• 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.