Posted by so on July 17, 2005, at 17:01:32
In reply to Chemical balance: The gift of LeChatlier et al. » so, posted by chemist on July 17, 2005, at 16:27:55
> hello there, your friend chemist here...the ``concept of chemical balance'' - known to chemists and non-chemists alike as chemical equilibrium - is explained exhaustively in the literature and is based explicitly on observations that are repeatable, quantifiable, and objective in nature...all the best, chemist
>
>I understand there is a significant body of literature about equilibrium in organic chemistry, but based in part on the opinions of many scientists, I do not have as much confidence in literature that attempts to correlate well-defined tendencies toward equilibrium with preferred subjective sensations.
As I understand it, chemical equilibrium -- especially the tendency of molecules to seek a balanced contingent of 8 electrons -- eventually leads us all to a condition we call "death" and which is nothing to fear or regret, according to many faiths.
Is the subjective sensation of happiness a result of equilibrium or of an upset equilibrium? What about sorrow? Would you describe depression as "serontonin deficiency" or "monoamine oxidase poisoining"? What imbalanced chemicals tell us the difference between appropriate situational sadness and conditions described as temporary chemically induced depression? Which condition is chemically balanced - happiness or stoicism?
Perhaps you can redirect your reply to the drugs board, where I or others can reply with further questions if we feel we can gain information from your answer.
poster:so
thread:527956
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050716/msgs/529145.html