[puppypower (OP)]

Quote from: puppypower on Yesterday at 11:15:31
Both are expressed in the pH affect.
Not really.

Rather than posting reams of obvious stuff (we know the water is there, and we know it behaves weirdly), perhaps you could actually answer this.

Quote from: Bored chemist on 23/03/2021 12:33:19
Quote from: puppypower on 23/03/2021 11:09:14
, I started a parallel water analysis,
What did you actually do?

I am trying to show you and everyone, however, the discussion cannot yet get past the front door, to outside the box. The answer is outside the box. Normally I plow on, but this time I want to be slow and patient, since leaving the box, temporarily, is important.

Conceptually, the co-partner relationship between water and the organics of life allows you to model life from either side of the partnership, since each reflects the other, to create the potential between, needed for life. Other solvents do no reflect properly. In my opinion, a water side approach, although newer, is the smarter way to approach life, since it is chemically simpler, compared to having to account for all the organic diversity which seems to expand with each improvement in technology. 

However, I do appreciate everyone who did and does it the hard way. The harder organic way was technically easier. It is technically easier to look at the large lumbetinh DNA, than look at dynamic water that exists around in situ DNA. What was learned both the DNA can used for a water refection translation. A direct water approach would be technically far more difficult to do. In situ water, in live cells, in not easy to analyze. I learned how to place the organics in the mirror, and see the needed water parallel. There are simple trends. 

As evan_au mentioned, "tardigrades can survive in "suspended animation" for years with only 1% of the normal amount of water in their cells."

This is an example of all the organics in place,  as shown in textbooks, with very little water beyond chemically bound water that will not centrifuge. In this example, we do not have to assume water since water is lacking. Are the tardigrades alive at this point? The answer is no. The conformations of its organic materials are not correct for life. Its enzymatic reactions are limited and/or stopped, while the integrated state called life, is not there. The layman looking at textbooks will assume this should be alive since the pros know better and draw it this way. Then again, water is harder to analyze than the organics so what is less certain is not included but lumped wth casino math.

If we add water, the inert  pile of tardigrade power up, as the organic configurations reorientate, enzymes become active, and all the organelles begin to integrate. For some reason,  I been being asked to belief there is nothing to see here, and ignoring the water is the path I need to take, so I can run with the herd. I saw through that magic trick long ago. Organic centric levitation is not possible, even if you think you see it.

 I should be able to suggest experiments to prove this theory. I suggested powering up hibernating tardigrades, with water, a little at a time, to observe the power up priorities, until life resumes.

Is this a "water is inherant to all life including aliens" post?

 Water is very good as a refrigerant to the temperature we are used to, its latent heat is rather high,  it is lighter in solid hexagonal form than its liquid meaning it floats at a pressure on a planet with gravity enough to hold an atmosphere meaning it floats rather than sinking, it has a humongous heat capacity to act as a buffer. Plus it seems to be fairly abundant.

All speculation about alien life in water or any other solvent is speculation, since there is no hard evidence of any such life. The only hard evidence is connected to life on earth which uses water. When others propose other solvents for life,  since DNA does not work in any of the proposed solvents, they will need to also supply, at the very least, an alternate template material. This is never done. This gets a pass, simply to appease benefactor for continued funding.

Life on earth has all the organic parts already done by nature. We only need to catalog these and try them in other solvents. For example, if we add isopropyl alcohol to the corona virus. they die.  What type of protein and genetic alternatives would be needed to form virus in an alcohol planet?  Science appears to pander to these speculations, with a dual standard based on the casino math jackpot mentality. Water leading life is doomed to alternate theory. Politics and science both use the same casino math. This is why we are stuck at the door to common sense. But I will wait for the casino to close, so I can hand out gambling addiction leaflets. 

[Bored chemist]

Rather than posting reams of obvious stuff (we know the water is there, and we know it behaves weirdly), perhaps you could actually answer this.

Quote from: Bored chemist on 23/03/2021 12:33:19
Quote from: puppypower on 23/03/2021 11:09:14
, I started a parallel water analysis,
What did you actually do?

[puppypower (OP)]

One of the best simple tools, I noticed, for approaching life from the the water side, is the water and oil affect. If we mix water and oil and then agitate, we get an emulsion. If we let it settle, the water and oil will separate back into two layers. The agitation adds energy and work. When the agitation stops, the system will give off the artificially added energy, and spontaneously move back into the lower free energy of two separated layers. The emulsion is a high free energy state. Water has an internal free energy set point and will lead things back.

The hydrogen protons, in pure water, are not fixed in place, even though hydrogen protons are covalently bonded to oxygen with strong OH binds. The high electronegativity of oxygen; magnetic heavy, allows oxygen to stabilize extra two extra electrons, so the hydrogen protons can form higher levels of complexity, beyond only covalent bonded to oxygen; hydrogen bonding. This extra mobility of the hydrogen protons reflects states of higher entropy driven by the second law.

If we add organics to the water, this creates surface tension anywhere where the water and oil have any surface contact.  If we agitate, this increases the surface area contact between water and oil and amplifies the surface tension.

The "tension" is implicit of the covalent side of polar-covalent nature of hydrogen bonding. The covalent character expands the hydrogen bonds to better align the covalent bonding orbitals with oxygen. The polar side of the hydrogen bond switch can get closer; has no tension.

The covalent aspect of hydrogen bonding increases election sharing; covalent sharing, with oxygen it but it reduces the mobility of the protons in the bulk matrix. Water's hydrogen proton entropy decreases  as surface tension increases.

In the case of the emulsion, we added work and energy via agitation, to add free energy. This will   reverse the second law for the hydrogen protons. The surface tension binds and immobilizes the hydrogen protons into covalent bonding. Once this energy input stops, water increases its hydrogen proton entropy, once again, by reducing the surface contact and surface tension. This excludes the oil, to form pure water, with less tension; hydrogen protons moves back to the polar side. The more pure water that can form; one single water phase, the larger the proton entropy increases via the 2nd law.

This is useful to life, since nearly all the organics of life create some level of surface tension in water. The water's hydrogen proton entropy needs, in turn, will push the organics into lumps, clumps and phases. We get membranes, organelles and other organic compartments within cells.

The hydrogen protons of pure water were made to move; 2nd law, and will do all types of things to the organics to satisfy the needs of the second law, including sending information via enhance directed mobility.  Or if the organic is too stubborn, water will increase local entropy via enzyme catalysis.

It is not coincidence that the DNA is the most hydrated molecule in the cell; not a mono-polymer, since the DNA has four base monomers. This reflects very low surface tension at the top of the organic food chain. The base pairing occurs to shield the water from the reduced moieties on the bases. This was a goal from day one. This was not gambling, but a sure thing needed to satisfy the hydrogen proton's 2nd law needs in water. Life, thereafter,  generated a lot of entropy increase.

The modern cell has lingering surface tension, due to the vast variety of organic, which the water tries to decrease, so it can increase hydrogen proton entropy. When lumping and clumping is not enough, other things begin to happen; chemical changes, all the way to the state we call life.

[Bored chemist]

Rather than posting reams of obvious stuff (we know the water is there, and we know it behaves weirdly), perhaps you could actually answer this.

Quote from: Bored chemist on 23/03/2021 12:33:19
Quote from: puppypower on 23/03/2021 11:09:14
, I started a parallel water analysis,
What did you actually do?

[Zer0]

Hiya PuppeyPowerz!
😊

Just based on your sheer Liking for
 " WATER "
Here is a lil something U might enJoy reading.
👌

https://www.joiscientific.com/water-magic/

Okay then, guess i shall leave now...coz i do Not have anything else considerable to add to your OP.
🙋

P.S. - u r soo much persistent even wen ur a pup, heaven knows how sternly strong u'd be once u grow up.
🐶
Ok buhbyeez & Tc!
🦴

[puppypower (OP)]

Rather than posting reams of obvious stuff (we know the water is there, and we know it behaves weirdly), perhaps you could actually answer this.

Quote from: Bored chemist on 23/03/2021 12:33:19
Quote from: puppypower on 23/03/2021 11:09:14
, I started a parallel water analysis,
What did you actually do?

It is not clear what you are asking. If you are asking what I have done, new, this will come after I build the needed foundation. If you cannot accept the foundation, it is moot after that.  I am trying to make sure the foundation is very clear, first. This has huge free market potential.

Hiya PuppeyPowerz!
😊

Just based on your sheer Liking for
 " WATER "
Here is a lil something U might enJoy reading.
👌

https://www.joiscientific.com/water-magic/

Okay then, guess i shall leave now...coz i do Not have anything else considerable to add to your OP.
🙋

P.S. - u r soo much persistent even wen ur a pup, heaven knows how sternly strong u'd be once u grow up.
🐶
Ok buhbyeez & Tc!
🦴

Thanks for the link. I will try to read it, but I had eye surgery yesterday and my eye is still adjusting. Writing is a little easier at this time.


Back to background
The water model for life began when I was a sophomore in college. It was the end of second semester organic chemistry, which was my favorite subject in college. We did some chapters on polymers; plastics, then on life molecules like protein and DNA. It was during that time I started to  understand the importance of secondary bonding for the properties of bio materials. The author of the textbook, at the very end, made the point that hydrogen bonding was a key to life being a universal secondary bond in all the important materials. This stuck with me, but it was placed on the back burner for about ten years.

One day, at a time of leisure and a good job,  I revisited this idea and started to self educate in biology, looking at the 3-D structures of biomaterials. I was a materials expert by education; metals, ceramics and polymers; secondary bonding, so this was down my alley.

I decided to develop a theory that one could model a cell using just the hydrogen bonding, since secondary bonding was the key to the properties of these materials. I developed a qualitative approach of high and low free energy, but this was hard to sell. It could explain all types of things in a simple way, but the traditions were carved in stone. I stopped again and did to revisit for another 10 years.

One day, after many new cycles of hope and disappointment, I came to the understanding that a even better way, that was easier to investigate and had more data, was to use the water as the antagonist to the organics. The hydrogen bonding approach was more consistent with the organic-centric approach and had been modeled as a reactive variable, but little data was available.

Water created a potential that gave me the energy needed to lead the organic secondary bonding such as via the water-oil affect. This was easier to develop than the hydrogen bonding analysis. When I read that the organics of life were dead without water, I knew I the leader variable, that could impose all the secondary bonding needed for life.

The problem had always been the lack of constructive feedback and having to assume the negativity meant I needed to start again. But eventually I realize that biology is linear memory science and not\conceptual and abstract science. In physics there is more openness to new ideas along as they don't challenge anything held dear. Chemistry is more settled science, so that area was good to have under my belt, to make sure I was on point.

[puppypower (OP)]

Hydrogen bonding forms between the hydrogen and the nonbonding electron orbitals of highly electronegative atoms; like oxygen, nitrogen, chlorine, etc., This was always odd to me. The nonbonding electron orbitals, of say oxygen, were used to bond hydrogen via hydrogen bonding. Why are they called nonbonding?

The reason is the nomenclature was designed with primary covalent bonding in mind and not secondary bonding. The hydrogen bond is somewhat unique in hat it can turn the nonbonding into bonding orbitals, and convert bonding orbitals into nonbonding, at the level of covalent.

I have already discussed this as being connected to the magnetic heavy side of oxygen, which allows ten negative charges to balance eight positive charges. A charge in motion creates a magnetic field ,and the mobility of the electrons generate an offsetting magnetic attraction. As the hydrogen proton approaches the nonbonding orbitals, it can participate in the open side of the oxygen based magnetic field. 

What is cool about this is hydrogen bonds can become cooperative, meaning they can cluster and enhance each other. A cooperative has the weird property of making the first bond broken of the cooperative, the strongest bond, no matter where you cut. This implies there is extended electron mobility so they all get stronger, loosely similar to resonance stabilization in benzene.

When the entropy of the hydrogen proton lowers to make a cooperative, the enhanced electron entropy can pick up the slack. Water via hydrogen binding has two ways for applying potential to organics. Along the DNA, enzymes disrupt cooperative hydrogen bonding with water, causing an large increase in hydrogen proton entropy. As the enzyme passes, the water goes back and resets the cooperative.  We have cooperative electron and proton free energy helping the enzyme. If we remove the water the enzyme cannot make up the difference.

[Bored chemist]

It is not clear what you are asking.

I suspect you are the only one who thinks that.


It really isn't difficult.
What did you actually do?
You say you "I started a parallel water analysis,"
Well, what analysis did you undertake and in what way was it "parallel"?
Did you actually start it?
Had someone actually done it before?

I suspect the answer is that you didn't really do anything; you didn't even bother to learn what is already known; you just wrote some nonsense on web pages.

But feel free to tell us all what you actually did.

[Bored chemist]

I have already discussed this as being connected to the magnetic heavy side of oxygen,...

Which is still word salad.

[Bored chemist]

Chemistry is more settled science, so that area was good to have under my belt,

You do not have chemistry under your belt.

[Bored chemist]

I decided to develop a theory that one could model a cell using just the hydrogen bonding

That's not a theory, is it?

[Petrochemicals]

Is this a "water is inherant to all life including aliens" post?

 Water is very good as a refrigerant to the temperature we are used to, its latent heat is rather high,  it is lighter in solid hexagonal form than its liquid meaning it floats at a pressure on a planet with gravity enough to hold an atmosphere meaning it floats rather than sinking, it has a humongous heat capacity to act as a buffer. Plus it seems to be fairly abundant.

All speculation about alien life in water or any other solvent is speculation, since there is no hard evidence of any such life. The only hard evidence is connected to life on earth which uses water. When others propose other solvents for life,  since DNA does not work in any of the proposed solvents, they will need to also supply, at the very least, an alternate template material. This is never done. This gets a pass, simply to appease benefactor for continued funding.

Life is more likely to use an alternate to DNA than use an alternate to water. Copper for blood, breathes chlorine, mostly made from silicon are all theories  but water and its characteristics of ice density, latent heat, specific heat, triple point all point to it being water based.

Liquid is pretty much a necessity for life in my considered opinion , a solid is fixed and gas is too tempestuous.

[puppypower (OP)]

I have already discussed this as being connected to the magnetic heavy side of oxygen,...

Which is still word salad.

Salad is good for you. The roughage helps with digestion. I try to be more descriptive than only using the jargon of the experts in the field. I am trying to teach first, and impress, last. I prefer to reach a wider audience, that includes layman. I am not trying to impress a niche audience.

Oxygen can hold two more electrons that it has nucleus protons. For this charge instability to remain stable, we need to include the offsetting magnetic fields from the two extra electrons, as they move about the oxygen nucleus, within the 3-D (Px,Py,Pz) magnetic fields set up by 2p-orbitals. Charge and electrostatic forces alone cannot explain how oxygen can do this. You need to factor in  the extra magnetic force. I call it magnetic heavy. I thought that was a good memory peg. I am going to stick with it

 

It is not clear what you are asking.

I suspect you are the only one who thinks that.
It really isn't difficult.
What did you actually do?
You say you "I started a parallel water analysis,"
Well, what analysis did you undertake and in what way was it "parallel"?
Did you actually start it?
Had someone actually done it before?

I suspect the answer is that you didn't really do anything; you didn't even bother to learn what is already known; you just wrote some nonsense on web pages.
But feel free to tell us all what you actually did.

There is pure science and then there is applied science. Pure science needs resources or else nobody will accept it. Logic alone is never good enough. Seeing is believing. Applied science is different in that it only needs logic and ingenuity, which does not cost anything. Applied science may also require stepping outside the box, if one is looking for a free market niche. My newest approach is an applied science approach that needs some background, before its makes sense. The goal is to compete with applied casino science at a fraction of the waste and cost. Instead of complain about casino science, I want to give it a nice watch and retire it. Applied science often has propriety information. Pure science tends to be free, since it was paid for in advance, by benefactors who control it via bureaucracy. Free market is more open to utility.

Back to the Foundation Theory.

I would like to change direction and discuss osmosis, which is common to life, and has a connection to the hydrogen bonding of water. Osmosis occurs when two solutions of different concentrations, are separated by a semi-permeable membrane, that only allows water to freely pass in both directions. The membrane restricts movement, across the membrane, with respect to all dissolved solutes.

This scenario is common to cell membranes, which are very selective in terms of material transfer. However, water is able to freely move back and forth. The resultant osmotic affect is somewhat bizarre, in that a pressure head will develop, as shown below in the center pic, that appears to defy gravity. The forces at the membrane balance, but a gravity head is generated and although water can release the pressure head, it does not.



One way to help understand; applied science, how this works, is to first look at the water-oil affect. In this case, water and oil will form surface tension, with a mathematical surface being a 2-D;  flat or semi-curved structure. In the case of osmosis, water, alone, is allowed to become 3-D. The solute is forever restricted to the 2-D surface of the membrane. This extra z-dimension of the water generates the osmotic affect, for both the water and the solute. The z-dimension is not pure science, but a practical way for modeling purposes; computer simulation.

If we mixed a solution of pure water and a solution of salt water, without the membrane, both the water and the salt solution, by dissolving and mixing into each other, will interact in 3-D. In this case, we do not get any pressure head, on one side of the beaker and a negative pressure head on the other side. The two 3-D vectors cancel. But when only water can go 3-D, we end up with a single z-vector that has to do the job of both vectors. This allows nature to amplify the presence of the water. It also allows nature to develop a directed force vector using the water. This allows pressure to translate to free energy changes and vice versa. Life uses chemical and mechanical principles that feedback and balance each other.

Osmosis is a colligative property, meaning that osmosis is only dependent on the concentration of the solute but not on its chemical character. This tells us the osmotic affect is connected to entropy since enthalpy is connected to EM forces and the character of the solute. For example, if we mix nitric acid and water the solution will get hot, If we mix salt and water, the solution will get cold. If we use the same concentration of each, in two osmotic experiments, both will generate the same osmotic pressure since hot or cold; different EM force interactions, are not connected to the osmotic affect. The hot and cold is about enthalpy and internal energy, but not entropy.

There are four known colligative properties. Osmosis, boiling point; BP elevation; melting point; MP depression and vapor pressure lowering.. The common thread appears to be the entropy of water. In BP elevation, the elevated BP means the entropy of water is forced to remain lower than needed, by the solute, to boil normally. This elevates the BP. In MP depression, the entropy is forced to stay higher, by the solute, so it has to get colder to solidify. In VP lowering, the entropy is forced to stay lower then is normally needed to vaporize. Based on this pattern, one would expect entropy in water also explain osmosis. The question is higher or lower, since colligative properties can go both ways. This is how inference works and costs nothing to do. This is different from casino science, where you need a wad of cash to gamble.

The key to the nature of the water's up or down entropy change within osmosis, is pressure. In the third pic on the diagram, an applied downward force can inhibit further osmosis and even reverse it.  Pressure can be used to inhibit and even reverse the entropy change. Pressure can tweak free energy up and down; mechanical and EM equilibria.

Relative to the binary polar-covalent nature of hydrogen bonding, pressure benefits the polar side of the binary, since polar hydrogen bonding benefits by the two charges getting as close as possible. The osmosis pressure is induced, because the entropy of the water is decreasing, as the entropy of the solute increases. The entropy drive of the solute, favors the covalent side of the hydrogen bonding binary.

This can be understood as a type of surface tension, at the level of individual molecules; hydration spheres.  The osmotic pressure implies a push back, by the water, to maintain a better polar side hydrogen bonding equilibrium. At full osmotic pressure, no further covalent hydrogen bonding 2-D molecular surface tension can happen. The hydration spheres for any further solutes gets inhibited at a certain pressure. Logic allows one to see without a microscope. The pressure head reflects an entropic potential in the water, that tries to the counter the solute entropy increase, until a balance is reached between the two.

If you think about the cell, it is full of polymers, such as protein from amino acids. This final result for the living cells is connected to osmosis and colligative properties. If we polymerize amino acids into protein, the number of solute particles decreases. This can reduce the needed osmotic pressure, and thereby allow the more reactive polar side of the hydrogen bonding binary to be favored. Polymerization made the pre-cells more reactive, even before enzymes.

[Bored chemist]

I am trying to teach first, and impress, last.

You are doing neither.

Try using the right words, rather than deliberately avoiding being clear.

[Bored chemist]

Oxygen can hold two more electrons that it has nucleus protons. For this charge instability to remain stable, we need to include the offsetting magnetic fields from the two extra electrons, as they move about the oxygen nucleus, within the 3-D (Px,Py,Pz) magnetic fields set up by 2p-orbitals. Charge and electrostatic forces alone cannot explain how oxygen can do this. You need to factor in  the extra magnetic force. I call it magnetic heavy. I thought that was a good memory peg. I am going to stick with it

The formation of the oxide ion has northing to do with magnetism.
You are talking bollocks.

[puppypower (OP)]

Oxygen can hold two more electrons that it has nucleus protons. For this charge instability to remain stable, we need to include the offsetting magnetic fields from the two extra electrons, as they move about the oxygen nucleus, within the 3-D (Px,Py,Pz) magnetic fields set up by 2p-orbitals. Charge and electrostatic forces alone cannot explain how oxygen can do this. You need to factor in  the extra magnetic force. I call it magnetic heavy. I thought that was a good memory peg. I am going to stick with it

The formation of the oxide ion has northing to do with magnetism.
You are talking bollocks.

The p-orbitals have lobes in the (x,y,z) directions, both plus and minus. See below;



A charge in motion will create a magnetic field, while a magnetic field will follow the right hand rule, where the thumb, index finger and middle finger pointed in x,y,z directions, represent the current direction, magnetic field direction and the magnetic force that is created. I forget which finger is which.

In the case of the p-orbital geometry, all the magnetic forces of the right hand rule can complement each other in 3-D, via the six p-electrons electrons. This can bind the electrons, including the two extra electrons, with a strong additive magnetic force.  We may not see the magnetic force since the cancelling magnetic waves are so efficient in 3-D.

If we had two wave generators, one at each end of a wave tank, with each 180 degrees out of phase with each other, the waves would cancel in the middle, even though the two wave generators are adding a lot of energy. The stillness of the middle tank, due to wave cancellation, will hide the dynamics of the two wave generators, and create a false negative that many appear that the generators are not even plugged in.

The fact that charge is out of balance, yet oxide is stable, implies it has to be magnetic to overcome electrostatic. There is no other explanation. The 3-D, 2-P orbital magnetic force addition of atoms like oxygen, chlorine, nitrogen are really powerful, making these very electronegative. They can all accommodate extra negative charge. Life uses these atoms for their 3-D wave tanks, with the hydrogen proton of hydrogen bonding, able to play in these 3-D wave tanks.

[Bored chemist]

A charge in motion will create a magnetic field, while a magnetic field will follow the right hand rule, where the thumb, index finger and middle finger pointed in x,y,z directions, represent the current direction, magnetic field direction and the magnetic force that is created. I forget which finger is which.

In the case of the p-orbital geometry, all the magnetic forces of the right hand rule can complement each other in 3-D, via the six p-electrons electrons. This can bind the electrons, including the two extra electrons, with a strong additive magnetic force.  We may not see the magnetic force since the cancelling magnetic waves are so efficient in 3-D.

It's still practically nothing to do with magnetism.

The fact that charge is out of balance, yet oxide is stable, implies it has to be magnetic to overcome electrostatic.

The "balance" that is needed is provided by the counter-ion.
For example, in calcium oxide there is a Ca++ ion to go with the O-- ion.

There is no other explanation.

Yes there is; and it's called science.
You should try finding out about it. Science is much more interesting than nonsense.

[puppypower (OP)]

If we start with oxygen gas; oxygen atoms, and metallic calcium, both begin charge neutral. To form calcium oxide, the already neutral oxygen atoms needs to accept two electrons from the neutral Calcium atom, allowing both to become charge imbalanced. If all that was important was electrostatic charge neutrality, this reaction should not occur due to the created charge imbalance. What ends up happening is calcium will end up enriched in positive charge and the oxygen will end up electron enriched, relative to the originally two neutrally charged atoms. This reaction is very favorable and gives off a lot of energy.

The driving force is an electron in motion; electrons moving between the Calcium metal and oxygen atom, creates a magnetic field. In this case, there is better magnetic force addition for the two extra electrons of calcium, within the oxygen, than was originally within calcium.

Let us look at this from a basic Physics POV.  If we had two wires, side-by-side, with electron currents in each wire, if the currents are in the same direction, the wires will repel, via the right hand rule. If the currents are moving in the opposite direction, they will attract each other, even though both are using moving negative charges with charge repulsion. The magnetic force can overcome electrostatic repulsion; See below;



In the case Calcium metal, its two outer electrons are in the 4S orbital. This means these electrons   begin with opposite spin that will magnetically attract to other; two wires with opposite currents. However, the oxygen by placing these in her 2p-orbitals can create a super stable 3-dimensional wire situation, that has 6 currents and 6 wires, in x,y, z directions, that all attract via the right hand rule as applied in 3-D. This is more stable, than the 4S orbital, and can extract calcium's electrons to create these two ions. The calcium ion stabilizes itself, by using its 4S orbitals, for some extra EM attraction, but all it can do is share, but never completely take the electrons back.

If you look at some solid state crystals of CaO, each Calcium+2 ion can become surrounded by six oxides ions. In this crystal grid, Calcium uses six oxides ions, to share two electrons. It uses the equivalent of 1/3 electron from six different oxides.

This is tells us this is not about charge, since 1/3 of a negative charge or 1/3 of an electron has never been found in particle accelerator physics. The electron always remains one thing; 1 minus charge, that cannot be reduced any more. However, since the EM force is one interchangeable unified force; charge and magnetism can become one thing, allowing a virtual 1/3 negative charge to be simulated by the magnetic fields. The sharing is timed averaged by the magnetic fields, to add up as a virtual third of an electron.

I have used the analogy of two wave generators in the opposite ends of a wave tank. If these wave generators are pumping out waves that are 180 degrees out of phase, the two wave generators will cancel each other, since the crests and troughs from one wave generator, will overlap the troughs and crests of the other. The center of the tank will be still and all the mechanical energy pumped into the tank, will be hidden in the wave addition stillness at the center of the tank. The stillness creates the illusion that there is no energy in the tank, due to wave cancellation. There is nothing to see, therefore it does not exist? Does it need to sing and dance to exist?

The hydrogen proton, via hydrogen bonding, can play in this hidden energy rich, yet calm looking wave tank of oxygen.  If we placed a wooden board in the stillness of the wave tank, the solid wooden partition, can disrupt the wave cancelation in the liquid water tank. This will cause the hidden energy to reappear. It will look like opposite waves appearing on each side of the board; potential energy gradient will appear. The oxygen hides a huge source of hidden energy, and if fully tapped into, can lead to observed affects like the quantum tunneling of hydrogen proton pairs in water; two waves that become hidden, then reappear over there.

This last quantum tunneling analysis is speculation, but from a practical POV, this is theoretically possible. All our wave tank needs to retrieve the hidden energy is the correct partition. This extreme spectacular is not needed for life. Life can benefit by tiny amounts of hidden energy, bled off by the hydrogen protons; forms virtual hydrogen atoms (endothermic) from hydrogen protons, via a time shared virtual electron. Oxidation is always ready to take the energy back for a different boost; stillness returns.

I am trying to develop the water side of life, using accepted principles, without adding provocative things, but the physics of the EM force in atomic orbitals opens new doors.

[puppypower (OP)]

Let me go back to osmosis and colligative properties. The four colligative properties only depend on the concentration of solute, but not the character of the solute. Each solute particle is treated the same no matter its size, surface charges, and internal characteristics.

Colligative properties do not discriminate against any solute, based on any of the superficial criteria normally used by science. Science likes to differentiate reality into its tiny differences, but the colligative properties integrate all this chemical cataloging diversity into a simple commonality. Each unit of solute, no matter whether it is negative, positive, neutral, large or small is treated the exact same way, no matter what its surface and inner workers may be. This is mystifying and right down my alley.

In terms of the four forces of nature, this above unity analysis suggest that the colligative properties and the osmosis appear to have more in common with gravity, than the other three forces. The black hole does not discriminate between any type of matter or any energy photon. The rest of the forces tend to discriminate and work only in certain situations. This inference also appears to be consistent with the osmotic pressure head, pushing upward against gravity. It can linger their as though levitating. The net effect uses gravity to help control the EM forces via pressure. This appears to demonstrate unified forces in action.

The electron remains a single particle, no matter how powerful the particle collider experiments are  designed. The electron can be smashed, where all other common matter is broken down, but the electron remains one particle, with both negative charge and some mass. Since the electron remains one thing, that is forever unified, it seems likely the line between gravity and negative charge can be blurred by the electron.

If you look at the nature of colligative properties and its concentration dependency, all solute entities will become surrounded by hydrating water. However, some solute particles will get a larger hydration spheres, by being larger or having more charges. However, since the size and character of the solute is not important, the hydration sphere size and character is also not a critical parameter in osmosis. The molecular and ionic hydration sphere differences are not the basis for the unified response of colligative properties. The unified response is not connected to the 2-D affect of molecular and ionic surfaces; hydration, but is really connecter to the residual 3-D affect, associated with the open pure solvent; freely moving water.

The semi-permeable membrane results in only water having an extra dimension beyond the 2-D membrane interface between solute and water. That interface will discriminate. The 3-D nature of the free moving water, within in osmosis, has to work not only for itself, put also for the solute, to help optimize total system free energy.

Entropy is a state variable. Any given state matter will define a specific amount of entropy. Entropy is also a unifying variable, based on states of matter, which can be anything regardless of any superficial character. The electron is the main way entropic states are sustained in chemical matter.

Hydrogen bonding is a more of a specialty thing for states of life. But electrons are always involved in all states, such as  metal and life. I can see the electrons bridging the gap between EM and Gravity to meets the needs of the second law, using the hydrogen proton, as a partition; virtual gravity.

Consider a salt tablet dropped into a glass of water. The salt will sink due to the gravity, weight and its higher density. Once the salt is dissolved, now the same heavy salt will be found everywhere as though its weight does not matter. Gravity is sort of suspended by other things, or else all solutions would show a density gradient and never become uniform. However, since entropy is a state variable, fully dissolved can be driven by the second law over time; absorbs more and more energy over time. The osmotic pressure head will not only cause the solute to rise against gravity on one side, but it will also cause some solute to lower downward, toward the earth, on the opposite side. This can also be done with fluctuations in the earth's local gravity. Life taps into these cool physics affects.

[Bored chemist]

The driving force is an electron in motion; electrons moving between the Calcium metal and oxygen atom, creates a magnetic field.

And a picosecond or two later when they have moved, the magnetic field collapses because they are in longer in motion.

Did you not realise that?

I guess not, because if you actually had a clue what happens, you wouldn't have wasted time with that picture of current flowing in wires.

This means these electrons   begin with opposite spin that will magnetically attract to other; two wires with opposite currents. However, the oxygen by placing these in her 2p-orbitals can create a super stable 3-dimensional wire situation, that has 6 currents and 6 wires

In reality, there are no wires, no currents and no magnetic fields.

I am trying to develop the water side of life, using accepted principles,

Then you need to start by learning what the accepted principles are.
They include things like "the importance of evidence".

CaO is not magnetic.

Hydrogen bonding is a more of a specialty thing for states of life.

Most of the hydrogen bonds in the world are in ocean water and ice- not life