• el_abuelo
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    9 days ago

    Science shit?

    I dont know…but I wouldn’t say that’s a good reason to doubt it, for example I don’t know how they proved black holes exist but they seem pretty confident.

    • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      Ok, if it’s just particles how does it distinguish the particles on a molecular level. This is important shit. The closest science can do is gas chromatography and that’s an instrument which exists in any reputable lab. Also, using gas chromatography for this a far cry from the simple function of our sense of smell which can distinguish scents just by simply introducing a fragrence.

      • el_abuelo
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 days ago

        Maybe I’m misreading your tone, but I’m not trying to argue with you - I’m genuinely curious about this and if you have superior knowledge I’m open!

        My understanding from a quick skim of Wikipedia citations suggests we understand what’s involved (particles and receptors) but the actual mechanism around encoding of signals seems to be theory.

        We also can’t teach a computer to think, but we still have quite a good idea of how it works.

      • Redfox8@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 days ago

        I believe the receptor cell responds to a particular part of the molecule in question. Artificial flavourings and scents have identical (or similar enough) parts to trigger the same response, but are otherwise different molecules.