Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
Jon Greenberg wrote:
...
that we are probably the main
As a former biology teacher, I'll freely admit
culprits in this story. ("High energy ATP" and allthat). The mixed-up story
of reaction thermo presented in most bio classesis conceptually appealing
to the chemically naive because it makes intuitivesense and is simpler than
the story we've been discussing here.Unfortunately, it happens to be wrong.
I still haven't seen any physics-based grounds
for objecting if someone wants to speak of
"high-energy ATP".
This sounds to me like political correctness,
not physics. Sneering at "high-energy ATP"
seems as pointless as declaring war on those
who open their eggs on the wrong end.
http://www.online-literature.com/swift/gulliver/5/
If I'm being naive, please enlighten me.
Please give an example of a logical contradiction
and/or an experimental result that is incompatible
with measuring energy in such a way that ATP has
high energy. (Politically-correct fashion
statements
are not requested.)