Peter M. VS Randi and the Pentawater

[Dancing David]

Randi's quote from the Commentary

Just read this as an example of pure techno-claptrap:
Normally, the water you drink is in large clusters of H20 [sic] molecules. That's because its [sic] been affected by air, heat, and modern civilization. PentaTM is water that, through physics, has been reduced to its purest state in nature — smaller clusters of H2O [sic] molecules. These smaller clusters move through your body more quickly than other water, penetrating your cell membranes more easily. This means PentaTM is absorbed into your system faster and more completely. When you drink PentaTM, you're drinking the essence of water. You get hydrated faster, more efficiently, and more completely than with any other water on earth.
Folks, water is water. It's burned hydrogen, no more, no less. The molecules of H2O — not "H2O" as these quacks write — do not "cluster," under any influence of the dreadful "air, heat, and modern civilization" that you're cautioned to fear. True, water exhibits surface tension, and the molecules do "line up" to an extent, though almost any foreign substance in there disturbs this effect — soap/detergent "wets" it readily. But water molecules in "clusters"? No way! The illustrations you see here are totally wrong and fictitious. There's no such thing as "essence of water," by any stretch of scientific reasoning, or imagination. This is total, unmitigated nonsense, a pack of lies designed to swindle and cheat, to steal money, and to rob the consumer. And "through physics" has nothing to do with it.

"http://www.randi.org/jr/08-24-01.html"


Peter challenges us to do a search on hydrogen water and bonding. So I did:

Hydrogen bond - the magic of water
Water has a strong affinity for itself. Through partial charges of hydrogen bonding, each water molecule can bind up to four other water molecules. These can be arranged into a variety of ways to create various forms of lattice work (e.g., as seen in various types of ice).
Liquid water has almost about as much hydrogen bonding as does ice!!; but in liquid water bonds are forming and breaking faster with a half life of 10-11 sec (yet the water molecules still have a high affinity for themselves). Thus, the liquid quality actually depends more on the half life of hydrogen bonds rather than the actual number of hydrogen bonds. It turns out that liquid water is not all that different from that of ice.

http://www.mrs.umn.edu/~goochv/CellBio/lectures/water/water.html

Theoretical studies have shown that certain specific cyclic arrangements ("clusters") of 3, 4, and 5 H2O molecules are especially stable, as is a three-dimensional hexamer (6 molecules) that has a cage-like form. But even the most stable of these clusters will flicker out of existence after only about 10 picoseconds. It must be emphasized that no clustered unit or arrangement has ever been isolated or identified in pure bulk liquid water.
Liquid water can be thought of as a seething mass of water molecules in which hydrogen-bonded clusters are continually forming, breaking apart, and re-forming. Theoretical models suggest that the average cluster may encompass as many as 90 H2O molecules at 0°C, so that very cold water can be thought of as a collection of ever-changing ice-like structures. At 70° C, the average cluster size is probably no greater than about 25.

http://www.chem1.com/acad/sci/aboutwater.html




But even the most stable of these clusters will flicker out of existence after only about 10 picoseconds

Liquid water can be thought of as a seething mass of water molecules in which hydrogen-bonded clusters are continually forming, breaking apart, and re-forming.



So Mr. Morris, it would seem that water 'clustes' are made reference to but they are very short lived, how long is 10 pico-seconds and that they are not very stable as all.

Randi aknowledges the surface tension of water , which is about as accurate as any discussion of 'clusters'.

I respectfuly submit that water clusters reffered to in Randi's commentary are in reference to the Penta-water variety. And despite your claims to the contrary , he is essentialy as correct as a non-chemist is going to be.

Then you Mr. Morris stated this:

In attempting to correct his error, Randi only digs himself deeper. Randi claims that clusters are limited to six molecules. He is wrong. Any given molecule of water will form bonds with up to 5 other molecules, correct. But – here’s the part Randi misses – each of those 5 will bond with another 5, and each of those with another 5, and so on.

Nor is it correct to say that the cluster ‘lasts’ for such a short time. Individual bonds within a cluster might break, but the cluster itself is not destroyed. Also, bonds broken will re-form even more quickly. At any given instant, almost all molecules will be bonded to one cluster or another, and any individual molecule is bonded for almost all the time.
[/b]


The first part is totaly unsupported by the citations I could find. The second part is just semantic gymnastics.

A molecule may be bonded at any time and in fact this makes for the viscosity of water but the 'clusters' are very short lived.

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Hell, even if water clusters were semipermanent, how can they mimic the properties of thousands of other molecules? What, is water some kind of jack-of-all-trades on a molecular level? Who needs those other 90 elements, anyway?

~~ Paul