Water (Molecular Chemists?)

[Hosnon]

Last night as I was trying to fall asleep, I just began to wonder what it is about oxygen and hydrogen that makes it combine to form something that is essential to life.

The best I could come up with is that it is the first 'molecule' (after 1 proton and 1 electron) that fills up all the orbitals. Haven't studied chemistry in a while but there are 2 spots in the first level and 8 in the second right? So with two Hs and one 0, the first level of both Hs is full and the first and second level of the O is full (with sharing going on).

Am I correct so far?

So perhaps there is some metaphysical requirement met when the most basic (besides Hydrogen's) molecular structure is complete?


edit: Had 'election' for 'electron'...oh boy, my thoughts cross too often.

[unblock]

1. there are indeed 2 "spots" in the first orbital, but

each atom has its own orbitals, and only electrons fill them (the protons and neutrons of each atom for the nucleus, not the orbitals).

so each hydrogen atom has one electron in its orbital that has two spots.

besides, the two hydrogens are at opposite ends of the molecule (well, not directly opposite, but at a wide angle) so they don't really "share" much.


i think water's utility to life has more to do with its polarity and its effetiveness as a soluent, thus being able to play a key role in delivering nutrients and sweeping away toxins.

then again, i'm not a molecular chemist, i just play one on du.

[Hosnon]

5. Sorry I'm never quite as clear as I need to be:

First orbital: 2 spots (thanks for affirmation)

Hydrogen (1 electron)

One spot (for lack of knowing the proper term) left over

Second orbital: 8 spots

Oxygen (8 electrons)

Two spots left over

So obviously two hydrogens attach and we have water. I believe I remember seeing somewhere that the orbitals for the two hydrogens are considered to be filled because of sharing going on between the electrons from the oxygen atom and each hydrogen atom - but not clear on that. If this is the case then water is pretty much totally stable right?

I agree too that water's polarity and characteristic as a solvent help it be useful for life. I'm wondering though that if it's 'completeness' regarding the orbitals is what makes it a solvent relative to other molecules. I believe the polarity comes from the fact that more time is spent by the electrons around the larger oxygen nucleus.

[Igel]

20. Compounds form so that orbitals are

nice and complete. Methane, cholesterol, and water all share this property.

Water dissociates a bit, which is handy. It also has a charge separation, making it polar. This makes it a great solvent. It forms weak bonds between molecules. It's abundant. And stable. And simple.

It's liquid at a decent temperature: lots of compounds are stable, proteins aren't denatured, and can painlessly fold.

Importantly, ice is lighter than water. This is rare. Otherwise, most rivers, lakes, and and even bays would have a thick layer of ice at their bottom; even in moderate climates, it probably wouldn't melt over the summer.

[Warpy]

23. Don't think of the orbitals as neat little circles with

little bits of "stuff" called electrons. That isn't the case, at all.

Each orbital contains a set charge, and each requires a gain or loss of negative charge to "complete." However, the motion of the electrons is more like a moth around a porch light than it is a neat little orbit, and this is where the confusion comes in.

The "fog" of electrons is shared by hydrogen and oxygen atoms when they're combined as water.

The solvent ability of water exists because one "end" of the molecule is positively charged and the other is negative. That means anything capable of ionization can be dissolved in water. Hydrocarbons are nonpolar molecules, which explains why oil won't dissolve in water.

Clear as mud?

[Hosnon]

25. Yea I remember first reading about the clouds and wondering

why they screwed us up in class with crappy little solar system type pictures? Especially us males who learn visually, haha.

[htuttle]

2. What's cool about water:

1) It can exist in all three states of matter within a hundred degrees centigrade. Also, the solid form is less dense than the liquid form. That means ice floats, and is critical to life in oceans.

2) It likes to bond with lots of different molecules. This allows it to be an efficient solvent and biological 'transport' for energy, oxygen, etc...

I think it's point one that makes all the difference, though. There aren't many other chemicals that can be solids, liquids and gases all within a narrow range of temperatures. This is probably essential for planetary biology and circulation.

As far as our life on Earth is concerned, I think it's carbon that should get much of the credit. It can bond in four places per carbon atom (if I remember my HS chemistry classes), which makes it very handy for chemical metabolism. The only element close that I've ever heard of is silicon, but it's not nearly as promiscuous as far as chemical bonding goes.

[whistle]

3. For those who feel they need to know "why"...

<link> http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/philo/faculty/boghossian/papers/Externalist.html

http://www.pathways.plus.com/questions/answers14.html#72

[Hosnon]

9. Yea yea yea...I got a degree in Philosophy.

I'm with Wittgenstein on the matter: great mental exercises and the journey is worthwhile but little is practically solved.

Then again, my question may lie on that borderline between metaphysics and physics - something like quantum physics.

[whistle]

10. Well then perhaps a pursuit in the study of humility might be of....

...benefit.

[Hosnon]

11. Haha...what for? That's something Christ spoke of and

I'm not much of a follower:)

I wasn't trying to be an ass - just wanted a more non-philosophical discussion since I've seen where those tend to end up.

[whistle]

14. You brought up the metaphysical, I was just trying to be of help

[Hosnon]

16. Thanks. Again I'm bad with clarity. I'm looking more for scientific

evidence that would support perhaps a more metaphysical importance to water.

I haven't got a chance to fully read those articles but it seems they deal with semantics and like.

Thanks though.

[whistle]

19. Perhaps then, your thread was started in the wrong group...

...instead of General Discussion, you might better be served in the science area. Still, I find your question interesting especially as a way of staying awake at night.

[Hosnon]

22. Ah...there is a Science Area? I briefly looked but didn't see one. Yes

that would have been more appropriate, haha.

Yes what would I do without message boards to flesh out all the crap that runs through my mind as I fall asleep?

Edit: Yea got it...I'm relatively new to DU so I'm still exploring. Didn't mean to take up space on the wrong board.

[whistle]

27. Not a problem, here is the link and you could request that the...

...moderator movethe thread to that board:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=228

P.S. it is located under "non-political"

[Botany]

4. It is all about the 1.82 dipole moment!

And the fact that water has structure.

:bounce:

[Hosnon]

7. Help the rest of us out: 1.82 dipole moment? eom

[Botany]

13. 1.82 dipole moment =

the charge between the 2 H atoms on the water molecule because of the H atoms
geometry


H
O *************
H ************** This area between the H atoms is the dipole moment

CO 2 does not have a dipole moment because of the geometry of the molecule

C--O-- C C atoms @ 180 degrees from each other.

Another important aspect of H2 O is that it helps in canoe and ski efforts.

Spring water w/ good whiskey is nice too.

my water molecule got moved when I posted ..... try this one

O
H H

This thing keeps moving my model around google water and look @ a molecule

[Hosnon]

17. I think I get the idea. Kinda like magnets forcing themselves out of

a straight alignment.

[kodi]

6. ammonia would be prior to water

nitrogen is lower on the periodic chart than oxygen.

the real beauty in nature is the hybridization of carbon into sp orbitals

[Hosnon]

8. Ah yes...I didn't have a periodic table and didn't want to get up to look.

Nitrogen would be the first to seem more complete if it bonded with a hydrogen atom.

[SnowGoose]

12. We have only one system of chemical life to study,

and that's the one we find here on earth, so anything we figure out may not be applicable elsewhere - that is, water may not be essential to life, just life here.

I agree with unblock, that the issue is that the chemicals life is made out of here on earth undergo most of their interesting reactions in solution, and proteins (which do virtually all of the enzymatic work in your cells) and nucleic acids (your DNA, for example) are soluble in water, because of its polarity.

It's also handy that there's a lot of it around - perhaps if some other solvent were predominant on earth, water wouldn't have been favored, and a non-polar life system might have evolved.

I think a mild support for that conjecture can be found in the fact that our cellular fluids are salty, like the ocean. Some have argued that our cells are simply a way to carry seawater around with us, so that our chemistry can continue to function in an environment analogous to where it started. I think that's probably a bit too much of an oversimplification.

Although your conjecture about the 'completeness' of water is appealing in a philosophical sense, I would tend to think it's not supported for two reasons. First, water could be said to be incomplete in the sense that the oxygen actually has two pairs of unshared electrons (that's why it's geometry is 'bent' rather than straight).

Secondly, I could point to compounds not critical to life which are arguably equally (or even more) complete. Methane, for example, has no unshared pairs hanging off on the side - each of it's unpaired electrons is shared with a hydrogen. But methane does not occupy the same role in life as water.

I wonder if you've read Lewis Thomas' 'Lives of a Cell'. An enjoyable and approachable book for the educated non-biologist, and it deals with some more philosophical issues that might appeal to you (solely on the basis of your posted musings).

Take care.

[Hosnon]

15. Thanks. I'll check out the book. The farthest I got in Bio/Chem

was a college course. Always very fond of it though.

Can the water molecule share those other electrons and make it straight rather than bent?

Just thought that since it was a simple molecule (unlike methane) there could be something to the idea but someone else pointed out that the simplest molecule to complete both orbitals would be nitrogen and hydrogen.

Thanks for the post. I'll definitely leave this one to you guys and only think about it while I'm laying in bed, haha.

[ultraist]

18. "metaphysical" reason? *shakes head* so anti Einstein...

Why would something that you don't have a full understanding of have a metaphysical reason? Are you religious?

I'm with the real scientists on this. I don't have any chemistry background but I defer to the experts. There is no "metaphysical" or God reason for this.

[Hosnon]

21. Not religious at all - at least beyond a First Cause. Metaphysics

doesn't imply God.

Just curious about such things as if the arrangement of particles we call water is particularly special for life or if other molecules can serve the purpose.

And Einstein did have a similar belief about religion that I do. Compared science and reality to a young boy walking into a large library with books in strange languages. He knows something ordered it but just doesn't know what. I equate it to a Logos.

But I don't want the thread to stray too much. My original late night question has been explored enough to satisfy me.

Thanks

[unblock]

24. particle man, particle man

doing the things a particle can
what he like? it's not important, particle man
is he a dot, or is he a speck?
when he's underwater does he get wet?
or does the water get him instead?
nobody knows, particle man.


for some reason this thread made me think of this....

[diamond14]

26. you are correct in that ORBITALS move to be FILLED...AND when

the orbital are filled to the END of the row in the Periodic Chart, the molecule CONTRACTS and becomes smaller, and non-reactive (since all orbitals are filled, none left to react)...at the end of the rows are the NOBEL GASES (Helium, Neon, Argon, Krypton, and Xenon, Radon) which are FILLED orbitals, and do not REACT with other atoms/molecules (except in extreme circumstances that can be imposed by CHEMISTS, but non-reactive in nature)....so you are correct, that atoms/molecules tend to react, in order to FILL their orbitals (shells)...


in the case of WATER.....

TWO hydrogens, and ONE oxygen atom makes water

each hydrogen has ONE electron, the Oxygen has FOUR electrons....the TWO additional electrons from each hydrogen FILLS the oxygen/hydrogen shells to the end of the row in the Periodic Chart....


details:

Hydrogen is NUMBER 1, has ONE electron....needs one MORE electron to fill the S-orbital (filling all shells to the end of the row in the Periodic Table...the end of that row is number TWO, so TWO electrons fill the S-shell)


Oxygen is NUMBER 8, has EIGHT electrons, needs two MORE electrons to fill the P-orbital (filling all shells to the end of the row in the Periodic Table, the end of that row is number TEN, so two MORE electrons give TEN to fill the P-shell in that row)


-------------------------

each oxygen has ONE S-orbital, which is already filled by two electrons (first row) ...these fill up the first S-shell, and so are mostly non-reactive...

AND a SECOND-row S-orbital, which is filled (second row, S-orbital, Lithium and Beryllium mostly LOSE their electrons to go back to the end of the first row shell-configuration) by TWO electrons, these fill the SECOND level S-orbital and so are mostly non-reactive...

the ONLY reactive electron shells for OXYGEN are THREE P-orbitals, each orbital needs TWO electrons...so six electrons are needed to fill all the shells to the end of the row in the Periodic Chart....

Six electrons to fill the P-shell to the end of the row (lower level S-shells are ALREADY full)....
TWO electrons from OXYGEN share TWO electrons from Hydrogen, AND TWO electrons from OXYGEN sit in a shell together, BENDING the WATER (H2O) molecule a little bit downward...this BEND is what makes water POLAR....it's not a LINEAR molecule, like this - ...rather, it'sbent like this V ...with TWO oxygen electrons sharing the orbital at the BEND and the hydrogens at the tops of the V-shaped water molecule....




additional note: electrons can MOVE to a different atom, transferring an electron (like when your car rusts)

OR electrons can SHARE orbitals (shells) with other atoms (as in water)....






ask me more if you need to.....PROUD TO BE A CHEMIST

go to the CHEMIST's web site...link to ENTHUSIASTS, or our many educational tools for teachers and students....

http://www.Chemistry.org


here's a great FLASH Periodic Table of the Elements...
http://www.chemsoc.org/viselements/

if you don't want FLASH, here's a less dramatic Periodic Table of the Elements
http://www.webelements.com/