0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
If the chirality of electrons from cosmic rays can influence us, why should they outweigh the vastly larger number of electrons in the matter around us?
To confirm the stupidity, most of the cosmic rays at ground level are muons, which are achiral.
They decay into pairs of electrons and antineutrinos (and positrons and neutrinos) whose chirality cancel out. There are equal numbers of pairs of both types so the entire shower is achiral!
the entire shower is achiral!
Quote from: larens on 21/05/2020 20:50:27If the chirality of electrons from cosmic rays can influence us, why should they outweigh the vastly larger number of electrons in the matter around us?I'm pretty sure the energy levels of cosmic rays are incomparable to the energy levels of electrons in normal matter.
Quote from: larens on 21/05/2020 20:50:27They decay into pairs of electrons and antineutrinos (and positrons and neutrinos) whose chirality cancel out. There are equal numbers of pairs of both types so the entire shower is achiral!That seems unlikely. We appear to live in a strongly matter-dominated Universe. Do you have a reference for cosmic rays producing or containing equal numbers of electrons and positrons (or muons and anti-muons)?
Quote from: larens on 21/05/2020 20:50:27the entire shower is achiral!Electrons are significantly more likely to interact with matter than anti-neutrinos, so matter wouldn't see the shower as achiral on average.
The chirality of interaction does not depend on the energy by the principle of equivalence.
There have to be an equal number of electrons and positrons by conservation of charge.The shower would still be achiral because there are an equal number of positrons.
Well, so far the data easily satisfies all the ifs,
Calcite crystals are long and pointed
Quote from: larens on 21/05/2020 19:25:50Well, so far the data easily satisfies all the ifs, No.At best, the data says "maybe" to all the ifs.That's not the same as saying it happened.
Quote from: larens on 19/05/2020 22:23:56Calcite crystals are long and pointedhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceland_spar#/media/File:Silfurberg.jpgThat's the typical shape of calcite crystals- barely twice as long as they are wide with fairly blunt ends.
Quote from: larens on 21/05/2020 22:30:13The chirality of interaction does not depend on the energy by the principle of equivalence.Nobody ever said that it did.
I'm pretty sure the energy levels of cosmic rays are incomparable to the energy levels of electrons in normal matter.
So I would expect there to be at least a slight bias towards one chirality over another at sea level.
How was I supposed to take this statement when we were talking about interactions?
There is but the flux is on the order of 0.1 electron per square meter per second. The density is about 34 orders of magnitude smaller than the density of electrons in the body, which was my original point.
And out of all of those electrons in the body, what proportion of them do you think have enough energy to damage DNA?
There you go again - pointing out that philosophically there is always the possibility of a counterexample.
I am talking about crystals grown from a restricted area at one end with a restricted point of nucleation. They are rather knife like:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calcite
Quote from: larens on 21/05/2020 23:23:42I am talking about crystals grown from a restricted area at one end with a restricted point of nucleation. They are rather knife like:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CalciteThat illustrates my point.There are 14 pictures of calcite crystals on that page; 13 of them show that you are wrong.You focus on the minutiae that support your bizarre idea.
You have convinced yourself that your idea is right, just because it is faintly possible.*That's not the way to do science.* It isn't : you need water for calcite crystals but water destroys the titanocene.
One can use applied science to prove pure science theory, with the experiment actually generating artificial end products that may have useful applications.
Nobody can prove how life appeared on earth, period. There is no pure science observational data.
scientifically designed experiments.
Quote from: larens on 22/05/2020 18:25:52scientifically designed experiments. OK mix titanocene dicarbonyl with water.(use a fume cupboard to protect you from the carbon monoxide produced.)It only needs one experiment to show that it fails.
For what it's worth, the presence of ammonium sulphate will make the destruction of the titanocene derivative a little quicker.
The rest is a huge stack of wishful thinking.
, so I go ahead and produce a successful model.
a suitably concentrated calcium titanate solution.
I go ahead and produce a successful model.
I am an optimist, so I go ahead and produce a successful model.
Quote from: larens on 22/05/2020 22:27:38I am an optimist, so I go ahead and produce a successful model.How do you know it's successful if you haven't tested it?