8 ms·

Water transformed into shiny, golden metal

112 points by sohkamyung 5y ago

aurizon 5y ago
The highly infectious Delta has optimised yield of all the steps in replication and an infected person soon reaches a virus titer of 1200 times the previous titer, 2 days quicker. That means each particle shaken loose by panting, shouting etc has 1200 times as much virus. In adition high frequency child voices shed 10 times as much as adult voices on the vocal folds - thus children are prone to fast and intense spread and even though they have historically higher survival rates, it is not clear if the youth advantage will enable them to survive the 10,000 times the viral titer AND the extra spread = an abundance of caution to protect the kids. Virus replication requires making virus sub-units and assembling them into a virus. When the cell gets full it ruptures and spills completed viruses as well as a sea of unused and partially used subunits. There will be a 'critical path' that ends up maximizing complete viruses and minimizing wasted sub units. There has been a lot of work studying the Delta variant and why it leads to over 1000 times as many virus particles in the blood. 1000 times as many means any expelled particle of sputum holds 1000 times as many chances to infect a person. This greater efficiency explains why it peaks it's infectivity ( as measured by virus titre (measured number of particles in the blood)) 1-2 days faster and why it spread so much faster. This paper, and others are exploring this aspect of virus kinetics. It also reports that the vaccine efficacy is maintained, so a booster is a very good idea. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.08.443253v4.full https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.08.443253v4.... A search under 'covid-19 delta variant replication kinetics' showed many similar papers. I can not understand the hate? This is a true and valid situation.
- Goety 5y ago
  wrong post
  - aurizon 5y ago
    Argh, I hate that type of error...
peter_d_sherman 5y ago
>"In theory, most materials are capable of becoming metallic if put under enough pressure. Atoms or molecules can be squeezed together so tightly that they begin to share their outer electrons, which can then travel and conduct electricity as they do in a chunk of copper or iron. Geophysicists think that the centres of massive planets such as Neptune or Uranus host water in such a metallic state, and that high-pressure metallic hydrogen can even become a superconductor, able to conduct electricity without any resistance. Turning water into a metal in this way would require an expected 15 million atmospheres of pressure, which is out of reach for current lab techniques, says Jungwirth. But he suspected that water could become conductive in an alternative way: by borrowing electrons from alkali metals. These reactive elements in group 1 of the periodic table, which includes sodium and potassium, tend to donate their outermost electron. Last year, Jungwirth and his colleague Phil Mason — a chemist who is also known for making science videos on YouTube — led a team that demonstrated a similar effect in ammonia. The fact that ammonia can turn shiny in such conditions was known to the British chemist Humphry Davy in the early nineteenth century, Edwards points out. The team wanted to try the same approach with water instead of ammonia, but faced a challenge: alkali metals tend to react explosively when mixed with water. The solution was to design an experimental set-up that would dramatically slow the reaction so that it would not be explosive. The researchers filled a syringe with sodium and potassium, a mixture that is liquid at room temperature, and placed it in a vacuum chamber. They then used the syringe to form droplets of the metal mixture and exposed them to small amounts of water vapour. The water condensed onto each droplet and formed a layer one-tenth of a micrometre thick. Electrons from the droplet then quickly diffused into the water — together with positive metallic ions — and, within a few seconds, the water layer turned golden."
- wuschel 5y ago
  This phenomenon is also known as solvated electrons [1], and is used in organic chemistry in reduction reactions e.g. Birch Reduction [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solvated_electron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solvated_electron [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birch_reduction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birch_reduction
- dang 5y ago
savant_penguin 5y ago
"The researchers filled a syringe with sodium and potassium, a mixture that is liquid at room temperature, and placed it in a vacuum chamber. They then used the syringe to form droplets of the metal mixture and exposed them to small amounts of water vapour." Why will it react slowly under these conditions? As I understand it this is just NaK + water (in vapour form), why isn't the reaction just as fast?
- yetihehe 5y ago
  Because you add water more slowly, essentially atom by atom, otherwise you would have to add picoliter sized drops of water or small amounts of very fine dust of metal.
- denton-scratch 5y ago
  I'm surprised to learn that Na + K is liquid at room temperature; both Na and K on their own are solids at room temperature. I enjoyed "Can we have the balcony for explosions"!
  - hinoki 5y ago
    I wonder if it’s an [0] eutectic alloy? This property is used to make solders that melt more easily, and cast iron is easier to melt than wrought iron, which explains the name. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eutectic_system https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eutectic_system
  - pfdietz 5y ago
    And, as I mentioned in an earlier comment, the ammonia + lithium eutectic has a melting point below 90K!
- pas 5y ago
  Probably the reaction is just as fast, but since they add very (very!) small amount of water, when the free electron bubbles collapse and the electrons interact with the H2O molecules the released energy is not enough to cause the usual macro scale effect (the phase change of water to steam, and thus the explosion).
isoprophlex 5y ago
Sort of related: you can also obtain "dissolved electrons" by putting chips of sodium or potassium in pure ammonia. I forgot what I used this for back in the day, but the solutions were very very beautiful. Apparently electrons dissolved in ammonia are an intense, deep blue. Photos don't really do it justice: https://ssl.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000lH1LMamRdV8/s/860/860/Fphoto-36109402G-2RM.jpg https://ssl.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000lH1LMamRdV8/s/86...
- CamperBob2 5y ago
  What happens if you hold a magnet near those free electrons?
  - jiggawatts 5y ago
    Science.
  - isoprophlex 5y ago
    Interesting question, considering that they're "wet" electrons in a dynamic environment, I'd say the effect would be not so much different from applying a magnetic field to any other solution with dissolved unpaired electrons. So: fun for doing electron spin resonance studies, nothing spectacular otherwise. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_paramagnetic_resonance https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_paramagnetic_resona...
    - Goety 5y ago
      There are quite a few interesting applications should this ability be harnessed in water.
throwaway17_17 5y ago
As a footnote, the underlying paper and research is by Phil Mason, who goes by Thunderf00t on YouTube. He posted a video of the experiment to his channel today[1]. 1: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Vdz18ibX7rE&t=16s https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Vdz18ibX7rE&t=16s
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- tallies 5y ago
  Interesting, I recognize the channel name from his toxic anti-feminist rant videos I'd seen years ago. Great that he's doing something productive now
  - ajuc 5y ago
    He was always a scientist and also did debunking of crowdfunding projects that promised physically impossible stuff. And while I agree about his toxic tone - he has some points regarding feminism. For example his critique of Feminist Frequency podcast was on point ("in this game women can be killed therefore it's sexist" meanwhile in that same game you kill thousands of men and that's fine).
  - rowanG077 5y ago
    This guy is toxic in everything he does. I greatly dislike him because of this. But I almost always agree with the actual points he makes.
    - CRConrad 5y ago
      Does that mean you consider yourself toxic, too... Or perhaps that he actually isn't? (Genuinely asking, haven't looked at him yet. Just seems to stand to reason.)
      - buu700 5y ago
        I think he's just saying "the guy's an asshole, but he's usually not wrong". (Not agreeing or disagreeing either way, as I know nothing about Thunderf00t.)
creamyhorror 5y ago
Hmm, so by adding extra electrons (and ions?) to water, the water gains reflective properties. From a bit of googling, I'm reading that reflectiveness comes from having small "band gaps" (gaps between allowed electron energy levels) for electrons to cross. Metals have small/no band gaps, while non-metals have larger ones that (if I understand correctly) don't match with the energy levels of visible light. So I assume this means that adding electrons to water changes its band structure and reduces the gap. So is it generally true that any non-metal which gains electrons is able to absorb and release visible-wavelength photons more easily, i.e. is reflective?
- CamperBob2 5y ago
  So is it generally true that any non-metal which gains electrons is able to absorb and release visible-wavelength photons more easily, i.e. is reflective? Bill Beaty has a nice ELI5-style essay on the subject at http://amasci.com/elect/charge1.html http://amasci.com/elect/charge1.html , where he discusses what electric charge is (and isn't): "Here is a way to see charge directly: look at the surface of a wire. Metals look metallic because they contain a 'fluid' composed of movable electrons. This electrical 'fluid' is an excellent reflector of light waves, and it causes the surfaces of metals to act like mirrors. It's these same electrons which flow during an electric current. The 'silvery' stuff of a metal is the charge. What is charge? It is a 'silver liquid' which is found in all metals, and which can be forced to flow. "Even though the charge is visible, its flow is not. Look carefully at wires in an operating electric circuit and you won't see anything moving along. This is not very mysterious: stir a glass of water and then look for the flowing motion. You'll see moving bubbles and perhaps moving specks of dirt, but you won't see the water move. The silvery charge-fluid in a wire has no bubbles or dirt, so even though the charge is visible, we cannot tell if it is moving or still."
  - creamyhorror 5y ago
    > This electrical 'fluid' is an excellent reflector of light waves Thanks, though I'm actually wondering about a deeper question: why is this so? Why do loose plasma-like electrons make metals reflective (or, roughly equivalently, how does adding extra electrons make a non-metal like water more reflective)? To continue on this topic, the 'bands' I referred to are clusters of energy levels corresponding to the orbitals of the atoms. (I found this neat explanation: https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Inorganic_Chemistry/Map%3A_Inorganic_Chemistry_(Housecroft)/06%3A_Structures_and_energetics_of_metallic_and_ionic_solids/6.08%3A_Bonding_in_Metals_and_Semicondoctors/6.8B%3A_Band_Theory_of_Metals_and_Insulators https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Inorganic_Chemistry/... ). Apparently, metallic reflectivity comes down to the fact that metals have overlapping "valence" and "conduction" bands. This allows electrons in the lower "valence" band to be excited to the higher "conduction" band and then fall back down and emit photons - which is reflection. Therefore, in the case of water with extra electrons, the additional electrons may be causing the valence and conduction bands to come closer together - maybe by filling up the valence band and bringing the top of the band closer to the conduction band? Just wanted to speculate on the chemistry of this discovery a bit, I've always found the science interesting.
fit2rule 5y ago
Might be a useful technique to be exploited in camouflage research. Combine this with drop-stiched expandable, and we might have Predator-level hidden baddies to deal with ..
verytrivial 5y ago
I don't know if I really don't understand this or there is a confusion in the title. The shiny-metal-ness is from an already shiny metal that is forming the drop, right? The interesting thing is perhaps the fact it is golden as the water interacts with the surface, but frankly that looks very similar to other thin-film surface interactions, some of which are due to oxidisation in other reactions. Now, that this isn't the normal O2 reaction is interesting, and that there isn't a violent H2O oxidation process that normally occurs is interesting, but it just feels like 'Look! Water is shiny and metal now' is a bit ... misleading?
- honie 5y ago
  The title is not misleading, and the golden layer formed is metallic water and not any of the metals used -- where electrons are delocalised/shared between water molecules. They have strong evidence that the layer is indeed metallic water and not something else: > Experiments at a synchrotron in Berlin confirmed that the gold reflections produced the signatures expected of metallic water. In my opinion, the ingenious part of the experiment is the following part, and I'm glad that they were lucky enough to find the right conditions: > The key to avoiding an explosion, Jungwirth says, was to find a window of time in which the diffusion of electrons was faster than the reaction between the water and the metals. Edit: added "in my opinion".
  - verytrivial 5y ago
    Ah, interesting thanks!
    - honie 5y ago
      I forgot to say that what you said is perfectly reasonable and not too different form my initial reaction. This is indeed very weird (but cool) science. :)
      - gus_massa 5y ago
        I agree. The original explanation is a good guess but it's not what is happening in the OP. There is experiment to detect some sugars, that is somewhat similar to this alternative explanation (and unrelated to the experiment in the OP). More details in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tollens%27_reagent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tollens%27_reagent Random quick video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21PHoxlukME https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21PHoxlukME NileRed video with more technical details: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGmxHLHyUPc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGmxHLHyUPc
nchase 5y ago
This reminds me of Ice-nine, from Kurt Vonnegut's Cat's Cradle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat%27s_Cradle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat%27s_Cradle
bitwize 5y ago
This is fucking crazy-go-nuts. This is what real-life mad science looks like. Scientists decided "yeah, water is great and all but what it really needs is a nice metallic sheen" and found a possible way to make that happen based on a technique with sodium, potassium, and ammonia. Only problem is, sodium and potassium explode in water! So now the problem became getting the metallic sheen without the explodey drawbacks... and they invested effort and funding to actually do it! Utterly mad, and brilliant.
- gus_massa 5y ago
  The author of the research paper is Phil Mason (Thunderf00t on YouTube). He has another paper[1] and video[2] about making sodium+potasium explode in water. [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/nchem.2161 https://www.nature.com/articles/nchem.2161 [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmlAYnFF_s8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmlAYnFF_s8

112 points by sohkamyung 5y ago

The highly infectious Delta has optimised yield of all the steps in replication and an infected person soon reaches a virus titer of 1200 times the previous titer, 2 days quicker. That means each particle shaken loose by panting, shouting etc has 1200 times as much virus. In adition high frequency child voices shed 10 times as much as adult voices on the vocal folds - thus children are prone to fast and intense spread and even though they have historically higher survival rates, it is not clear if the youth advantage will enable them to survive the 10,000 times the viral titer AND the extra spread = an abundance of caution to protect the kids. Virus replication requires making virus sub-units and assembling them into a virus. When the cell gets full it ruptures and spills completed viruses as well as a sea of unused and partially used subunits. There will be a 'critical path' that ends up maximizing complete viruses and minimizing wasted sub units. There has been a lot of work studying the Delta variant and why it leads to over 1000 times as many virus particles in the blood. 1000 times as many means any expelled particle of sputum holds 1000 times as many chances to infect a person. This greater efficiency explains why it peaks it's infectivity ( as measured by virus titre (measured number of particles in the blood)) 1-2 days faster and why it spread so much faster. This paper, and others are exploring this aspect of virus kinetics. It also reports that the vaccine efficacy is maintained, so a booster is a very good idea. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.08.443253v4.full https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.08.443253v4.... A search under 'covid-19 delta variant replication kinetics' showed many similar papers. I can not understand the hate? This is a true and valid situation.

Goety 5y ago
wrong post
- aurizon 5y ago
  Argh, I hate that type of error...

peter_d_sherman 5y ago

>"In theory, most materials are capable of becoming metallic if put under enough pressure. Atoms or molecules can be squeezed together so tightly that they begin to share their outer electrons, which can then travel and conduct electricity as they do in a chunk of copper or iron. Geophysicists think that the centres of massive planets such as Neptune or Uranus host water in such a metallic state, and that high-pressure metallic hydrogen can even become a superconductor, able to conduct electricity without any resistance. Turning water into a metal in this way would require an expected 15 million atmospheres of pressure, which is out of reach for current lab techniques, says Jungwirth. But he suspected that water could become conductive in an alternative way: by borrowing electrons from alkali metals. These reactive elements in group 1 of the periodic table, which includes sodium and potassium, tend to donate their outermost electron. Last year, Jungwirth and his colleague Phil Mason — a chemist who is also known for making science videos on YouTube — led a team that demonstrated a similar effect in ammonia. The fact that ammonia can turn shiny in such conditions was known to the British chemist Humphry Davy in the early nineteenth century, Edwards points out. The team wanted to try the same approach with water instead of ammonia, but faced a challenge: alkali metals tend to react explosively when mixed with water. The solution was to design an experimental set-up that would dramatically slow the reaction so that it would not be explosive. The researchers filled a syringe with sodium and potassium, a mixture that is liquid at room temperature, and placed it in a vacuum chamber. They then used the syringe to form droplets of the metal mixture and exposed them to small amounts of water vapour. The water condensed onto each droplet and formed a layer one-tenth of a micrometre thick. Electrons from the droplet then quickly diffused into the water — together with positive metallic ions — and, within a few seconds, the water layer turned golden."

wuschel 5y ago
This phenomenon is also known as solvated electrons [1], and is used in organic chemistry in reduction reactions e.g. Birch Reduction [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solvated_electron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solvated_electron [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birch_reduction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birch_reduction
dang 5y ago

savant_penguin 5y ago

"The researchers filled a syringe with sodium and potassium, a mixture that is liquid at room temperature, and placed it in a vacuum chamber. They then used the syringe to form droplets of the metal mixture and exposed them to small amounts of water vapour." Why will it react slowly under these conditions? As I understand it this is just NaK + water (in vapour form), why isn't the reaction just as fast?

yetihehe 5y ago
Because you add water more slowly, essentially atom by atom, otherwise you would have to add picoliter sized drops of water or small amounts of very fine dust of metal.
denton-scratch 5y ago
I'm surprised to learn that Na + K is liquid at room temperature; both Na and K on their own are solids at room temperature. I enjoyed "Can we have the balcony for explosions"!
- hinoki 5y ago
  I wonder if it’s an [0] eutectic alloy? This property is used to make solders that melt more easily, and cast iron is easier to melt than wrought iron, which explains the name. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eutectic_system https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eutectic_system
- pfdietz 5y ago
  And, as I mentioned in an earlier comment, the ammonia + lithium eutectic has a melting point below 90K!
pas 5y ago
Probably the reaction is just as fast, but since they add very (very!) small amount of water, when the free electron bubbles collapse and the electrons interact with the H2O molecules the released energy is not enough to cause the usual macro scale effect (the phase change of water to steam, and thus the explosion).

isoprophlex 5y ago

Sort of related: you can also obtain "dissolved electrons" by putting chips of sodium or potassium in pure ammonia. I forgot what I used this for back in the day, but the solutions were very very beautiful. Apparently electrons dissolved in ammonia are an intense, deep blue. Photos don't really do it justice: https://ssl.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000lH1LMamRdV8/s/860/860/Fphoto-36109402G-2RM.jpg https://ssl.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000lH1LMamRdV8/s/86...

CamperBob2 5y ago
What happens if you hold a magnet near those free electrons?
- jiggawatts 5y ago
  Science.
- isoprophlex 5y ago
  Interesting question, considering that they're "wet" electrons in a dynamic environment, I'd say the effect would be not so much different from applying a magnetic field to any other solution with dissolved unpaired electrons. So: fun for doing electron spin resonance studies, nothing spectacular otherwise. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_paramagnetic_resonance https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_paramagnetic_resona...
  - Goety 5y ago
    There are quite a few interesting applications should this ability be harnessed in water.

throwaway17_17 5y ago

As a footnote, the underlying paper and research is by Phil Mason, who goes by Thunderf00t on YouTube. He posted a video of the experiment to his channel today[1]. 1: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Vdz18ibX7rE&t=16s https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Vdz18ibX7rE&t=16s

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
tallies 5y ago
Interesting, I recognize the channel name from his toxic anti-feminist rant videos I'd seen years ago. Great that he's doing something productive now
- ajuc 5y ago
  He was always a scientist and also did debunking of crowdfunding projects that promised physically impossible stuff. And while I agree about his toxic tone - he has some points regarding feminism. For example his critique of Feminist Frequency podcast was on point ("in this game women can be killed therefore it's sexist" meanwhile in that same game you kill thousands of men and that's fine).
- rowanG077 5y ago
  This guy is toxic in everything he does. I greatly dislike him because of this. But I almost always agree with the actual points he makes.
  - CRConrad 5y ago
    Does that mean you consider yourself toxic, too... Or perhaps that he actually isn't? (Genuinely asking, haven't looked at him yet. Just seems to stand to reason.)
    - buu700 5y ago
      I think he's just saying "the guy's an asshole, but he's usually not wrong". (Not agreeing or disagreeing either way, as I know nothing about Thunderf00t.)

creamyhorror 5y ago

Hmm, so by adding extra electrons (and ions?) to water, the water gains reflective properties. From a bit of googling, I'm reading that reflectiveness comes from having small "band gaps" (gaps between allowed electron energy levels) for electrons to cross. Metals have small/no band gaps, while non-metals have larger ones that (if I understand correctly) don't match with the energy levels of visible light. So I assume this means that adding electrons to water changes its band structure and reduces the gap. So is it generally true that any non-metal which gains electrons is able to absorb and release visible-wavelength photons more easily, i.e. is reflective?

CamperBob2 5y ago
So is it generally true that any non-metal which gains electrons is able to absorb and release visible-wavelength photons more easily, i.e. is reflective? Bill Beaty has a nice ELI5-style essay on the subject at http://amasci.com/elect/charge1.html http://amasci.com/elect/charge1.html , where he discusses what electric charge is (and isn't): "Here is a way to see charge directly: look at the surface of a wire. Metals look metallic because they contain a 'fluid' composed of movable electrons. This electrical 'fluid' is an excellent reflector of light waves, and it causes the surfaces of metals to act like mirrors. It's these same electrons which flow during an electric current. The 'silvery' stuff of a metal is the charge. What is charge? It is a 'silver liquid' which is found in all metals, and which can be forced to flow. "Even though the charge is visible, its flow is not. Look carefully at wires in an operating electric circuit and you won't see anything moving along. This is not very mysterious: stir a glass of water and then look for the flowing motion. You'll see moving bubbles and perhaps moving specks of dirt, but you won't see the water move. The silvery charge-fluid in a wire has no bubbles or dirt, so even though the charge is visible, we cannot tell if it is moving or still."
- creamyhorror 5y ago
  > This electrical 'fluid' is an excellent reflector of light waves Thanks, though I'm actually wondering about a deeper question: why is this so? Why do loose plasma-like electrons make metals reflective (or, roughly equivalently, how does adding extra electrons make a non-metal like water more reflective)? To continue on this topic, the 'bands' I referred to are clusters of energy levels corresponding to the orbitals of the atoms. (I found this neat explanation: https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Inorganic_Chemistry/Map%3A_Inorganic_Chemistry_(Housecroft)/06%3A_Structures_and_energetics_of_metallic_and_ionic_solids/6.08%3A_Bonding_in_Metals_and_Semicondoctors/6.8B%3A_Band_Theory_of_Metals_and_Insulators https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Inorganic_Chemistry/... ). Apparently, metallic reflectivity comes down to the fact that metals have overlapping "valence" and "conduction" bands. This allows electrons in the lower "valence" band to be excited to the higher "conduction" band and then fall back down and emit photons - which is reflection. Therefore, in the case of water with extra electrons, the additional electrons may be causing the valence and conduction bands to come closer together - maybe by filling up the valence band and bringing the top of the band closer to the conduction band? Just wanted to speculate on the chemistry of this discovery a bit, I've always found the science interesting.

fit2rule 5y ago

Might be a useful technique to be exploited in camouflage research. Combine this with drop-stiched expandable, and we might have Predator-level hidden baddies to deal with ..

verytrivial 5y ago

I don't know if I really don't understand this or there is a confusion in the title. The shiny-metal-ness is from an already shiny metal that is forming the drop, right? The interesting thing is perhaps the fact it is golden as the water interacts with the surface, but frankly that looks very similar to other thin-film surface interactions, some of which are due to oxidisation in other reactions. Now, that this isn't the normal O2 reaction is interesting, and that there isn't a violent H2O oxidation process that normally occurs is interesting, but it just feels like 'Look! Water is shiny and metal now' is a bit ... misleading?

honie 5y ago
The title is not misleading, and the golden layer formed is metallic water and not any of the metals used -- where electrons are delocalised/shared between water molecules. They have strong evidence that the layer is indeed metallic water and not something else: > Experiments at a synchrotron in Berlin confirmed that the gold reflections produced the signatures expected of metallic water. In my opinion, the ingenious part of the experiment is the following part, and I'm glad that they were lucky enough to find the right conditions: > The key to avoiding an explosion, Jungwirth says, was to find a window of time in which the diffusion of electrons was faster than the reaction between the water and the metals. Edit: added "in my opinion".
- verytrivial 5y ago
  Ah, interesting thanks!
  - honie 5y ago
    I forgot to say that what you said is perfectly reasonable and not too different form my initial reaction. This is indeed very weird (but cool) science. :)
    - gus_massa 5y ago
      I agree. The original explanation is a good guess but it's not what is happening in the OP. There is experiment to detect some sugars, that is somewhat similar to this alternative explanation (and unrelated to the experiment in the OP). More details in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tollens%27_reagent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tollens%27_reagent Random quick video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21PHoxlukME https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21PHoxlukME NileRed video with more technical details: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGmxHLHyUPc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGmxHLHyUPc

nchase 5y ago

This reminds me of Ice-nine, from Kurt Vonnegut's Cat's Cradle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat%27s_Cradle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat%27s_Cradle

bitwize 5y ago

This is fucking crazy-go-nuts. This is what real-life mad science looks like. Scientists decided "yeah, water is great and all but what it really needs is a nice metallic sheen" and found a possible way to make that happen based on a technique with sodium, potassium, and ammonia. Only problem is, sodium and potassium explode in water! So now the problem became getting the metallic sheen without the explodey drawbacks... and they invested effort and funding to actually do it! Utterly mad, and brilliant.

gus_massa 5y ago
The author of the research paper is Phil Mason (Thunderf00t on YouTube). He has another paper[1] and video[2] about making sodium+potasium explode in water. [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/nchem.2161 https://www.nature.com/articles/nchem.2161 [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmlAYnFF_s8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmlAYnFF_s8