Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

A Water Molecule's Chemical Formula Isn't Really H20

Posted by timothy on from the at-least-not-all-the-time dept.

hackwrench writes "According to this article in Physics News Update, a water molecule's chemical formula is really not H2O, at least from the perspective of neutrons and electrons interacting with the molecule for only attoseconds (less than 10-15 seconds). According to new and recent experiments, neutrons and electrons colliding with water for just attoseconds will see a ratio of hydrogen to oxygen of roughly 1.5 to 1, so a more accurate formula for water under these circumstances would be H1.5O."

11 of 103 comments (clear)

  1. Still water! by trompete · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, as long as it's still wet, there's no reason to panic.

    --
    More than enough BS
  2. Can you say WRONG by MarkusQ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Bah! The interpretation given this research is absurd. If I invented a new machine to count the legs on cows, and my machine said that typical cows had three legs each, what would we conclude? That we'd been wrong about cows all these years, or that my machine wasn't working quite the way I'd expected it to?

    In the present case, a better headline would have been something like "Unexpected effect hides some protons in neutron & electron scattering experements."

    -- MarkusQ

    1. Re:Can you say WRONG by OwnerOfWhinyCat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Must agree Markus. The cow leg counter is a great example.

      The absurdity in the article makes one wonder where we've been getting all that hydrogen from for all these years. We've been cracking H2O with electrolysis and been getting both H's pretty consistently for decades. The experiments that show the PH are pretty solid as well, so it seems a little early to start theorizing that black holes are giving off the extra half a mole of Hydrogen we've been getting out of a mole of water.

      The cool part (that they seemed to entirely miss) is that these techniques could be used to confirm/reject models for wave-theory covalent bonding. Maybe that tough little benzene ring is resonant at more than just the electron shell level....

  3. Lower interaction rate, not fewer atoms. by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The spin in the article is misleading. What's actually happening is that the interaction cross-section between electron and neutron beams and the hydrogen in water (and in things like hexane) is lower than expected relative to the interaction cross-section with oxygen or carbon.

    The conjecture about why the phenomenon occurs (entanglement of protons) is interesting, but they're going to need to find a plausible mechanism and confirm that it's happening before we really know what's going on.

  4. Re:water in time by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 5, Funny

    And if it was H2O.99999973 , we'd know what CPU they used to count it with....

    --
  5. H-2-WHOA!! by quinkin · · Score: 4, Funny
    But that will mess-up up the name of the waterslide in the Simpsons...

    H-2-WHOA!

    Q.

    --
    Insert Signature Here
  6. Change water all you want by 1nv4d3r · · Score: 4, Funny

    H-2-0, H-3-0, H-1.5-0 I don't care.

    But consider yourselves warned: Leave my caffeine molecule alone!

  7. Be careful by isn't+my+name · · Score: 4, Funny

    See this lengthy thread from years ago.

  8. By my references... by chriso11 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually, an attosecond is 10e-18, not 10e-15. 10e-15s would be a femtosecond (and 10e-12 is a picosecond). Yes, I know that they say an attosecond is 'less than 10e-15sec', but it is misleading.

    --
    No, I don't trust in god. He'll have to pay up front, like everybody else.
  9. Re:H2O, H3O, and OH by jonadab · · Score: 5, Funny

    > The big deal is you'd end up with a glass 125% full of water.

    Ah, but if you take a couple of sips, then you'll have a glass that
    is three-quarters full and three-quarters empty. Get another glass
    just like it, drink yet a few _more_ sips out of it, until it's
    one-quarter full and one-quarter empty, pour them together, and the
    glass will be full and not full. You know, the full glass that
    cannot be empty is not the true full glass, and all that zen rot.

    --
    Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  10. Wish there was more detail on the experiment by jgoemat · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This does not mean that water molecules have one and a half hydrogen atoms at all. If you use electrolysis to separate the hydrogen and oxygen from a quantity of water, you will get VERY close to twice the number of oxygen atoms as hydrogen. If they gave a little more detail on their experiments it would be helpful to judge what they actually mean.

    For instance, if they are just shooting electrons and neutrons at water and counting how many hit hydrogen nuclei and how many hit oxygen nuclei, you would expect a larger number than normal to hit oxygen since the nucleus is larger (three times the protons and neutrons of hydrogen). They do say "25% fewer protons than expected", but they don't say what they expected or why.

    Also, did they have the water in a vacuum chamber? If not, there would be dissolved gasses present in the water that their beam could hit as well. I didn't notice any count for Nitrogen so they must not have done it in a glass sitting on a table, but they don't say.