The Deep

[Mainframes]

It's not necessarily water 'attached' to dust grains but hydrates of various compounds and water complexes. All this will have happened during the various stages of the formation of the planet as all the various compounds will be present in the accretion disk that the solar system was formed from.

 

[MikeCarra]

It's not necessarily water 'attached' to dust grains but hydrates of various compounds and water complexes.

^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^

I think that Justa keeps missing the fact that "water" in crystal structures doesn't necessarily mean blobs of liquid.

 

[MikeCarra]

Ever seen water in lava that didn't convert to steam and expand away explosively???

Ummm, yeah. Here's a picture of a PEGMATITE:

As magma cools it excludes elements that do not necessarily fit in the crystalline structure of the igneous rocks formed. Ultimately you are left with a lot of Si and O and really funky elements that don't like to hang out with their pals elsewhere. Along with a lot of WATER that was in the magma and is now in the remainder of the melt (See THIS ARTICLE)

You get really unique features, very large crystals, minerals that you don't see in many other places. Really, generally neat rocks.

(Also check this out, HERE)

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Ummm, yeah. Here's a picture of a PEGMATITE:

As magma cools it excludes elements that do not necessarily fit in the crystalline structure of the igneous rocks formed. Ultimately you are left with a lot of Si and O and really funky elements that don't like to hang out with their pals elsewhere. Along with a lot of WATER that was in the magma and is now in the remainder of the melt (See THIS ARTICLE)

You get really unique features, very large crystals, minerals that you don't see in many other places. Really, generally neat rocks.

(Also check this out, HERE)

Yes, in a world with lots of water already in the air and on the ground. Sure you can explain water getting into rocks when water is already there. We are NOT debating that point at all, so why keep pointing me to articles where this is their entire argument?

We are discussing how water is formed, not how it gets into rocks after they cool from water already existing. It is those positive H molecules in the solar wind emitted from the sun that combines in the corona of comets with silicate sputtered off it's surface. Just as on earth, the moon, and every planet not too hot to prevent atomic bonding of H20. Yet must at the same time occur in processes energetic enough to form those atomic bonds. Earth has an abundance because it's magnetosphere also prevents the solar wind from stripping off all the water molecules, as occurs on the moon and Mars, comets and asteroids, except in deep craters or patches of shallow frost. They do not have strong enough magnetic fields.

Here is half of the equation.

http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/personnel/russell/papers/structVenusTail.pdf

"with the higher energy population being interpreted as accelerated planetary oxygen ions."

And here is the second part, positive hydrogen atoms from the solar wind.

Solar Wind Creates Water in Star Dust, Implications for Life

"This wind consists primarily of protons, the positively charged nuclei of hydrogen atoms."

H2O.

But accidents happen.

""We were originally looking for solar-wind–implanted helium in the rims on minerals in interplanetary dust particles, and stumbled onto water," Ishii said."


And since all chemical processes are electrostatic, and the solar wind is an electric current..... Right back we go again.

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2012/10/solar-winds-found-a-source-for-moon-water.html

 

[Mainframes]

Sorry but you are still missing an explaination, with evidence based back up, of how solar wind is able to split a silicon dioxide molecule.

Also, all chemical reactions are not electrostatic. Covalent bonds are not electrostatic, they are electron orbital sharing.

 

[lesliedellow]

Sorry but you are still missing an explaination, with evidence based back up, of how solar wind is able to split a silicon dioxide molecule.

Also, all chemical reactions are not electrostatic. Covalent bonds are not electrostatic, they are electron orbital sharing.

"And since all chemical processes are electrostatic, and the solar wind is an electric current....."

You know Justa. He thinks he only has to wave a magic wand over a couple of similarly sounding phrases, and he imagines he has made a point.

Apple trees grow from seeds. Grape pips are seeds. Therefore apple trees grow from grape pips. (And I will have my Nobel Prize in the post, if you please.)

 

[mzungu]

"And since all chemical processes are electrostatic, and the solar wind is an electric current....."

You know Justa. He thinks he only has to wave a magic wand over a couple of similarly sounding phrases, and he thinks he has made a point.

Apple trees grow from seeds. Grape pips are seeds. Therefore apple trees grow from grape pips. (And I will have my Nobel Prize in the post, if you please.)

Justa will take any subject and turn it into one related to Electricity and thus in the realms of EU/PC theory.

He always creeps into a thread and slowly turns it into EU/PC.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Justa will take any subject and turn it into one related to Electricity and thus in the realms of EU/PC theory.

He always creeps into a thread and slowly turns it into EU/PC.

Show me one single place where there is no electrical activity? So why again do you ignore it?????


Oh that's right, you prefer Fairie Dust instead of reality. The maths for Fairie Dust are more elegant than actual plasma physics, huh?


Probably why you resorted to personal attacks instead of debating the science. You have no science in which to counter.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Sorry but you are still missing an explaination, with evidence based back up, of how solar wind is able to split a silicon dioxide molecule.

Also, all chemical reactions are not electrostatic. Covalent bonds are not electrostatic, they are electron orbital sharing.

Yes, it is called electrostatics, that electron orbital sharing.

Didn't you learn anything about protons and electrons in your physics class, or charged particles in general?

How atoms bond - George Zaidan and Charles Morton | TED-Ed


Because as always you all insist on ignoring laboratory evidence.

covalent bond (chemistry) -- Encyclopedia Britannica

"covalent bond, in chemistry, the interatomic linkage that results from the sharing of an electron pair between two atoms. The binding arises from the electrostatic attraction of their nuclei for the same electrons."


Electrostatics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Electrostatic phenomena arise from the forces that electric charges exert on each other. Such forces are described by Coulomb's law. Even though electrostatically induced forces seem to be rather weak, the electrostatic force between e.g. an electron and a proton, that together make up a hydrogen atom, is about 36 orders of magnitude stronger than the gravitational force acting between them."


But go right ahead and continue to ignore all of science.

BBC - GCSE Bitesize: Covalent bonding - Higher

"The strong bonds between atoms that are joined by covalent bonds are the result of electrostatic attraction between the positive nuclei of the atoms and the pairs of negative electrons that are shared between them."

4.2 - Covalent Bonding



But you are confused and I understand.

Chemical Bonding Confusion | Education in Chemistry Blog

"in introductory courses is fraught with many difficulties and at times may even obscure the fundamental reason for the chemical bond—the electrostatic attraction between positive nuclei and negative electrons"

Bonds-vs-Interactions

"Bonds and intermolecular forces have one very fundamental thing in common. Both mechanisms are electrostatic forces of attraction (Coulombic forces) between areas of charge. The primary difference between bonds and intermolecular forces is the locations of the areas of charge and the magnitudes of the areas of charge. As a result of these differences, there are significant differences in the strengths of the resulting attractions."



How long are you going to keep ignoring reality in favor of Fairie Dust??????


Chemical Bonding

"We know that each atom is a compromise between electrostatic attraction between the electrons and the nucleus and electron-electron repulsion."

The Electrostatic Force - Coulomb's Law

"When you view a chemical change, always take a moment to see the change in the light of electrostatic force. The electrostatic force is the central force in chemistry. Always take a moment to conceptualize the internal energy associated with chemical change as the work of electric forces during re-arrangement of electric charges, electrons and protons, in the processes of disaggregration from reagents and reaggregation as products.

Atoms are held together by the electrostatic force between the nucleus and electrons.

Two atoms in a covalent bond are held together by the electrostatic force between the nuclei of the atoms and the shared electrons in the inter nuclear space.

Molecules attract one another by the electrostatic force between induced dipoles (Van der Waals attraction), permanent dipoles (dipole-dipole attraction), or hydrogen bonding (where the positive end of the dipole is a hydrogen atom).

Intermolecular forces, ionic bonds, and metallic bonding all involve electrostatic force, so it is electrostatic force that holds together the particles of a substance in condensed phase of matter (solid or liquid).

In a liquid solution, it is electrostatic forces holding together the solvent and solute. In biochemistry, the structure of a large macromolecule such as a protein, is determined by a complex interplay of electrostatic forces between the functional groups of the molecule, within the molecule itself, with associated molecules, and with the aqueous solvent. When you learn the fundamentals of electrostatics in physics, you are preparing yourself to understand chemistry."



But apparently you didn't understand the fundamentals of electrostatics in physics to prepare yourself for understanding chemistry.


EDIT:
You all want to play attack the person, fine, let's play then. Otherwise can we get back to scientific discussions?

 

[mzungu]

Probably why you resorted to personal attacks instead of debating the science. You have no science in which to counter.

There is nothing to debate with EU/PC since they are not science. Now go play with AV, DAD, and the rest of the pseudo-scientific creationist gang and leave the big boys to debate matters of science of which you know nothing about!

 

[Justatruthseeker]

There is nothing to debate with EU/PC since they are not science. Now go play with AV, DAD, and the rest of the pseudo-scientific creationist gang and leave the big boys to debate matters of science of which you know nothing about!

Yah, like the big boys claim chemical bonds are not electrostatic when every textbook and laboratory experiment says the opposite?

That kind of "big boy" pseudo-science???

Sounds more like pure ignorance or pure denial of "little boys", take your pick.

 

[Mainframes]

Covalent bonds are not electrostatic!

They are the sharing of electron clouds to form bonds. Otherwise how do you explain covalent bonds between hydrogen atoms in a hydrogen molecule, or also oxygen and chlorine molecules.

 

[Heissonear]

It's not necessarily water 'attached' to dust grains but hydrates of various compounds and water complexes. All this will have happened during the various stages of the formation of the planet as all the various compounds will be present in the accretion disk that the solar system was formed from.

A little fundamental chemistry and a galaxy of speculation.

The amount of speculation from "evidence based" crowd does not seem alarming to them.

The area between what is real and stated to be real has produced a world people mentally live in.

 

[RealityCheck]

A little fundamental chemistry and a galaxy of speculation.

The amount of speculation from "evidence based" crowd does not seem alarming to them.

The area between what is real and stated to be real has produced a world people mentally live in.

This from the guy who continually failed to address his lack of evidence for the existence of a spiritual realm.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Covalent bonds are not electrostatic!

They are the sharing of electron clouds to form bonds. Otherwise how do you explain covalent bonds between hydrogen atoms in a hydrogen molecule, or also oxygen and chlorine molecules.

Oh my god.

Hydrogen bonds are "polar" dipole to dipole bonds from electrostatic interactions. Stop denying the science!!!!!!

Hydrogen bond - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"A hydrogen bond is the electromagnetic attractive interaction between polar molecules, in which hydrogen (H) is bound to a highly electronegative atom, such as nitrogen (N), oxygen (O) or fluorine (F). The name hydrogen bond is something of a misnomer, as it is not a true bond but a particularly strong dipole-dipole attraction, and should not be confused with a covalent bond."

Intermolecular force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Dipole-dipole interactions are electrostatic interactions between permanent dipoles in molecules"

Covalent bonds are electrostatic interactions between electrons and the nucleus of the atom. Dipole to dipole are electrostatic interactions between the dipole moments of those molecules.

There is no ambiguity, you just need to stop and take time to understand the atomic interactions is all and quit ignoring them to propagate your incorrect beliefs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_covalent_bond#Polarity_of_bonds

 

[MikeCarra]

Oh my god.

Hydrogen bonds are "polar" dipole to dipole bonds from electrostatic interactions. Stop denying the science!!!!!!

H2 is NOT a "hydrogen bond" as that phrase is usually taken in chemistr. It is a non-polar covalent bond from the sharing of 1s electrons between two hydrogen atoms.

Repeat: this is NOT the same thing as a "hydrogen bond" which is the electrostatic attraction of a polar bond for the opposite end of another polar bond.

Such as H2O in which the OXYGEN has two unshared electron pairs and is more electronegative than the HYDROGEN. This means the H2O molecule has a slightly more "negative end" and a slightly more "positive end" (the O is the more negative end and the side with the Hydrogens is the more positive).

The Hydrogens in an H2O molecule are attracted to the Oxygen in DIFFERENT H2O molecule.

Mainframes was correct to point out that they bonds IN AN H2 MOLECULE are covalent bonds (sharing of electrons).

 

[Justatruthseeker]

H2 is NOT a "hydrogen bond" as that phrase is usually taken in chemistr. It is a non-polar covalent bond from the sharing of 1s electrons between two hydrogen atoms.

Repeat: this is NOT the same thing as a "hydrogen bond" which is the electrostatic attraction of a polar bond for the opposite end of another polar bond.

Such as H2O in which the OXYGEN has two unshared electron pairs and is more electronegative than the HYDROGEN. This means the H2O molecule has a slightly more "negative end" and a slightly more "positive end" (the O is the more negative end and the side with the Hydrogens is the more positive).

The Hydrogens in an H2O molecule are attracted to the Oxygen in DIFFERENT H2O molecule.

Mainframes was correct to point out that they bonds IN AN H2 MOLECULE are covalent bonds (sharing of electrons).

Valence Bond model of Bonding in H2 - Chemwiki

"These hydrogens come together because of the electrostatic attraction between the nuclei and the electron desnity between them."

Because you fail to understand what all bonds are.

Non-covalent interactions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You fail to understand those electrons are charged negatively, as the nucleus is charged positively. It's not my problem you flunked basic physics. So what do you think holds them together? Magic Fairie Dust???

 

[MikeCarra]

Valence Bond model of Bonding in H2 - Chemwiki

"These hydrogens come together because of the electrostatic attraction between the nuclei and the electron desnity between them."

Because you fail to understand what all bonds are.

Non-covalent interactions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You fail to understand those electrons are charged negatively, as the nucleus is charged positively. It's not my problem you flunked basic physics. So what do you think holds them together? Magic Fairie Dust???

What the F are you arguing with here?

No one is saying chemical bonds don't have an electrostatic nature! Normally people differentiate between IONIC bonds and COVALENT bonds.

But when you took Mainframes to task over the H-H bond in H2 and indicated it is a "hydrogen bond" that is where I drew the line.

"Hydrogen bonds" are NOT the same as covalent bonds. They simply aren't.

Bonds between two hydrogen molecules are COVALENT BONDS DUE TO THE SHARING OF THE 1s ELECTRONS.

"Hydrogen bonds" on the other hand are electrostatic attractions between two molecules with dipole moments as we see between two different water molecules.

What are you on about? Honestly.

 

[MikeCarra]

hydrogens atoms bond by forming a SIGMA molecular orbital in which the two 1s electrons in each hydrogen atom hang out.

This will allow both atoms to achieve a stable outer shell electron configuration.

Each hydrogen atom is electrically neutral (since they have 1 proton and 1 electron) so the attraction is not a charge attraction but rather the need to form a stable, Noble Gas configuration in the outer valence shell. Now the nature of the noble gas configuration WILL relate to charge between the nucleus and electrons and the ionization energy necessary to remove an electron.

The reason He doesn't form these bonds is that if one were to start to fill the MOLECULAR ORBITALS a bonding and an antibonding Molecular Orbital would both be filled and the molecule would not hold.

 

[Mainframes]

Yes, whilst there are electrostatic forces present between an nucleus and it's electrons. The covalent bond itself is due electrons being shared between in a single orbital around two hydrogen nuclei.

The actual nuclei themselves are actually repelling each other and it is the balance between the repulsion of the nuclei and the attraction of the electrons in the shared orbital that dictates the length and strength of a covalent bond.