• diykeyboards@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Makes me wonder if evolution in plants selected green coloration to minimize water loss. Does chlorophyll have to be green? It absorbs light to either side of the spectrum but not green?

    • DigitalMus@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      The sun’s spectrum at the earth surface peaks in the green color range, which should make green the most efficient choice. Although, I wonder why they have to absorb only a single or a narrow band of color.

      • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Producing multiple pigments to absorb more colours is very expensive, and the chemical reactions only take a certain amount of energy, anything beyond is converted into heat (which is bad for water retention).

  • RestrictedAccount@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I have a degree in chemistry from the 1980s. The school I went to was big into kinetics.

    How is this any kind of new?

    How is this different from how a microwave oven works?

    • kusttra@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      If you read the article, it’s pretty clear. Instead of the energy of the photons being used to heat the water molecules to state change, that energy is used to break the molecular bonds between small groups of water molecules, and those groups are small enough to then be picked up by the air and evaporate. This way, the energy contained in a photon is converting much more liquid water to water vapor than if that same amount of energy was actually used to excite the water molecules, as in a microwave.