Is Chromosome Damage Caused by Ultraviolet Photons a Reasonable Proposal?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kasse
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Damage
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the proposal that ultraviolet photons can cause chromosome damage through thermal energy transfer. A single ultraviolet photon carries about 10 electron volts, which can be converted into heat energy affecting the cell nucleus. To assess the feasibility of this damage mechanism, participants discuss calculating the temperature rise in the nucleus using the mass of a typical nucleus and the specific heat capacity of water. The formula for heat transfer, q = mcΔT, is suggested as the appropriate method for determining temperature change. Overall, the proposal raises questions about the adequacy of thermal energy from photons to cause significant chromosome damage.
kasse
Messages
383
Reaction score
1
Somebody tells you that a single ultraviolet photon carries an energy equivalent of about 10
electron volts (eV, see Appendix B). You propose a damage mechanism: A photon delivers that
energy into a volume the size of the cell nucleus and heats it up; then the increased thermal
motion knocks the chromosomes apart in some way. Is this a reasonable proposal? Why or why
not?


(Heat produced) = (mechanical energy input) * (0.24 cal/J)

so that

Heat produced = 3.84E-19 cal
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That's a good first step. Now you need to convert that energy into a change in temperature. To do this, you need to find the mass of a typical cell nucleus by finding the volume and assuming it has the same density as water (typically a good assumption when working with cells).
 
Assuming a cell nucleus diameter of ca 2 micrometers and mass density equal to that of water, the mass of the nucleus is 4E-15 kg.

I'm not sure how to calculate the temperature rise. Can I simply use

<br /> \Delta E_k = \frac{3}{2} k_B \Delta T<br />

as for gases?
 
Last edited:
You'd have to use the more general formula

q = mcΔT

Where q is the amount of heat transfered, m is the mass, c is the specific heat capacity, and ΔT is the change in temperature.
 
Should I assume the same specific heat capacity as water too?
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top