Heavy water tastes the same as ordinary water (1935)
science.sciencemag.org
science.sciencemag.org
> A US nuclear laboratory is said to maintain a "heavy dog"--fed with heavy water and "heavy" food, and with the heavy isotope deuterium replacing normal hydrogen throughout the whole body.
-- New Scientist, 1976 [1]
And:
> [it] would be invisible to a MRI scanner. The dog would still be clearly visible to the naked eye so apart from confusing the staff operating the scanner I can see no advantage to this.
-- source [2]
[1] https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=AhC9t3Q3YMcC&lpg=PA480&o...
[2] https://scicommstudios.wordpress.com/2012/01/08/hydrogen/
So they grew plants and grasshoppers in a sealed environment, with CO2 (and probably other carbon sources) from oil. Since the hydrocarbons in the oil are millions of years old, the carbon is essentially exhausted of radioactive isotopes.
If you carbon dated one of those grasshoppers it would have seemed tens of thousands of years old...
Deuterium is toxic in high concentrations. It slows down metabolism and inhibits cell division. Mammals die within week if half of the water in the body is replaced with deuterium oxide.
Some other neat things I found along the way, mostly on Wikipedia: heavy waters freeze at 4-5 degrees Celsius, the heavier the higher. Frozen heavy water will sink in liquid normal water, and pure "tritiated water" ("super-heavy" water, with tritium hydrogen isotopes) is radioactive and will boil itself if pure enough.
I don't know the explanation for that one, I always assumed taste buds have neutral taste calibrated for water found in real environments - with salt and minerals dissolved in it.
(This is probably not correct, but I also imagine it like this: AFAIK pure water forces osmosis to go in the other direction than usual, so maybe the taste one feels isn't "positive sweet" but "negative salty".)
Soft water is sweet. Hard water tastes fresh.
And chemistry pertains to modification of electrons and bonding energies.
I'm seeing placebo or contamination.
I am guessing other people have downvoted you for adopting an ignorantly confident tone on something you are not a specialist for - this is probably a bit harsh but perhaps this can be a friendly reminder to keep an open mind about these things.
Yes, Chemistry is effectively the study of electrons, but nature has been shown to be isotopically sensitive. Moreover, I have heard of chemistry on radioactive chemicals being a nightmare to reproduce because there are certain reactions where there are competing reaction pathways which are kinetically controlled and so isotopic interactions can wreak havoc on your products.
The masses being larger should result in them moving slower I think? (At the same temperature)
Allegedly this influences how the diffusion/osmosis works out, resulting in more or less water in the cells on the tongue or something?
It is also possible that I am getting things mixed up with when he tasted extremely pure water, which iirc causes some cells to burst, causing a sweet taste?
Batman’s scientific content wasn’t all that high.
I expect to find this on the shelf right next to Dirty Lemon Charcoal water shortly.
That's generous.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment
We also need to re-enforce that "how this value is calculated" is just another level of correlation with reality, it is not an absolute, i.e is not how reality "calculates" it for anything except for things that exist purely in the realm of the abstract - where our abstraction is also the definition.
I believe it's this lack of understanding that results in the distorted view of science being the practice of recording absolute truths.