homeopathy, it's about creationism. But you're right, science enthusiasts should not embrace it.

 

Here we go......[cue circus music and clowns]   :)

Indeed. :Clown: Moreover, here we go again inasmuch as we are awash is this drivel at Hypography. Allow me to cite just a few of the thread starter's drippages:

Strange Claims About Dna, Dice, And Water

Water As The Co-Partner Of Life

Life And Water

Good grief.

[HydrogenBond]

In all due respect, Exchemist is not up on the latest breakthroughs in water chemistry. He may have known chemistry from the past, but he is not up with the present. Turtle also has demonstrated he is not up to speed in chemistry. Heat capacity and boiling points are not called holistic or homeopathic properties of water. 

 

HBond, are you claiming that H₂O molecules in liquid state (water) don’t move around :QuestionM Surely you’re not :Exclamati

Such a claim contradicts the definition of liquid. A substance in which molecules for extended structures is a solid, and such structures are know as crystalline. H₂O in a solid state (ice) behaves like this, and commonly has a regular crystalline structure.
 
HBond does seem to come back to vague claims about water with troubling regularity. :(

I know of only one well-developed discipline foundationed on the idea that liquid water contains useful information, and it also claims that water has many magic-like properties unknown to science: homeopathy. It’s practically without exception considered a pseudoscience, entirely lacking in experimental or credible theoretical support.

HBond, though I fear are and will continue to persist in your essentially homeopathic beliefs, I wish you’d abandon them. Water is certainly important in biology, astrophysics, chemistry, and many other scientific disciplines, but homeopathy isn’t a scientific or credible discipline, nor one I think any science enthusiasts should embrace, in any of its traditional or nouveau forms.

I never said that water does not move around and is like a crystalline solid. I have said, a half a dozen times or more that water forms extended structures. I have also said that the average water molecules only lasts about 1 millisecond in liquid water, until it trades hydrogen. Both are connected to hydrogen bonding. This is very different from an ideal solution, where the water molecules are uniformly associated, vibrating and moving about randomly, due to the assumption of average bonding forces. Water is not an ideal solution. Instead water forms pockets of structuring, which can appear throughout the non ideal solution, and which appear around surfaces. 

 

Below is a representation of icosahedral clusters of water which contain 280 water molecules. This is about the largest water structuring that has been proven to exist in liquid water. The diagram shows transformation between its low and high density configurations due to some of the hydrogen bonding switching from covalent to polar. There are changes in H,S.V or enthalpy, entropy and volume. 

 

Below are a few papers that have characterized short range order in liquid water. They have evidence that supports icosahedral water structures. These correspond with the calculated oxygen radial distribution function near-surface water at 4 °C. 

 

 

C. Huang, K. T. Wikfeldt, D. Nordlund, U. Bergmann, T. McQueen, J. Sellberg, L. G. M. Pettersson and A. Nilsson, Wide-angle X-ray diffraction and molecular dynamics study of medium-range order in ambient and hot water, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 13 (2011) 19997–20007; http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1107/1107.4795.pdf. [Back, 2, 3, 4] 

 

A. Møgelhøj, A. K. Kelkkanen, K. T. Wikfeldt, J. Schiøtz, J. J. Mortensen, L. G. M. Pettersson, B. I. Lundqvist, K. W. Jacobsen, A. Nilsson and J. K. Nørskov, Ab Initio van der Waals interactions in simulations of water alter structure from mainly tetrahedral to high-density-like, J. Phys. Chem. B Special Issue: H. Eugene Stanley Festschrift, 115(2011) 14149-14160. [Back, 2] 

 

A. Nilsson and L. G. M. Pettersson, Perspective on the structure of liquid water, Chem. Phys. 389 (2011) 1-34; K. T. Wikfeldt, L. G. M. Pettersson and A. Nilsson, Liquid water structure from X-ray spectroscopy and simulations, Proceedings- International School of Physics Enrico Fermi : Complex Materials in Physics and Biology 176 (2012) 165-186. [Back, 2, 3]

Edited December 30, 2016 by HydrogenBond

[HydrogenBond]

If you assume water is an ideal solution, relative to evolution and biology, your analysis is wrong by default. The best you can get is empirical that need massaging by statistics. I have been saying this for years. You don't build on a swamp and expect the building inspector to give it two thumbed up, unless those inspectors are corrupt or corruptible.

 

For some reason, so many people in discussion forums seem to think if you don't accept evolution, as it, even though it uses a poor foundation premise about water, then that means you believe in creationism. In the world of science there is something called the third alternative, which I have been stressing from day one. You can advance understanding of evolution and biology by using more realistic assumptions about water. It makes a big difference since water becomes a driving force due to the way it self associates. 

Edited December 30, 2016 by HydrogenBond

[HydrogenBond]

Let me give an analogy for relationship between the water and the organics of life. As an analogy, say you are a freshman who has just moved away to college. It is the first day of class and you are in a large lecture hall, with all the other freshman. Everyone is in the same boat, not knowing anyone or what to expect. You look around at each other and take a seat. Everything is wide open in terms of where to sit and who to talk to. This is like an ideal solution; anything seems possible. 

 

In the next scenario, you are a transfer student who comes into the same college in the middle of the term. By then friendships have been made, groups have formed, with even single people in the habit of sitting in certain places in the lecture hall. Structuring has appeared in the lecture hall.   You need to look around, figure out the cliques and find your place. There are some cliques that do not appeal to you, while there are others who you know will exclude you, directly or indirectly. There will be seats in the front and back which are off limits, since they are the preferred seat of a veteran student, who has sat there for weeks.

 

However, there will also be some places where you will be welcome. These will be the lowest stress; energy, places in the lecture hall, where you can relax and fit in. After a few weeks, you become a fixture in terms of the newer transfer students that will come next week. This is not the ideal solution of day one freshman year. It is more restrictive; dice become loaded. 

 

In the cell, although pure water will self associate, much of order in the water is a function of its association with large surfaces, such as the DNA. The DNA is dissolved within water. The liquid solution is very crowded, requiring the water touch the DNA, at all exposed surfaces, while trying to minimize its own energy. This requires that the water hydrogen bond to the DNA, as well as to other water molecules, which are touching adjacent areas of the DNA, often in unique ways, that can include certain settings of the P-C switches. This order in the water, will even reflect the base pairs, with each base pair having unique water signatures, due to the unique potential each will create. 

 

The DNA is like the head of a fraternity, who creates an ordered pocket in the lecture hall, with the members around him each having their unique seat preference. This pocket is not just composed of the members, but has a buffer of seats beyond itself. Unless you plan to pledge that fraternity, you may not feel welcome entering that buffer zone. The DNA allows order in the water over its large surface, that extends racially outward into the bulk water. The DNA can pack and unpack altering the exposed surface. The order imposed by the DNA, extends outward and meets the smaller order structures in water; icosahedral. 

 

The current models treat water as an ideal solution, like day one freshman year, where anything is possible; throw the dice. But the reality of the water dynamics is it is like a transfer student entering a lecture hall with students (organic surfaces) already defining their niche. This is not ideal to the new student, but still works. It imposes limits, so there are only a few sweets spots left to sit. 

 

The cell is roughly about 70% water and about 30% organic macromolecules and ions. There is a lot of water surface area in contact with a wide range of organics, with the percentages of organics high enough to where the water starts to become continuously integrated between the organic surfaces.  The cell's water can gel into a continuous matrix, or loosen its viscosity. This allows wider information transfer via the hydrogen bonding binary from far to close. The binary is more than bits and bytes of information. It has muscle; enthalpy, entropy and volume. This means even chemical reactions and conformational changes, that undergo free energy change and generate pressure, generate binary information. 

Edited January 1, 2017 by HydrogenBond

[CraigD]

I never said that water does not move around and is like a crystalline solid.

I hoped and am relieved that you confirm you’re not saying that.

 

I have said, a half a dozen times or more that water forms extended structures.

You have, over many years. I believe you introduced me to not only the mainstream literature describing the tetrahedral structure of liquid water, but the weird ideas of people like Martin Chaplin, at such websites as his “Water Structure and Science” and his Hpathy.com “homeopathy portal” article “Memory of Water”.

 

I think that people like you and Chaplin are saying more than “what forms extended structures.” I think you claiming that it is possible to store and retrieve information from liquid water, other than in obvious, limited ways, such as measuring the mass of a volume of water, or its temperature.

 

Although traditional homeopathy makes claims beyond this, mostly that information stored in water can be used to treat disease, I think that beliefs like yours and Chaplin’s can be considered a fundamental tenet of present day homeopathy, which is why I referenced in my previous post.

 

Am I correct in my understanding of what you are saying, and what you believe :QuestionM

 

After my deep question about you and homeopathy, here is, I hope, an easy question:

I have also said that the average water molecules only lasts about 1 millisecond in liquid water, until it trades hydrogen

I don’t recall having heard this claim before, and am surprised by it, because according to many references, including this one by Chaplin, “The water hydrogen bond is a weak bond, never stronger than about a twentieth of the strength of the O-H covalent bond”. From this, I’ve long visualized the O-H bonds in liquid water as being very long-lasting, the H-bonds rapidly breaking and reforming, allowing H₂O molecules to wander liquidly (pardon the pun) through warm water.

 

Do you have a reference supporting your claim, HBond :QuestionM

 

It seems that it could be true, but the making and breaking of chemical bonds in a liquid, where molecules are moving at many different velocities, according to statistical thermal laws, is complicated beyond my ability to quickly figure out myself.

[HydrogenBond]

Before I answer these questions, I wanted to start off with a very new study published in 2016. 

 

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/08/160804101722.htm

 

The structure and dynamics of the DNA double helix are influenced in a decisive way by the surrounding water shell. New experiments in the ultrafast time domain show that the first two water layers at the DNA surface generate electric fields of up to 100 megavolts/cm which fluctuate on the femtosecond time scale and are limited to a spatial range on the order of 1 nm.

​The water is forming cooperative hydrogen bonding with delocalized electrons. Water hydrogen bonds to the DNA and then to itself and then to a secondary water layer; DNA-water-water to create 3-D electric fields ay the nanoscale. 

I don't have time this morning, but I will look for the reference where I read that molecules in liquid water only exist about 1 millisecond.  But for now, I found this quote;

Cooperative hydrogen bonding increases the O-H bond length whilst causing a 20-fold greater reduction in the H····O and O····O distances [436]. The increase in bond length has been correlated with the hydrogen bond strength and resultant O-H stretch vibrations [1318]. Thus O····O distances within clusters are likely to be shorter than those at the periphery, in agreement with the icosahedral cluster model.

 

When cooperatives form, the covalent -OH bonds of H2O will stretch; vibrations. At the same time, the H...O  or hydrogen bonding distances get closer. The partial covalent character of hydrogen bonds allow these to swap with the stretched 0-H vibrations.The symmetry of water hydrogen bonded with four other water, makes the hydrogen bonds and the covalent bonds of water sort of interchangeable, especially in cooperatives. The electric fields on the water of the DNA shows how much energy is generated by cooperative water-organic surfaces. 

 

As far as Chaplin, true he wrote about homeopathic water and the memory of water. If you read this article in his web site, about water and hydrogen bonding, this topic is one of hundreds of topics, added for completeness. This topic is not the theme of the site. The site is geared to the state of the art research in water, with no related research left out. If it was funded by science and published in a science journal, it is included. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 3, 2017 by HydrogenBond

[HydrogenBond]

In the liquid state, in spite of 80% of the electrons in H₂O being concerned with bonding, the three atoms do not stay together as the hydrogen atoms are constantly exchanging between water molecules, due to protonation/deprotonation processes. Both acids and bases catalyze this exchange and even when at its slowest (at pH 7), the average time for the atoms in an H₂O molecule to stay together is only about a millisecond. As this brief period is, however, much longer than the timescales encountered during investigations into water's hydrogen bonding or hydration properties, water is usually treated as a permanent structure.

 

 

http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_molecule.html

 

Above is the quote and link to the not so strange claim that water molecules only last about 1 millisecond in the liquid state. 

 

Before going returning to the main topic, I would like to look at Martin Chaplin's treatment of homeopathy on his web site. The very mention of homeopathy seems to be treated as the litmus test for chemical quackery, which then results in valid science ending up in the strange claims section; game of taboo by association. I will quote a few paragraphs to show how this is treated own his site. 

 

Homeopathy is a branch of alternative medicine, ^{b , i} created in 1796 by the disillusioned doctor Samuel Hahnemann, that is based around the surmise that an individual may be treated using minute doses ^d of natural materials which in larger doses would be expected to cause the same symptoms (the 'like cures like' principle). ^h Remedies start with such a natural material that is diluted and then subjected to a sequence of further dilutions in purified water or aqueous ethanol with considerable agitation (called succussion, see below) between dilution steps. Each dilution (as shown) results in about a 100-fold dilution and many cycles (e.g. 20, 50, 200) are performed before the remedy is used.

 

In spite of many (most?) people knowing of success stories (and the opposite) concerning the use of homeopathy where it is practiced [120], scientists have difficulty in regarding this form of alternative medicine as any more than a placebo effect. ^e The ‘memory of water’ is a popular phrase that is mostly associated with homeopathy [1211] following his and others’ allergy research work [132]. These research teams reported that solutes subjected to sequential physical processing and dilution show biological effects different from those apparent using just the water employed for the dilutions. The subject has drawn a lot of controversy with many 'scientists' simply rejecting it outright without studying the evidence. Whether or not this work is correctly interpreted, the value of homeopathy depends on whether it can treat ailments not on whether water has 'memory'.

The main evidence against water having a memory is that of the very short (~ps) lifetime of hydrogen bonds between the water molecules [1209]. Clearly in the absence of other materials or surfaces (see later), the specific hydrogen bonding pattern surrounding a solute does not persist when the solute is removed any more than would a cluster around any specified water molecule, or else water would not know which of its myriad past solutes took preference. Indeed the atoms that make up the water molecule only remain together for about a millisecond in liquid water due to proton exchange (see water dissociation). A recent NMR study shows no stable (>1 ms, >5 μM) water clusters are found in homeopathic preparations [712].

Both temperature and magnetic fields affect the infrared spectrum of water (showing their effect on water clustering) and these effects remain for considerable time (~1 hour) after the magnetic field is removed or temperature changed [1697]. It has been shown that (still) mineral water can be magnetized and retain this magnetization for more than a day, supposedly due to the production of magnetic nanobubbles. [1780].

 

There are numerous examples of the slow equilibration in aqueous solution. Thus, it can take several days for the effects of the addition of salts to water to finally stop oscillating [4] and such solutions are still changing after several months showing a large-scale (~100 nm) domain structure [1148]. Also, water restructuring after infrared radiation persists for more than a day [730], and water photoluminescence changes over a period of days [801]. Changes to the structure of water are reported to last for weeks following exposure to resonant RLC (resistance inductance capacitance) circuits [927]. Conductivity oscillations (~ 0.5 Hz) at low concentrations of salts also show the poor tendency to equilibrium in such solutions [661]. Succussion, by itself, has been shown to be 'remembered' for at least 10 minutes as solitons (that is, standing waves) [893]. Treatment by magnetic fields (0.8 T) have been shown to leave a memory effect lasting several days [2676]. Extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields (ELF-EMF) have significant and effects on liquid water that last for minutes after the field is removed [1896 ]. ^h Electromagnetic-treated water has been proven to have diverse biological effects on both animal and plant cells [2219 ].

 

It has been found that clathrate hydrate nucleation is faster in solutions that once formed the clathrates but where it had been subsequently dissociated for periods up to several hours [1391]. ^f Thus the solution shows a 'memory effect' of its previous history, although it is likely that this is due to retained super-saturated gas concentrations [1429] and/or nanobubble formation [2350]. Other interesting examples of the memory of water are the Mpemba effect and the observation that hot water pipes are more likely to burst than adjacent cold water pipes [959]. In both effects, water seems to remember whether it has been recently hot or cold even when subsequently cooled. The Mpemba effect is a well proven phenomenon that also seems to be caused by unexpected solute and time effects and is described and explained elsewhere.