Karsten Müller

Chemistry
and Science
Fiction
What We Can Learn from the Future
Chemistry and Science Fiction
Karsten Müller

Chemistry and Science

Fiction
What We Can Learn from the Future
Karsten Müller
Institute of Technical Thermodynamics
University of Rostock
Rostock, Germany

ISBN 978-3-662-70378-6 ISBN 978-3-662-70379-3 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-70379-3

Translation from the German language edition: “Chemie und Science Fiction” by Karsten Müller, © Der/
die Herausgeber bzw. der/die Autor(en), exklusiv lizenziert an Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, ein Teil von
Springer Nature 2022. Published by Springer Berlin Heidelberg. All Rights Reserved.

This book is a translation of the original German edition “Chemie und Science Fiction” by Karsten
Müller, published by Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE in 2022. The translation was done with the help of an
artificial intelligence machine translation tool. A subsequent human revision was done primarily in terms
of content, so that the book will read stylistically differently from a conventional translation. Springer
Nature works continuously to further the development of tools for the production of books and on the
related technologies to support the authors.

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer-Verlag GmbH,
DE, part of Springer Nature 2025

TM & © 2025 CBS Studios Inc. STAR TREK and all related marks and logos are trademarks of CBS
Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse
of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar
or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, part of
Springer Nature.
The registered company address is: Heidelberger Platz 3, 14197 Berlin, Germany

If disposing of this product, please recycle the paper.

Preface

Science fiction is not just exciting entertainment. Good science fiction offers not
only fiction but also science. A particularly good example of this are the series
and films of the Star Trek universe. For more than half a century, Star Trek has
fascinated people. In the encounter with extraterrestrial cultures, we reflect on our
society. The stories from distant worlds encourage a new perspective on our own
world. Questions of human life, which we would otherwise hardly think about,
come into focus. Since the mid-1960s, Star Trek has repeatedly accompanied and
even advanced social developments. The diverse series and films, which continue
to emerge to this day, are a reflection of our time and at the same time a guide to
how things can continue. Therefore, Star Trek may be the greatest science fiction
series that has ever existed.
It all began almost 60 years ago when the original series, known in German as
Raumschiff Enterprise, started (in English often called: The Original Series, from
which the abbreviation TOS, used not only in this book, originates). Captain Kirk,
Mr. Spock, and Dr. McCoy traveled with the crew of the Enterprise to distant plan-
ets and experienced fantastic adventures. Then there was a gap. After the short-
lived attempt of a first Star Trek animated series, there were no new adventures for
a decade and a half. At least not in series form. About ten years after the end of the
original series, Captain Kirk returned. This time not on television, but on the big
screen. A whole series of movies followed before things finally picked up again at
the end of the 1980s. Captain Picard stood on the bridge of a new Enterprise. Set a
century later, in the 24th century, this Enterprise once again traveled to worlds that
no human had seen before. Before Star Trek: The Next Generation (TNG) ended,
the third live-action series followed in the early 1990s with Star Trek: Deep Space
Nine (DS9). A series with a daring new concept. Instead of being set on a space-
ship, the action took place on a space station. What initially sounds like a marginal
difference is a real challenge narratively for a science fiction series. Because now
the protagonists could no longer simply fly to the aliens themselves. They had to
come to them. The concept worked surprisingly well, and the Star Trek universe
was enriched by a whole new kind of stories. The next series, Star Trek: Voyager
(VOY), started just two years later and was again based on a spaceship. However,
this one had been stranded at the other end of the galaxy, and the journey home
took a full seven years. When Voyager returned to Earth at the beginning of the
21st century (of course, it actually returned in the second half of the 24th century,

v
vi Preface

but it was seen on television at the beginning of the 21st century), the fifth series
went back two centuries. Star Trek: Enterprise (ENT) depicted the time immedi-
ately before the founding of the United Federation of Planets. When their journey
across the screens ended after only four years, it almost seemed as if the story
of Star Trek had also come to an end. There were still some movies, but the era
of the series was over. Again, there was a dark time that lasted over a decade.
But in 2017, the sixth series, Star Trek: Discovery (DSC), finally started, and not
long after, Captain Picard also returned—in a series named after him (Star Trek:
Picard, PIC). So the journey continues.
Unlike in some other well-known science fiction series, „science“ always
played a significant role in Star Trek (not just space fantasy). What most peo-
ple think of in this context is physics. There are many exciting questions in this
regard: Can a warp drive really exist? And what does Einstein say about it? How
can beaming work? And what does Heisenberg say about it? Can one escape from
the event horizon of a singularity? And what does Schwarzschild say about it? A
whole series of books has already been written about Star Trek and physics. The
technology of Star Trek is also more than exciting. Captain Kirk liked to stand on
the bridge. But in a certain way, Scotty was the secret hero. Engineers have always
played an essential role in Star Trek.
Admittedly, Star Trek did not make me become an engineer. That would prob-
ably have happened anyway. Only without Star Trek, I would have likely studied
electrical engineering instead of chemical engineering. How does Star Trek make
one specialize in chemistry?
In the years before I graduated from school, the fourth live-action series was
airing—Star Trek: Voyager. Voyager was probably the most in love with futur-
istic technology of all the Star Trek series. One detail of Voyager's technology
ultimately led me to choose chemistry: its computer. The computer systems of
Voyager were not based on conventional computerchips but on so-called bioneu-
ral gel packs. Biochemical components formed the heart of the most technologi-
cally advanced spaceship in the Star Trek universe. That was the decisive impetus:
the realization that chemistry is not just a marginal topic dealing with things like
paints and lubricants. Chemistry is the key. And Star Trek can open up a whole
new perspective on chemistry.
After having dealt with it scientifically for many years, I can say: Star Trek was
right. Chemistry is the key to an incredible number of things. To energy technol-
ogy, to medicine, to modern electrical engineering, to the understanding of nature
and climate, and much more. With this book, I want to try to pass on some of that.
The chemistry, as we experience it in Star Trek, is meant to serve as a bridge to
approach selected chemical questions in the following chapters and hopefully gain
one or two new and interesting insights.

Prof. Dr. Karsten Müller

Acknowledgments

Various people have inspired me to write this book and have contributed in differ-
ent ways to its creation. Starting with Magdalena Mikulaschek, who gave me Die
Star Trek Physik by Metin Tolan and thus first brought me the idea for this book,
to my editor Désirée Claus, who accompanied the publication process, many peo-
ple have made valuable contributions at the intermediate stages.
Not to be forgotten at this point are the diligent contributors who help create
the wiki on the internet platform Memory Alpha. While writing, this database was
very helpful as a memory aid. As a Wikipedian, I appreciate this work.
I would especially like to thank all those who contributed to clearing this book
of many errors and misunderstandings by diligently proofreading various chap-
ters. In this context, Dr. Patrick Adametz, Alexander Fendt, Dr. Christoph Krieger,
Christof Müller, Dr. Peter Schulz, Dr. Susanne Spörler, and Raphael Wittenburg
should be mentioned. Any remaining errors are solely my responsibility.

vii
Contents

1 The Chemistry of Extraterrestrial Life Forms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.1 Horta or Life from Silicon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Very Hot Extraterrestrials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.3 Life without a Body. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1.4 Crossing the Threshold . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2 Hydrogen and the Infinite Vastness. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.1 Breathing Hydrogen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.2 The Bussard Collector or Collecting from the Vacuum. . . . . . . . . . 33
2.3 Explosions in Space. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
2.4 One Moon Circles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
3 Atoms in a Completely Different Way . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
3.1 When Atoms Burn. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
3.2 Tiny Atoms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
3.3 Tiny Atoms—Part 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
4 Chemistry and Its Speed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
4.1 The Salt Vampire of M-113. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
4.2 A Thirsty Virus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
4.3 Simply Being Someone Else. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
4.4 Why Does a Dead Shapeshifter Revert to Its Natural Form? . . . . . 99
5 New Materials in the 23rd and 24th Century. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
5.1 How many Elements are there Actually?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
5.2 Materials That Do Not Consist of Chemical Elements. . . . . . . . . . 114
5.3 The Mixing Ratio of Matter and Antimatter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
6 Particularly Impressive Chemicals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
6.1 Corbomite or Kirk’s Favorite Chemical Bluff. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
6.2 The Molecule of Molecules. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141

ix
The Chemistry of Extraterrestrial
Life Forms 1

1.1 Horta or Life from Silicon

In 1967 and 1967, the first Star Trek series (often referred to as “The Original
Series,” TOS) began airing. This included the very well-known 26th episode of
the 1st season, “The Devil in the Dark”. It is about how the starship Enterprise
travels to the planet Janus VI in the year 2267. In the mining colony there, deaths
occur repeatedly. The colonists are attacked and killed by an unknown life form.
As is often the case with colonizers, there is a fundamental lack of understand-
ing of the peculiarities of the indigenous population in this situation as well. The
spheres found everywhere in the caves are not geological curiosities that can be
treated completely carelessly. They are the eggs of an intelligent, indigenous
life form called Horta. Naturally, Horta is not thrilled that the miners are killing
their offspring (albeit unknowingly) or placing them as decorations on shelves.
Accordingly, Horta defends itself, leading to the aforementioned deaths among the
colony’s inhabitants. The scientifically special aspect of this event is that Horta is
the first case of a silicon-based life form known to the Federation.
Silicon-based life forms are a popular subject both in the context of scientific
speculation and in various examples of science fiction literature. Life, as we know
it from Earth, is known to be based on the element carbon. Chemically speaking,
more precisely: on functionalized hydrocarbons. What does that mean? To under-
stand life based on silicon, we first need to look at life based on carbon.
First of all, terrestrial living beings do not primarily consist of carbon. Most liv-
ing beings are composed of about nine-tenths water, a compound of the elements
hydrogen and oxygen. Water is essential for life—not just on Earth, but essen-
tially everywhere. For the actual biochemistry that ensures we are not just bags
filled with water but real, complex living beings, carbon compounds are ultimately
needed. Water is still essential for every living being. This has a very simple rea-
son: it is liquid. This may sound trivial, but it is of central importance. The more

1
2 1 The Chemistry of Extraterrestrial Life Forms

complex compounds based on a carbon framework, from which living beings are
built, are almost all solids. They can be dissolved in water and thus handled like
liquids. In their pure form, however, they are solid. If living beings did not consist
mostly of water but only of these solids, no movement would be possible. This
would not only make higher life forms like most animals impossible. Even immo-
bile life forms like most plants rely on movement. There is not only the external
movement that animals use to move towards their food or to avoid becoming food
for other animals.
First of all (and this is the most important thing), there are internal movement
processes. Without these, life would not be conceivable at all. All kinds of sub-
stances must move from one place to another inside the cell. Molecules that serve
as food and are absorbed from the outside must be transported inside. Conversely,
waste products must be transported out of the cell. Proteins formed inside at the
so-called ribosomes must reach where they are needed. For reproduction, a cell
must divide. To do this, the cell membrane must deform, constrict, and close again
into two independent cells. All these processes require that molecules and at least
smaller particles can move. If a cell were not filled with a liquid, this would sim-
ply not be possible. If it were instead filled with a gas, the gas (unlike a solid)
would not be an obstacle to substance transport. On the other hand, it would not
support the transport either, which liquids can certainly do. Many substances are
soluble in water. And even non-water-soluble particles can at least float in a liq-
uid, provided their density is roughly the same as that of water. Due to the large
density difference, this is hardly possible with a gas. Therefore, all living beings
ultimately depend on being filled with a liquid.
Theoretically, one could of course think that any other liquid could just as
well be suitable for this. This is conceivable. However, water offers, besides the
fact that it is liquid at the temperatures that mostly prevail on Earth and its great
availability, other advantages. Its special chemical properties make it excellently
suited to support life. For one, the water molecule is very polar. This means that
the molecule is electrically neutral. However, there is an internal charge distribu-
tion within the molecule. The water molecule has a positively charged side (at the
two hydrogen atoms) and a negatively charged side (at the oxygen atom). This
makes it very good at dissolving substances like sugar and other polar molecules.
Additionally, it is a so-called ampholyte. This means that it can both accept and
donate hydrogen ions (also called protons). This allows it to support many impor-
tant chemical reactions. Overall, water has a whole range of special, sometimes
quite unusual properties. If the laws of nature were not exactly such that water
possessed the special combination of properties it has, it would be fatal for life.
So much for water. What about carbon? Why do we even say that terrestrial life
is based on carbon? After all, it is about hydrocarbons, which also contain many
oxygen atoms (and to a lesser extent also nitrogen and sulfur). So why do we
always say that life is based on carbon (and not water)?
There is a simple reason for this. Carbon is one of the few tetravalent elements.
A carbon atom can be chemically bonded to up to four other atoms simultane-
ously. Hydrogen, on the other hand, is monovalent. Each hydrogen atom can only
1.1 Horta or Life from Silicon 3

be bonded to a single other atom. Accordingly, it would be completely impossible

to build more complex compounds based on hydrogen. Hydrogen atoms can cer-
tainly be part of complex molecules. But wherever there is a hydrogen atom, the
structure does not go any further. If the hydrogen atom is bonded to a molecule,
then its one bond is already used up. It cannot form another true chemical bond
without separating from the main molecule.

A few more details

Hydrogen atoms that are, for example, bonded to oxygen atoms can indeed
form a kind of second bond in a certain way. This is referred to as the so-called
hydrogen bond. Hydrogen bonds arise because a positive charge is concen-
trated on the hydrogen atom. This partial positive charge is attracted by nega-
tive charges, for example, on oxygen atoms in other molecules. These hydrogen
bonds represent a very strong interaction between molecules. However, they are
still not strong enough to bind the two molecules so strongly that they would
become one large molecule. Therefore, the statement that hydrogen is monova-
lent is quite justified. ◄

Hydrogen (or other monovalent elements like chlorine or bromine) can therefore
play an important role in complex molecules. However, it cannot form the back-
bone of complex molecules. For this, an element is needed that can form multi-
ple bonds simultaneously. Oxygen, for example, is divalent and is thus able to be
bonded to up to two other atoms simultaneously. Therefore, an oxygen atom does
not necessarily represent the end of a larger molecule. The chain of atoms can
indeed continue after an oxygen atom. However, that is about it. Divalent atoms
could only bind long chains.1 More complex molecules, which are needed to ena-
ble life, however, require branches or at least the possibility to attach something
else to the chain (a so-called functional group). A long series consisting only of
the same atoms offers little room to form complex biomolecules. For this, the cor-
responding atom must be able to form at least a third bond.
An example of a trivalent element would be nitrogen. However, its chemical
properties are ultimately not really suitable for forming the backbone of complex
biochemical molecules. On the one hand, a long chain of nitrogen atoms would
be unstable. A molecule based on a long chain of nitrogen atoms would quickly
disintegrate. On the other hand, nitrogen tends to exhibit basic behavior in chemi-
cal compounds2. Ammonia is a well-known example of a basic nitrogen-based

1 In the case of oxygen, even that would be only possible to a limited extent. If one bonds oxygen
atom to oxygen atom, you get a peroxide. These peroxides are chronically unstable and even tend
to explode.
2 Basic (or often called alkaline) is the counterpart of acidic in chemistry. There are various def-

initions of bases and acids. The probably best-known definition is that according to Brønsted.
A Brønsted base is a substance that can accept positively charged hydrogen ions. In contrast, a
Brønsted acid donates them. Such acid-base reactions can sometimes be very vigorous but also
4 1 The Chemistry of Extraterrestrial Life Forms

compound. To some extent, the properties of nitrogen may indeed be interesting

for biochemistry. Therefore, biology ultimately uses nitrogen in the very important
amino acids. These are the building blocks of proteins. However, the task of form-
ing the backbone of biochemical molecules exceeds the capabilities of nitrogen. In
amino acids or proteins built from them, nitrogen is indeed used. However, only as
one of several elements.
Carbon, on the other hand, neither has the basic properties of nitrogen compounds
nor are long chains of carbon atoms chemically unstable. Moreover, the tetravalency
of carbon is a great advantage. Even if complex molecules could already be built in
principle with trivalent molecules: With the ability to be bonded to up to four other
atoms simultaneously, carbon offers many more possibilities for building complex
molecules. That is why we say that terrestrial life is based on carbon. And for this
reason, it is often speculated that life could also be based on silicon.
Silicon is located directly below carbon in the periodic table of elements. In
the periodic table, the principle applies that elements that are below each other
form a group. The elements of a group generally have similar chemical properties.
Accordingly, carbon and silicon are similar in some essential points. This includes,
among other things, the number of bonds they can form simultaneously. Silicon
is also tetravalent and can form the so-called silanes analogously to hydrocar-
bons. Silanes are chains of silicon atoms with hydrogen atoms attached laterally.
They thus correspond to alkanes as the simplest form of hydrocarbons. The carbon
atoms are simply replaced by silicon atoms. If one were to replace one of these
hydrogen atoms with a silicon atom, the chain could branch. If one were to replace
a hydrogen atom with a completely different atom (or a group of atoms), the mol-
ecule could be functionalized. This means that one could give it various chemical
properties, which is an essential prerequisite for a functioning biochemistry. This
is the reason why speculation about silicon-based life initially makes quite a bit of
sense.
But what challenges would silicon-based life forms actually face? One of the
reasons why carbon is so well-suited as the basic material of biochemistry is the
high stability of the bond between two carbon atoms. Carbon compounds simply
do not break down easily. The bond between two silicon atoms, on the other hand,
is significantly weaker. Accordingly, it would be even more important for a sili-
con-based life form than for us carbon-based life forms to have conditions that do
not destroy their biochemistry. An important point in this context is temperature.
Simply put: the higher the temperature, the more unstable silanes and their derived
compounds are. Therefore, silicon-based life forms would likely develop primarily

play a significant role in biochemistry. It would be of little help if the backbone of all molecules
were basic. This would cause the pH value inside living beings to rise enormously (i.e., the water
would also become basic) and all acids would be neutralized. As a result, all acid-base reactions
would be practically unusable for biochemistry because all Brønsted acids would have already
given up their protons.
1.1 Horta or Life from Silicon 5

in a cold environment. Horta or the somewhat later discovered Excalbians, with

whom we will deal in the next chapter and who are extremely hot, would therefore
have enormous problems to contend with. Silicon-based life does not appreciate
high temperatures.
However, low temperatures have certain disadvantages for life. A chemical
problem in a cold environment is the so-called reaction kinetics. This describes
how quickly a chemical reaction proceeds. The higher the temperature, the faster
reactions occur. To reach (and maintain) a certain temperature level, mammals
constantly burn fats and carbohydrates, their energy carriers, even if they do not
actually need the corresponding energy at that moment. This is an enormous waste.
But it still makes sense because it allows them to keep their body temperature con-
stantly at a high level. Because chemical reactions occur faster at high tempera-
tures, warm-blooded animals can carry out chemical reactions very quickly when
needed. Why this is important becomes clear when you consider that the provision
of energy for hunting, fleeing, or other physical exertions is provided by chemical
reactions. If the temperature is low, the organism can only perform at a low level.
Therefore, animals generally try to keep their body temperature high. Just not so
high that the molecules of their biochemistry start to decompose. That is why the
human body temperature is 37 °C. This is the highest possible temperature at which
no damage occurs due to high temperature. At slightly higher temperatures, most
organic molecules do not yet decompose. Nevertheless, individual (biochemically
important) classes of substances, such as enzymes, already change and begin to
lose their function. For silicon-based life forms, the maximum body temperature
would be significantly lower. Accordingly, their biochemistry could still function.
However, due to low temperatures, it would only function very slowly. Large physi-
cal performances, like the speed with which Horta moves, would be considerably
more difficult for them than for us. Therefore, silicon-based life forms would prob-
ably hardly develop beyond the state of single-celled organisms.
The chemical stability of silicon-based biomolecules would not only be a prob-
lem with regard to temperature. Although silanes, the silicon equivalents to hydro-
carbons mentioned above, generally withstand contact with water and mild acids
without problems, as soon as the water becomes basic, they react violently and
transform into solid silicates and hydrogen. Moreover, silicon-based life forms
could not simply coexist with us in the same atmosphere. Silanes have another
property related to their stability: they are pyrophoric. This means that they react
violently with the oxygen in the air at room temperature. Pure silanes would actu-
ally start to burn. As we have seen above, all living beings are structured in such
a way that they consist of small pouches (the cell membranes) containing a liquid
(in our case, water). This liquid would likely prevent silicon-based life forms from
immediately bursting into flames upon contact with air. Nevertheless, extraterres-
trial life would face massive disadvantages if it replaced carbon with silicon.
What if extraterrestrial life forms were not only based on silicon but also had
a completely different biochemistry? This is where it gets very speculative. The
chemistry we will discuss next differs even more from any biochemistry in known
living beings. But let’s just speculate.
6 1 The Chemistry of Extraterrestrial Life Forms

The weak point of silanes and the molecules derived from them was that the
bond between two silicon atoms is too weak. Therefore, the molecules tend to be
unstable. At this point, a widespread translation error could help. When English-
language works refer to life forms based on silicon, German translations often
speak of “Silikon”. The German term Silikon does not refer to the chemical ele-
ment silicon but to a group of plastics that include silicon in their chemical struc-
ture. The translation error becomes understandable when you know that silicon in
English is called “silicon”. The plastic “Silikon” is called “silicone” in English.
A small but not irrelevant difference.3 Unintentionally, this translation error could
point to a possible solution to the stability problem.
Let’s take a closer look at silicones. Their basic structure is based on the class
of substances known as siloxanes. These do not simply consist, as with silanes, of
a series of interconnected silicon atoms, but always alternate between an oxygen
atom and a silicon atom. Since the bond between oxygen and silicon is much more
stable than between silicon and silicon, siloxanes are significantly more stable than
silanes. Silicones, in turn, consist of siloxanes with alkyl groups attached to the
sides. Alkyl groups are nothing more than parts of hydrocarbon molecules. In this
way, you get a stable molecule that can branch out and to which all kinds of func-
tional groups can be attached. In other words: Based on a silicone structure, you
can essentially build everything that biochemistry needs. However, strictly speak-
ing, life forms based on silicone would not be purely silicon-based life forms, but
a hybrid form of silicon- and carbon-based.
There is one last major problem for silicon-based life forms. This concerns res-
piration. Respiration is important for living beings to provide energy. Although
there are other chemical ways, such as fermentation, for living beings to gain
energy, respiration is the only truly effective method. In respiration, carbon-based
life forms convert organic compounds with atmospheric oxygen into water and
carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide, along with water, is a second substance whose
special properties are essential for life. If the natural constants of the universe
were just a little different, there would be considerable problems for life. Here are
just two of them: First, there is the unusually high solubility of carbon dioxide in
water. This allows carbon dioxide to be transported out of the body without gas
bubbles forming in the cells, which would cause considerable damage. Secondly,
although it is highly soluble in water, it is ultimately still a gas. This makes it very
easy for an organism to release it into the environment.
This latter property, in particular, is a significant difference from what would
happen in the respiration of silicon-based life forms. Analogous to carbon bio-
chemistry, silanes or siloxanes would react with oxygen to form water and sili-
con dioxide. Carbon dioxide and silicon dioxide may sound very similar at first.

3 This translation error also occasionally occurs in the German synchronization of Star Trek. In
the 18th episode of the 1st TNG season, “Home Soil,” the German synchronization also mentions
that the life forms on the planet Velara III are based on silicone.
1.1 Horta or Life from Silicon 7

However, there is a huge difference: Carbon dioxide is a gas. Silicon dioxide is, in
the truest sense of the word, hard like a rock. Geologists usually call silicon diox-
ide quartz. The beautiful, glass-like crystals that you sometimes see are quartz:
nothing more than silicon dioxide. A silicon-based life form should therefore
avoid respiration. Otherwise, it must expect to turn itself into stone in no time.
One solution could be silicones again. As discussed, they consist of a siloxane
chain with hydrocarbon residues attached. If silicon organisms could manage to
specifically convert only these hydrocarbons to carbon dioxide during respiration
and leave the silicon-containing backbone untouched, then respiration would be
possible without turning themselves to stone.
In addition to true silicon-based life, which refers to life forms whose entire
biochemistry is based on silicon, one could also imagine life forms that are car-
bon-based but also use silicon. If we think of our own bodies, they are, as an
inorganic, silicon-based life form from Star Trek: The Next Generation puts it,
essentially “ugly big bags, mostly filled with water” (the term “ugly” is in the eye
of the beholder; according to the beauty ideals of the crystalline inhabitants of
Velara III, this may well be true for humans). If this description were complete,
humans would not be able to stand at all. To do so, the human (or other humanoid)
readership of this book has bones. The bones also have a significant organic, i.e.,
carbon-based, component. However, they largely consist of calcium phosphate.
This inorganic component makes the bones really hard. But there is no necessity
for living beings to use calcium phosphate for this purpose. In the vast expanses
of space, higher life forms could have developed whose bones consist of silicates.
In principle, this even exists on Earth, albeit only in much simpler life forms. The
so-called diatoms are tiny single-celled organisms that have a shell made of silicon
dioxide. Although their actual biochemistry is (like that of humans) based on car-
bon, they at least use silicon for part of their biological functions. It therefore does
not seem entirely far-fetched that silicon plays a role in biochemistry somewhere
in the universe. There might be something to Horta after all.

A few more details

We are currently speculating about whether the biochemistry of extraterrestrial

life forms could be based on elements other than carbon. Then we should at
least be thorough enough to consider whether there might be other candidates
besides the often-discussed silicon. Earlier in the text, I pointed out that ele-
ments that are in the same group in the periodic table are generally very similar
chemically. This is the main reason why silicon is repeatedly brought up as a
candidate. However, the periodic table continues below silicon. At least theoret-
ically, one could imagine something like a biochemistry with the next element.
Directly below silicon is the element germanium.
The existence of this element was predicted by the Russian chemist Dmitri
Mendeleev as early as 1871 from the structure of the periodic table, without
anyone having isolated it at that time. In 1885, the German chemist Clemens
8 1 The Chemistry of Extraterrestrial Life Forms

Winkler actually found it in a newly discovered mineral. It was eventually

named after Winkler’s homeland: Germany.
This germanium forms a group of substances called germanes, analogous to
hydrocarbons or silanes. A germane molecule is a chain of germanium atoms,
each with two hydrogen atoms attached laterally (or three hydrogen atoms on
the terminal germanium atoms). In principle, one could again imagine a bio-
chemistry based on this. However, the same difficulties as with silicon-based
biochemistry arise, only much more pronounced. Germanes are chronically
unstable, and in contact with air, solids are formed that do not melt even at
1000 °C. Therefore, germanium is probably not a serious candidate for non-
carbon-based life. ◄

1.2 Very Hot Extraterrestrials

The Excalbians are a species remarkable in various ways. It starts on a cultural

level. The concept of good and evil is completely unknown to them. They are
apparently very fascinated by it during their first contact with the Federation.
Therefore, they conduct an experiment that we can observe in the 22nd episode
of the 3rd TOS season, “The Savage Curtain”. Their approach is to set up two
teams. A total of eight people, consisting of members of the Enterprise crew and
representations of historical figures, compete against each other in battle. One of
the teams represents good. This team includes Captain Kirk, Mr. Spock, Abraham
Lincoln, and the Vulcan philosopher Surak. The second team represents evil. It
includes four correspondingly shady characters from Earth and extraterrestrial his-
tory. This team includes mass murderers like Colonel Green from Earth’s history
of the (from the perspective of the scriptwriter at the time, still far in the future)
21st century. But also personalities like Genghis Khan, who, at least in Mongolia,
is considered more of a hero than an embodiment of evil, or Kahless, who (as
one can learn in later Star Trek series) is practically the epitome of good for the
Klingons. One begins to sense how much the assessment of good and evil lies in
the eye of the beholder. Anyway, with the help of these two teams, the Excalbians
want to determine what is actually better: good or evil.
The Excalbians do not really become wise from their experiment. This is most
likely because their experiment has fundamental scientific weaknesses. On the
one hand, the measurement methodology is probably only limitedly suitable for
answering the actual question. Because what does the outcome of a fight to the
death say? With high probability, the side to which the stronger and smarter fight-
ers are assigned simply wins. The superiority of good or evil has at most a sec-
ondary influence on the outcome of the fight. On the other hand, the Excalbians
are dissatisfied with the result for another reason. The good use similar methods
in the fight as the evil. They cannot really see the difference and eventually have
to release the Enterprise back into freedom without having really progressed with
their question.
1.2 Very Hot Extraterrestrials 9

Besides their unusual misunderstanding of the concept of good and evil, the
Excalbians are also extremely remarkable from a chemical perspective. On the
one hand, they are chemically based on silicon. Therefore, when Scotty beams up
the image of Abraham Lincoln created by them, he feels like he is beaming up a
rock. We have already discussed the difficulties of silicon as a basis for life and the
necessity of low temperatures for silicon-based life. This should not be the topic
again here. On the other hand, the Excalbians are very hot. When trying to touch
them, Captain Kirk first burns his hands properly.
As we have already established, silanes can obviously not form the basis of
their biochemistry. At several hundred degrees Celsius, they would decompose in
no time. In an oxygen-containing atmosphere, silicon would inevitably form sili-
con dioxide at these temperatures. Since Scotty had the impression when beaming
that he was disassembling and transporting a rock into its atoms, silicon dioxide
seems to make up a considerable part of the Excalbian organism. However, sili-
con dioxide cannot be the main component. Mineralogists call it quartz. If you
are essentially made of quartz, then you are quite solid and quite restricted in your
movements. The Excalbians do not make an overly agile impression. That would
somehow fit with silicon dioxide. Even if the Excalbians may be several hundred
degrees hot, quartz only melts at 1713°C. Not even the aliens from the planet
Excalbia are that hot. Since the silicon dioxide in their bodies is both solid and
chemically quite inert, it is not really suitable as a carrier of their biochemistry. It
may possibly form the basic material of their bones. If their bones consist exclu-
sively of silicon dioxide, then that might explain their slow movements.
Bones made of quartz would indeed be very hard. At the same time, however,
they would also be quite brittle. Silicon dioxide possesses virtually no elasticity.
Therefore, objects made of silicon dioxide break very easily. Just think of glass.
The main component of most glasses is silicon dioxide. If you drop a drinking
glass on the floor, the likelihood is quite high that it will break. If you drop a plas-
tic cup on the floor, it usually survives unscathed. So, hardness is not everything.
A certain flexibility is often quite helpful. Inorganic silicon dioxide, whether in the
form of glass, quartz, or another mineral, is very hard. However, it almost com-
pletely lacks flexibility. Organic plastics, on the other hand, are relatively soft.
They can be bent somewhat without breaking immediately.
The malleability of plastic can be chemically explained by the fact that plas-
tic consists of a large number of molecules. These are quite large. There is a
strong chemical bond between the atoms in the molecule. However, there is only
a relatively weak attraction between the molecules. This is referred to as van der
Waals forces. If you shift two molecules of the plastic against each other, you only
have to overcome these relatively weak bonds. Therefore, plastic is quite soft.
Subsequently, the same van der Waals forces exist between the molecules in the
new position. In silicon dioxide, the entire solid (greatly simplified) consists of a
single molecule. You cannot deform it without breaking relatively strong chemical
bonds. That is why quartz is so hard. However, once you have shifted the atoms
against each other, the chemical bonds are broken, and new chemical bonds do
10 1 The Chemistry of Extraterrestrial Life Forms

not form so easily. Therefore, when the chemical bonds break, the entire solid
breaks.4 Silicon dioxide is therefore quite brittle. If the bones of the Excalbians
actually consist of silicon dioxide, then they should move very carefully because
their bones would be very hard but also prone to brittle fracture. Additionally, they
probably do not heal particularly well if they break.
For this reason, our bones are not simply made of lime. Inorganic calcium salts
give the bone its hardness, but there is also a lot of organic tissue in the bones.
This gives the bone a certain flexibility. Therefore, it is not as prone to fractures.
And if a fracture does occur, the blood-supplied organic tissue can contribute to
the healing of the broken bone. For example, calcium phosphate is transported
into the bone through the blood. This not only hardens them during childhood but
also allows the healing process in the event of a bone fracture. Silicon dioxide, on
the other hand, is almost insoluble in water (and thus in blood). Excalbians would
therefore have a problem if they wanted to heal a bone fracture. It is therefore very
sensible of them to move very carefully.
However, the transport of silicon dioxide through the blood of the Excalbians
is probably only one of their many problems. If their bodies are actually several
hundred degrees hot, then they have to deal with entirely different challenges. The
difficulties start much more fundamentally. Namely, with the state of aggregation
of the blood. The blood (or another body fluid that takes over its function) must be
liquid. A solid cannot naturally fulfill the task. But what about a gas?
A gas could theoretically flow through the veins by an extraterrestrial heart.
If the blood of the Excalbians is based on water, this would become necessary
because water evaporates (at a pressure of 1 bar) at 100 °C. While vapors might
be conducted through Excalbian veins, it cannot really take over the function of
blood. Because blood is primarily supposed to transport chemical substances
through the body. In the case of oxygen, which is supposed to reach the cells from
the lungs, this would still be quite simple. In the case of carbon dioxide, which
is transported by the blood from the cells to the lungs, this is also not a problem.
However, it becomes difficult with almost everything else. Energy carriers, vita-
mins, proteins (or whatever takes over these functions in silicon-based Excalbians)
dissolve more or less well in water. At least as long as it is liquid. When it is
evaporated, it becomes more difficult. How the Excalbian version of proteins is
supposed to be transported by gaseous blood is completely unclear. It would be
similarly difficult with energy carriers like sugar. Sugars are well soluble in water
due to the numerous hydroxyl groups in the molecules. However, it is hardly pos-
sible to evaporate them without decomposing them. If you simply leave out the
hydroxyl groups in the sugar molecules, evaporation works much better. Sugar

4 The molecules of organic plastics can also be linked by chemical bonds, significantly increasing
their hardness. These are then referred to as thermosets instead of thermoplastics. Thermosets are
considerably harder and do not melt (eventually, they decompose chemically if the temperature
becomes too high). However, the higher hardness is not only bought at the cost of poorer pro-
cessability but also with a certain tendency to brittle fracture.
1.2 Very Hot Extraterrestrials 11

Dextrose Hexane

hardly any aracon

Fig. 1.1  Two molecules each of glucose (dextrose) and hexane and visualization of the attrac-
tive forces between the molecules; strong hydrogen bonds occur between the hydroxyl groups in
glucose, while there are only comparatively weak van der Waals bonds between the hexane mol-
ecules (In reality, the carbon chain of glucose is usually closed into a ring; for simplicity, only the
open-chain form is considered here)

molecules without hydroxyl groups would simply be hydrocarbon chains. Such

substances are called alkanes. These alkanes are hardly soluble in water. For this
reason, our organism can do very little with alkanes. However, if you do not have
liquid blood, this does not really matter. Alkane vapors could then flow through
the veins of the Excalbians.
Why is it so difficult to vaporize sugar? And why does the corresponding
alkane (i.e., the “sugar” molecule without hydroxyl groups) vaporize so much
more easily? When we compare glucose with hexane, we find that, in principle, it
is essentially the same compound. In both cases, it involves six carbon atoms in a
row (Fig. 1.1).5 The difference is that in hexane (as in all alkanes), two hydrogen
atoms are attached to each carbon atom (or three to the terminal carbons in the
chain). In glucose, however, some of the hydrogen atoms are replaced by hydroxyl
groups. A hydroxyl group consists of one oxygen and one hydrogen atom. Since
the oxygen atom attracts electrons much more strongly than the hydrogen atom,
a slightly negative charge results at the oxygen atom. Because the electron con-
centration at the hydrogen atom is somewhat reduced, a positive charge results
there. The overall molecule is electrically neutral. However, the charge is unevenly
distributed within the molecule. Opposite charges are known to attract each other.

5 Inglucose, the carbon atoms are usually not arranged in a long row but form a ring. Cyclohexane
or methylcyclopentane would therefore be somewhat more accurate analogs to glucose. For sim-
plicity’s sake, we will assume here that it is just a long, straight chain. For understanding the effect
we are discussing, it does not matter whether the carbon atoms form a ring or a linear chain.
12 1 The Chemistry of Extraterrestrial Life Forms

Therefore, the negative oxygen atoms attract the positive hydrogen atoms in the
hydroxyl groups of other sugar molecules. This effect is called hydrogen bonding.
This effect does not occur in hexane. Therefore, the attractive forces between hex-
ane molecules are significantly weaker. When the molecules attract each other less
strongly, they are easier to separate. This is exactly what happens during vaporiza-
tion. Therefore, an alkane like hexane vaporizes much more easily than sugar with
the same number of carbon atoms in the molecule.6
Why have we examined this aspect so closely here? After all, this chapter is
supposed to be about living beings like the Excalbians, who have a very high
body temperature. The hydroxyl groups in sugars are precisely the crucial point.
Therefore, the Excalbians cannot use sugars (or other carbohydrates) as energy
carriers. The blood in their veins would be gaseous. Alkanes like hexane, on the
other hand, would be quite suitable. They can be vaporized without decomposition
and thus transported in the Excalbian body. Alkanes are already very well known
as chemical energy carriers today. However, not from biology, but from combus-
tion technology. Gasoline is ultimately nothing more than a mixture of alkanes.
The energy content per kilogram of alkane is even significantly higher than that
per kilogram of sugar.7 As we will see a little later, it is very important for the
Excalbians to have an energy-rich fuel as an energy source.
First, however, we want to stay with the aggregate state of Excalbian blood.
Wouldn’t there be a way to have liquid blood at several hundred degrees Celsius?
After all, blood must not only be an energy carrier but also transport all sorts of
things through the body. For this, a liquid is simply better suited than a gas. To
keep a liquid liquid at higher temperatures, there are even three options (which can
also be combined):

1. You can increase the pressure.

2. You can salt the water.
3. You can replace water with something else.

Option one actually occurs in nature. On Earth, there are organisms that live at
very high temperatures. These are called thermophilic organisms. Many of
these microorganisms live at temperatures above 40 °C. Some live at more than
70 °C. And some even at over 100 °C. The latter, however, only exist in the deep
sea. Because only there is the pressure high enough to prevent the water from

6 Hydrogen bonds can be formed not only with hydroxyl groups in other sugar molecules. They
are also formed with (chemically similar) water molecules. This is why water is practically
attracted to sugar, which is why its solubility in water is very good. Hexane, on the other hand,
does not form hydrogen bonds with water and therefore dissolves poorly in it.
7A problem with regard to energy would be the volume. One liter of liquid gasoline contains a lot
of energy. However, when vaporized, it expands significantly. The calorific value of the gasoline
does not change. However, the space requirement increases significantly. Since hexane already
boils at 69 °C, the Excalbians would have to constantly take in new alkanes, as they can hardly
store reserves in their bodies due to space constraints.
1.2 Very Hot Extraterrestrials 13

evaporating. At normal atmospheric pressure, the cells would simply be torn apart
by evaporation. Near deep-sea volcanoes, temperatures are sometimes above
100 °C, and the water is still liquid. Hyperthermophilic organisms live here. So
it is possible to keep water liquid in living beings even at high temperatures. How
high does the pressure actually have to be for this?
The higher the temperature, the higher the pressure must be. With rising tem-
perature, the required pressure increases approximately exponentially. At 150 °C,
a pressure of about 5 bar would be necessary. At a depth of 40 meters underwater,
such a pressure is reached on Earth. At 250 °C, at least 38 bar is already needed.
This corresponds to a diving depth of about 370 meters. Since Captain Kirk and
Mr. Spock were not crushed on Excalbia, the pressure there does not seem to be
quite as high. On the other hand, the internal pressure of the Excalbians’ bodies
cannot be much higher than the ambient pressure. Otherwise, they would simply
explode. Therefore, increased pressure is probably not the explanation for how the
Excalbians can be so hot.
Moreover, there is an upper limit for keeping liquids under increased pressure.
Every chemical substance has a so-called critical point. Above this point, no con-
densation can be achieved by increasing pressure. In the case of water, this criti-
cal point is at 374 °C and 221 bar. At the critical point, the steam is compressed
so much that it is no longer distinguishable from the liquid. Condensation, as we
know it, is therefore no longer possible. Beyond 374 °C, liquid water is definitely
out of the question, no matter how high the pressure is.
The second option would be to add salt to the water. Our blood contains a cer-
tain amount of salt. But that does not mean that the blood of the Excalbians could
not have a much higher salt concentration. Adding salt to water raises the boil-
ing point. Chemically, this can be explained by two effects. On the one hand, the
ions of the salt attract the molecules of the water. This hinders their transition to
the vapor phase. On the other hand, the salt lowers the concentration of the water.
Simply put, there are fewer water molecules on the surface, and thus fewer water
molecules can transition to the vapor phase. The apparent boiling point therefore
rises, and the blood would remain liquid at slightly higher temperatures.
The third option would be to use blood that is not based on water at all. Water
is not only suitable as the main component of blood and all cells because it is
liquid under Earth’s conditions. Water also has various properties that are very
important for biochemistry. But who knows exactly how Excalbian biochemis-
try works. Therefore, we can at least theoretically consider many substances that
could take on the role of water. Sulfur, for example, remains liquid up to well
over 400 °C. Perhaps liquid sulfur transports nutrients through the veins of the
Excalbians? Alternatively, chemistry offers a multitude of other substances that
would be liquid at the corresponding temperature. However, neither sulfur nor any
of these other substances offer the chemical properties that make water so excel-
lent for sustaining life.
Keeping the blood liquid is not the only challenge that high temperatures pose
for the Excalbians. Another problem is the temperature difference to the environ-
ment. Unless the environment is also very hot, they give off a lot of heat to the
14 1 The Chemistry of Extraterrestrial Life Forms

surroundings. We do not know exactly how the Excalbians normally live. When
they meet Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock, however, the ambient temperature does
not seem to be much above 20 °C. To avoid cooling down very quickly, they must
convert enormous amounts of energy carriers. What sounds like an excellent diet
program would, in practice, lead to starvation very quickly. This could be one of
the reasons why the Excalbians have rather shapeless, round bodies. The sphere
is the shape that has the least surface area for a given volume. Therefore, a spheri-
cal organism loses less heat to the environment than an organism of the same size
with a different shape. The closer the body approximates the spherical shape, the
less heat it gives off to the environment. The body shape of the Excalbians seems
to take this problem into account. Nevertheless, they would still have to chemi-
cally convert very large amounts of energy carriers to maintain their body temper-
ature. They would therefore rely on a very energy-rich energy carrier like alkanes.
A final problem is the stability of biochemical molecules. We have already
seen that silanes decompose at high temperatures. This is a problem for silicon-
based life forms. Ultimately, carbon-based life forms like us would have the same
problem. Above 40 °C, our proteins begin to denature. This is known from boiling
eggs. In this process, proteins coagulate, which corresponds to said denaturation.
They can no longer fulfill their biological function. The enzymes stop working and
eventually become irreparably damaged. As catalysts of biology, enzymes are sup-
posed to make desired reactions possible and provide an advantage over undesired
ones. Without functioning enzymes, many reactions may still occur in the organ-
ism. Unfortunately, they are not the ones the body actually needs. Therefore, the
rule is: an increased body temperature has its advantages. But only up to a certain
point. Then biochemistry begins to break down.
We have already mentioned thermophilic organisms above. There are appar-
ently ways to stabilize proteins so that they are stable at higher temperatures. How
exactly this works goes a bit too far here. If only because the biochemistry of sili-
con-based Excalbians is completely different anyway. In any case, they must bio-
chemically exert considerable effort to prevent essential molecules in their bodies
from decomposing.
However, high temperatures are not only disadvantageous. Extraterrestrial life
forms that are over a hundred degrees hot would have a number of advantages.
One thing that came to my mind is disinfection. Bacteria should hardly be a
problem for the Excalbians, as they would be roasted within seconds. However,
after thinking about it for a while, I realized that this circumstance only prevents
them from contracting an infectious disease when in contact with Captain Kirk.
Pathogens that have developed in the same environment as the Excalbians are
likely to have similar biochemistry and therefore cope quite well with the high
temperature.
A high temperature, however, has other advantages. One advantage would be
that diffusion is greatly accelerated. In organisms, many substances are simply
transported by diffusing. This means that the molecules move through another
1.2 Very Hot Extraterrestrials 15

substance without external influence. One can imagine it as all molecules moving.
In solids, they only oscillate around a predetermined place. In gases and liquids,
they move quite chaotically. The molecules of a substance dissolved in water are
therefore constantly being rammed by water molecules. As a result, the dissolved
molecules themselves start to move. This movement is initially chaotic and con-
stantly changes direction (namely whenever the next collision occurs). On balance,
however, it happens more often that a molecule moves from an area of high con-
centration to an area of low concentration. How could it ultimately be otherwise:
In an area of low concentration, there are hardly any molecules that can leave it.
Consequently, diffusion is driven by concentration differences. Substances thus
diffuse from areas of high concentration to areas of low concentration.
The speed of diffusion depends on three factors: the distance, the concentration
difference, and the diffusion coefficient.

1. The shorter the distance to be covered by diffusion, the faster it goes.

2. The higher the difference in concentration, the more effectively the molecules
are transported.
3. The higher the diffusion coefficient, the better diffusion works.

And the higher the temperature, the higher the diffusion coefficient. Simplified,
one can imagine that as the temperature rises, the molecules move faster. The
water molecules thus collide more often and more violently with the dissolved
molecules. Accordingly, other molecules are transported faster through the sub-
stance by diffusion. A fast transport of needed substances in the body is very help-
ful for many reasons. We will examine this in more detail later.
The most important advantage, however, is the reaction speed. Chemical reac-
tions proceed faster the higher the temperature. That is on of the reasons why
mammals maintain their body temperature at about 37 °C. This is the highest
possible temperature at which there are no problems due to the decomposition of
enzymes and other biomolecules. However, if an organism manages to prevent this
decomposition, it can further increase its body temperature. As a result, the chemi-
cal reactions inside it proceed significantly faster. Even if one enzyme or another
were to decompose, it might be bearable. After all, enzymes serve to accelerate
chemical reactions in the organism. Possibly, the Excalbians do not need enzymes
at all due to their high body temperature.8

8 Atleast the importance of enzymes for the mere acceleration of reactions is less important at
high body temperatures. However, by accelerating the desired reactions, enzymes also give them
an advantage over the undesired ones. In this way, enzymes contribute to ensuring that the right
reactions occur in the organism and indirectly suppress undesired reactions because they are too
slow compared to the desired ones.
16 1 The Chemistry of Extraterrestrial Life Forms

1.3 Life without a Body

Bodies can be a very annoying matter. You constantly have to be careful not to
bump and injure yourself. Bodies cannot withstand particularly high temperatures.
Otherwise, the proteins decompose. On the other hand, bodies do not like tem-
peratures that are too low. Otherwise, too many nutrients have to be burned, and
chemical reactions proceed more slowly. Bodies break down when they come into
contact with the wrong chemicals. Bodies get sick when they are infected with
viruses or bacteria. Bodies are subject to gravity. Bodies are prevented by solid
matter from passing through walls. All of this is extremely annoying and severely
limits the possibilities that one has as a physical being.
In the vast expanses of space, there are obviously—as we learn from Star Trek—
some species that have evolved to the point where bodies no longer constrain them.
Our heroes from Star Trek, for example, encounter a whole series of bodiless life
forms. Just think of the nebula-like creature that the Enterprise under Captain
Kirk encounters in the 18th episode of the 2nd TOS season, “Obsession,” or the
Companion that the away team of the Enterprise meets in the 2nd episode of the
2nd TOS season, “Metamorphosis,” not to mention the bodiless creature that feeds
on hate and therefore makes Kirk and his crew fight the Klingons in the 11th epi-
sode of the 3rd TOS season, “Day of the Dove.” Later Starfleet crews also encoun-
ter bodiless life forms. Think of Nagilum, with whom Captain Picard and the crew
of the Enterprise-D have to deal in the 2nd episode of the 2nd TNG season, “Where
Silence Has Lease,” or the bodiless being from the 21st episode of the 4th DS9 sea-
son, “The Muse,” which inspires Jake Sisko to achieve his highest literary accom-
plishments. Not to mention the photonic life forms that cause problems for the crew
of the Voyager in the 12th episode of the 5th VOY season, “Bride of Chaotica,” or
the Organians, who appear not only on the Enterprise under Captain Archer in the
11th episode of the 4th ENT season, “Observer Effect.”
All that is just a small selection. One could continue the list further. Bodiless
life forms apparently fascinate people even more than life forms based on silicon.
Reason enough to take a look at bodiless organisms. We won’t even start with life
forms that consist only of pure energy. That would be so far beyond anything we
know that we couldn’t conceive of it anyway. Therefore, we will briefly look at the
simplest basic form of bodiless organisms: Gaseous life forms.
What challenges would such a mist being face? What could its biochemistry
look like? In the 6th episode of the 1st VOY season, “The Cloud,”we learn that the
cosmic cloud, which turns out to be a life form, consists of hydrogen, helium, and
hydroxyl radicals. Additionally, there seem to be Omicron particles inside it.
What Omicron particles are cannot be answered according to the current state
of science. There are elementary particles designated with the Greek letter Omega.
However, an Omicron particle is not yet known. It can be assumed that these
Omicron particles play a significant role in actually making the cloud a life form.
Because the other substances are not really suitable for maintaining biochemistry.
Hydrogen and helium are indeed common in the universe. However, nothing can
be done chemically with helium. If you cannot form a bond with any other atom,
1.3 Life without a Body 17

you cannot contribute to biochemistry. This is the case with helium, and therefore
this element is completely useless for any biochemistry. Not just for the biochem-
istry we know on Earth. Hydrogen can indeed form chemical bonds. On the other
hand, it can only participate in them. It cannot function as a basic substance. As
we have already seen, hydrogen is monovalent. If you can only form a bond with
a single other atom, you can only form diatomic molecules (without the help of
another element like carbon). You still can’t really do anything with that.
A living being might be able to do a bit more with the hydroxyl radicals. The
term hydroxyl indicates that it is a compound of hydrogen and oxygen. Oxygen is
at least divalent. Apart from the fact that long chains of oxygen atoms are unstable,
no complex molecules can be built from them. The possibility of branching the
chain is missing. The fact that the hydroxyls are radicals also indicates that we
are dealing with “incomplete” molecules of oxygen and hydrogen. These are very
reactive. Therefore, they are called radicals. In simple terms, a bond in radicals
leads to nowhere. At this point, the molecule is very eager to form a bond because
it only has a half bond in a certain way. This is where the high reactivity comes
from. Normally, you want to keep radicals away from the body. Due to their high
reactivity, they easily “destroy” other molecules. For the extraterrestrial gas organ-
ism, reactions that these radicals carry out could theoretically provide energy.
However, a proper biochemistry still does not work with that. Quite apart from the
fact that the scanners of the Voyager obviously do not find significant amounts of
the corresponding reaction partners or products. If the conditions are such that the
hydroxyl radicals can react properly, then substances like water or hydrogen per-
oxide should be found in the cloud.9
It looks similar with the aforementioned Companion, a bodiless life form
that Captain Kirk encounters in the 2nd episode of the 2nd TOS season,
“Metamorphosis,” which consists only of energy and ionized hydrogen. The high
amount of energy might explain why the hydrogen is ionized. Nevertheless, the
Companion would still only be a cloud of hydrogen plasma10. It would thus be

9 Hydroxyl radicals each have a single electron on the oxygen atom. That is the bond “to
nowhere.” When two radicals meet, they link up so that the two “half bonds” unite into a “whole
bond.” In the case of two hydroxyl radicals, a molecule would form in which two oxygen atoms
are linked (this type of molecule is called peroxide). Since each oxygen atom still has a hydrogen
atom attached, the resulting compound would be hydrogen peroxide. Like all peroxides, how-
ever, this is rather unstable, so its decomposition would not be surprising. Among other things,
water would be produced during the decomposition.
10 The term plasma refers to a gas in which the atoms have given up at least some of their elec-
trons. In a certain way, the gas then consists of two types of particles: anions and electrons (plus
often a certain part of non-ionized atoms or molecules). The anions are the atomic nuclei that
remain when some of the electrons have been given up. In the extreme case, all electrons have
been given up. Then the atomic nucleus is only the atomic core. Since a hydrogen atom has only
one electron, hydrogen plasma necessarily consists of atomic nuclei. A hydrogen atom cannot
be partially ionized. A plasma can be created, for example, by high temperatures, but also by
radiation.
18 1 The Chemistry of Extraterrestrial Life Forms

quite electrically conductive. Nevertheless: That still does not result in biochem-
istry. To live, an organism is needed. It must be able to actively do something.
Otherwise, it is not a living organism. It needs molecules that perform functions
in the organism. For example, it needs proteins or similar substances to build
structures. Without any structure, no process can really take place. Even if these
structures are not proper organs, there should at least be formations like cells.
Without proteins (or something similar), such structures simply cannot be built.
Additionally, something like nucleic acids (i.e., a kind of DNA) is needed to store
genetic information. Otherwise, the organism could not reproduce and realistically
could not synthesize biomolecules either. All these are complex molecules. With
only hydrogen and maybe some oxygen, you can only be a cloud. Life does not
work that way.
A serious chemical challenge is also likely to be the reaction rate. For a chemi-
cal reaction to occur, the corresponding molecules must collide. This happens
more frequently the smaller the distances between the molecules are. Terrestrial
biochemistry takes place almost entirely in aqueous solution. In other words: in
a liquid. In liquids, the molecules are packed almost as closely as in a solid. The
arrangement is just a bit more chaotic. Due to the small distance, collisions occur
very frequently. Frequent collisions can often lead to reactions between the mol-
ecules. The reaction rate is correspondingly high. In a gas, the average distance
between the molecules is much larger. Therefore, collisions occur less frequently.
If the gas is also in space, then the pressure is very low. Accordingly, the average
distances between the molecules are very large (or better said from a molecular
perspective: gigantic). This, in turn, affects the frequency of collisions. Chemical
reactions therefore proceed slowly. A gaseous life form would therefore hardly be
able to quickly provide a lot of energy, for example. Thus, its performance is very
low.
Another problem for bodiless life forms would be the cohesion of the mole-
cules. What prevents the gas molecules from dispersing into space? Or, if the gas
life form is on a planet, what prevents it from mixing with the planet’s atmos-
phere? To keep their components together, cells of organisms on Earth are sur-
rounded by membranes. However, membranes are solid structures. Although they
are only micrometers thick and highly deformable, they may not seem particu-
larly solid to us. Nonetheless, a membrane is a solid. This solid limits the body
of a biological organism. Thanks to cell membranes, our cells are held together.
As a result, the cell components that are supposed to stay together actually stay
together. The fascination of bodiless life forms may lie in the fact that they do not
have a limited body. But if they simply continue to disperse into the environment,
they cannot survive for long. They simply dissolve—a notion that, on the other
hand, is not particularly fascinating.
A way out of this dilemma could be gravity. At least a huge cosmic nebula
like the one just discussed could simply be held together by its own gravity. If
the nebula being is really several astronomical units large and its density is not
too low, then it has a certain mass. Mass, in turn, leads to attraction in the form of
gravity. This gravitational field could hold the nebula being together. Curiously,
1.4 Crossing the Threshold 19

however, this nebula being is the only bodiless life form in Star Trek that seems
to possess something like a cell membrane. The crew of the Voyager only notices
this after they have damaged it by simply flying through it, leaving a large hole
in it. Fortunately for the nebula being, this hole is caused by a Starfleet ship. The
Voyager does not simply fly on. First, a way is found to “sew” the wound with a
novel form of space surgery.

1.4 Crossing the Threshold

An episode that raises scientific questions like few others is the 15th episode of
the 2nd VOY season. It bears the title: „Threshold“. On its journey home from
the Delta Quadrant, the Voyager discovered a completely new form of dilithium.
What dilithium actually is would undoubtedly be an incredibly exciting question
from a chemical perspective. After all, it is mentioned countless times in Star Trek
and plays a crucial role in the warp drive. Obviously, it cannot simply be synthe-
sized but must be mined on foreign planets. If such synthesis is still not possible in
the 24th century, it suggests that dilithium is an (as yet unknown to us) chemical
element. How to imagine a new, previously unknown form of a known chemical
element is another exciting question. A new isotope seems to be the only explana-
tion that makes sense according to current knowledge. Then the atomic nucleus of
this new form of dilithium would simply contain a few more or less neutrons. Its
chemical properties would remain unchanged, but some physical properties could
differ significantly.11
This new form of dilithium apparently possesses quite remarkable physi-
cal properties, as it enables the construction of a transwarp drive. The warp drive
allows Starfleet ships to travel faster than light. Current human research and devel-
opment are still far from this. According to the current state of knowledge, the the-
ory of relativity tells us that this is not so easily possible. In the future, however,
this problem will somehow be solved, allowing travel to foreign planets (other-
wise, we would be dealing with a serious error in Star Trek, and we really want to
dismiss that thought). For the Voyager, however, warp speed is still too slow. It is
at the other end of the galaxy and would take 70 years to return to Earth even at
the highest speed its warp drive can provide. The discovery of the foundations for
transwarp travel is therefore of particular interest to the Voyager crew. Transwarp
means infinite speed. One could occupy any point in the universe simultaneously

11 We will come back to the topic of isotopes. Theoretically, one could also imagine that the new
form of dilithium involves isomers. Isomerism is actually a term that plays a major role in chem-
istry but has nothing to do with the properties of the atoms themselves, rather with their arrange-
ment in the molecule. However, the term isomers is also used in nuclear physics and refers to
atomic nuclei that do not differ in the number of protons or neutrons but have different energy
levels. Energetically excited states of atomic nuclei, even if they are very long-lived, usually
revert to the ground state within nanoseconds. Gamma radiation is released in the process. But
perhaps there is a stable isomer of dilithium in the Delta Quadrant.
20 1 The Chemistry of Extraterrestrial Life Forms

or be home in the blink of an eye. No wonder, then, that every effort is made to
develop the corresponding technology, which is achieved in the remarkably short
time of just one month.
The possibility of infinite speed is certainly very fascinating from a physical
standpoint, but it will not concern us further here. We also do not want to fur-
ther discuss the question of how the human sensory apparatus is supposed to take
in impressions from the entire universe at once and how the brain is supposed to
process them. What happens to the pilot of the first transwarp flight is much more
exciting biochemically.
Tom Paris is allowed to pilot the shuttle Cochrane, contrary to the medical
advice of the ship’s doctor. Although he loses consciousness during the flight, he
seems to have otherwise coped well with the journey through the entire universe.
At least as far as the first impression goes. However, not long after his return, his
body begins to change at a rapid pace. He develops an allergy to water and can no
longer breathe normal air. To still enable Tom Paris to breathe, the doctor replaces
the oxygen in a small part of the sickbay with acidichloride.
The question of what kind of substance this is certainly raises puzzles. The word
component “dichloride” suggests that the corresponding molecule contains two
chlorine atoms. These are located on a molecular framework that is further speci-
fied by the syllable “aci-”. According to the IUPAC rules for the nomenclature of
chemical compounds, this component of the molecule cannot be identified. Some
may alternatively assign the letter “d” to the word component “aci”. Then one can
read the first part of the word as “acid”. However, the question arises as to what
the “i” between “acid” and “chloride” is about. If one were to insert a second “d”
into the word, it would result in a molecule based on some acid and two chlorine
atoms. There are indeed acids that contain two chlorine atoms in the molecule (for
example: dichloroacetic acid, which is used as a solvent and starting material for
the synthesis of some other substances). What exactly the doctor uses to enable the
mutating Tom Paris to breathe remains unclear.
The rapid changes that Tom Paris’s body undergoes are eventually explained
by the doctor as a natural process. Apparently, the lieutenant is undergoing normal
evolutionary advancement. This is quite remarkable if one understands what evo-
lution actually is. The theory of evolution states that organisms adapt to changed
living conditions over time. The genetic information that leads to physical traits
best suited to the environment prevails. There are two aspects to consider here.
The first point is that it is about adaptation to changed living conditions.
Evolution does not aim towards a “higher” life form. Greater body size or intel-
ligence can certainly prevail. But they do not have to. It depends on the environ-
ment what is “higher”. If this changes, new evolutionary processes set in that
lead in a different direction. The development from tiny single-celled organisms
to huge dinosaurs had definite advantages. That is why it happened in the past.
However, if the environmental conditions change at some point, the seemingly
“higher life form” with its large body size suddenly becomes disadvantaged and
suffers the same fate as the dinosaurs once did, or later the mammoth and other
prehistoric giants. Therefore, there is no “higher” development in evolution, only
1.4 Crossing the Threshold 21

“better adapted”.12 Depending on the environment in which the organisms live, the
best adaptation can be something entirely different. Accordingly, there is no pre-
determined direction in which evolutionary development would proceed. This is
somewhat hinted at the end of the episode. After Tom Paris overpowers Captain
Janeway and undertakes a second transwarp flight with her, the two eventually
strand on an alien planet. There they find themselves in a swampy jungle, where
they do not develop into mega-intelligent superhumans. Instead, they become large
amphibians that give birth to their young in an earth hole. A swampy jungle pro-
vides entirely different conditions than a highly technological spaceship. Optimal
adaptation leads to a completely different result there.
The second point is the speed of evolution. Tom Paris transforms into a
life form that differs greatly from conventional humanoids within a few days.
Although bacteria can make adaptations to changed environmental conditions
through evolutionary processes within remarkably short periods, there is a sig-
nificant difference. The generation time of bacteria can be significantly less than
an hour under certain circumstances. A few days then already constitute several
generations. In contrast, Tom Paris undergoes exactly zero generational changes in
these few days. Therefore, no evolution can take place.
Evolution is based on those who reproduce more being better adapted to the
given environmental conditions.13 Those who do not (or less) reproduce because
they, for example, do not survive, will have their genes less widely spread in future
generations. Therefore, the gene pool of a population approaches the genome of
those individuals who reproduce the most. The resulting changes in genetically
determined traits are called evolution. Without reproduction, there is consequently
no evolutionary development. An individual cannot therefore undergo evolution
within its own lifespan.
So what happens to Tom Paris? It clearly cannot be a classic evolution. For one,
it can only be influenced to a limited extent (for example, by radioactivity, because
it causes more mutations and consequently greater changes per generation, or by
drastically changed environmental conditions, because a larger part of the popula-
tion dies and only those who can better cope with these conditions due to their
genetic constitution are left to reproduce). On the other hand, it is ultimately only

12 Darwin’s famous formulation “survival of the fittest” accordingly does not mean the selection
(i.e., the superiority) of the strongest, but of the best adapted. The English word “fit” at this point
has nothing to do with fitness in the sense of physical strength, but comes from “to fit” (to suit).
If size and strength are what is best under the given environmental conditions, then the largest
and strongest will prevail. If the conditions are different, then perhaps the smallest will prevail.
Because under changed conditions, e.g., with food scarcity, size may be a real disadvantage
because it entails a large need for food.
13 Here lies a second, widespread misunderstanding about evolution. It is not primarily about sur-

viving oneself, but about reproducing. Survival is important insofar as it is, in a way, a prerequi-
site for successful reproduction. Someone who has ten offspring but ultimately dies quite early is
still evolutionarily more successful than someone who lives to an old age but has only one or two
(surviving) offspring.
22 1 The Chemistry of Extraterrestrial Life Forms

about a single individual and not a sequence of generations. This question is quite
interesting biochemically.
Somehow, the journey at infinite speed seems to have triggered a process that
permanently rewrites Tom’s genetic material. Several possible causes that induce
mutations are already known today. Radioactive radiation, for example, can lead
to mutations. Or a whole range of chemical substances. Such substances are called
mutagens. Examples of such mutagens are phenol or benzene. Since not even the
medicine of the 24th century really understood this consequence of the transwarp
flight, it is naturally difficult for us to say what was actually going on. But we can
at least try to understand the problem itself.
For this, we first need to realize how DNA molecules are actually dis-
tributed in the body. The genetic material of a human is not stored in a central
organ. Therefore, you cannot simply change it in this place and thereby change
the genome of the entire human. Instead, there are multiple copies of the genetic
information. And we are not talking about one or two backup copies here. The
DNA molecules with the genetic information of a human are present in approxi-
mately 100 trillion copies. This is how many cells the body of an adult human
consists of (plus or minus a few tens of trillions). In each of these cells (more pre-
cisely: in the respective cell nucleus) there is a copy of the DNA molecule. So if
the transwarp flight triggers a change in a DNA molecule in one of these cells,
it has more or less no impact. A changed genome in a single cell is completely
insignificant. Due to the changed DNA, this cell may produce slightly different
proteins. Its biochemistry is therefore no longer the same. Measured against the
total number of body cells, however, this is completely irrelevant. It only becomes
relevant if the change leads to the cell multiplying very strongly. The cell then
becomes the origin of a tumor. However, the mutation of a single cell cannot cause
significant changes in the appearance or abilities of a human.
The mutation would therefore have to affect very many cells simultaneously.
For a human to experience a real transformation, essentially every cell in the
body would have to mutate. And here lies the real challenge: Why should they all
mutate in the same way? Actually, each cell would mutate in a different way. Let’s
take a look at the biochemical basics of mutations.
Mutations usually occur when an error happens while copying DNA. DNA is
constantly being copied. Whenever a cell divides, it has to double its DNA to pass
the full genetic information to the daughter cell. For this, the genetic information
stored in the DNA molecule is essentially “transcribed” once. DNA molecules
are known to form the famous double helix. Two molecular strands are twisted
around each other. Each of these strands consists—simply put—of phosphoric
acid molecules and deoxyribose molecules, which are alternately linked together.
This creates a long chain. Attached to each deoxyribose molecule is a nucleobase.
There are four different ones: adenine, guanine, thymine, and cytosine.14 The two

14 Atleast this is the case with DNA. In RNA, which is used to convert genetic information into
proteins, uracil is used instead of thymine. The two molecules are quite similar chemically.
Thymine merely has an additional methyl group.
1.4 Crossing the Threshold 23

molecular strands of the double helix are not actually connected to form a single
molecule. There is no covalent bond between them, but only very many hydrogen
bonds. However, this does not need to concern us further.
The two strands of the double helix complement each other. This does not
mean that they are identical. In a way, the counterpart is always found in the other
strand. If there is an adenine molecule in one strand, there is a thymine molecule
at the corresponding position in the other strand. If there is a guanine molecule
in one strand, there is a cytosine molecule on the opposite side. There is always
an adenine-thymine or guanine-cytosine pairing. When DNA is copied, the double
helix is separated, and the appropriate nucleobases (along with the deoxyribose
and phosphoric acid residue) attach to each strand: always adenine and thymine
together and guanine and cytosine together. In this way, DNA molecules can dou-
ble. The result is two identical molecules that exactly match the original molecule.
A mutation occurs when a “transcription error” happens. There can be many
causes for this. Radioactive radiation, for example, can damage individual nucle-
obase molecules. As a result, they are overlooked during transcription. Mutagenic
substances can alternatively insert themselves during transcription. This can also
lead to a transcription error. Substances that are chemically very similar to nucle-
obases can be mistakenly read along. In all these cases, the copy is no longer
identical to the template. Such a mutation usually has no significant effects. If the
consequence is not uncontrolled proliferation (cancer), it is essentially irrelevant.
In the worst case, the cell dies. With 100 trillion cells, this hardly matters to the
body. Only if the mutation affects a germ cell (egg or sperm), does the mutation
become relevant. Because then it can be passed on to the offspring. In the off-
spring, the mutation then appears in all cells of the body because they all origi-
nated from the parental germ cells. In this case, the mutation can influence the
further development of evolution. However, most mutations should not be overes-
timated. Each person differs on average by about 50 mutations from their parents
(in other words: we are all mutants!). Given the enormous extent of the human
genome, this usually hardly matters. Only very few mutations actually cause a sig-
nificant change in the characteristics of the offspring.
Now back to Tom Paris. His body is mutating, which may be caused by some
kind of radiation during the transwarp flight. However, three things are noticeable
in this process:

1. Why does the process only start after quite a while?

2. Why does the process proceed in an “evolutionarily directed” manner?
3. Why does it proceed the same way in all cells?

I have no answer to question 1. Radiation can hardly explain it. At most, a chemi-
cal that acts with a delay because, for example, it first has to penetrate the cell
nuclei, which takes some time, might be a reason. But how could he have been
administered this chemical during the transwarp flight? We have already discussed
question 2 above. We understand the problem with question 3 when we recall what
we have just learned about mutations. Mutations are random events. If two cells
24 1 The Chemistry of Extraterrestrial Life Forms

mutate, then two different daughter cells result. In the two cells, it is highly likely
that completely different genes have mutated. And even if they were the same
genes, it is still likely a different mutation of the same gene. And if 100 trillion
cells mutate, then 100 trillion different daughter cells result. Therefore, the DNA
of a human in all his cells cannot be rewritten by mutation. This is only possi-
ble during generational change. Children can have DNA that differs (slightly)
from that of their parents as a result of mutations. If Tom Paris mutates as a whole
after his transwarp flight, then we are dealing with a biochemical effect that is at
least very unusual and cannot be explained with today’s biochemical knowledge.
Perhaps science in the 24th century will eventually find an explanation for it. Until
then, we can continue to speculate about it.
Hydrogen and the Infinite Vastness
2

2.1 Breathing Hydrogen

In the 6th episode of the 2nd DS9 season, “The ‘Melora’ Problem”, a romance
begins to develop. Dr. Julian Bashir falls in love (once again). A new crew mem-
ber arrives on the space station: the Elaysian Ensign Melora Pazlar. The Elaysians
come from a planet that seems to be much smaller than Earth, as the gravity is sig-
nificantly lower than on other Class-M planets.1
If we recall the film footage from the late 1960s and early 1970s, the first Earth
astronauts hopped around quite cheerfully on the Moon. Despite bulky space-
suits, they made impressive jumps on the lunar surface. This is because they had
the muscles and skeleton of a species that evolved on Earth. And on Earth’s sur-
face, there is six times the gravity compared to the Moon. The Moon’s gravity
can hardly hold a human to the ground. The human body is almost overpowered
for such an environment. Conversely, it is different for Elaysians. The Elaysians
evolved on a planet with very low gravity. They are much better adapted to such
an environment and can move more agilely there than most humanoids. However,
on a Bajoran space station like Deep Space Nine, the artificial gravity is set to be
similar to that on most Class-M planets. Its value is very similar to Earth’s. As a
result, the Elaysian Melora is confined to a wheelchair when she wants to move in
the world of other humanoids.

1 Alternatively,it is also conceivable that the density of the planet is significantly lower than that
of Earth. The average density of Earth is about 5.5 t per cubic meter. A planet that is not pri-
marily composed of iron would likely have a significant radiation problem, as it would lack the
magnetic field to protect it from cosmic radiation. On the other hand, its density could be signifi-
cantly lower. The density of quartz, which makes up a large part of Earth’s outer crust, is only
about 2.7 t per cubic meter. A quartz planet could theoretically be the same size as Earth but still
have lower gravity.

25
26 2 Hydrogen and the Infinite Vastness

Dr. Bashir naturally tries to find a medical solution to this problem and devel-
ops a therapy that would allow Melora to adapt to our gravity. The catch: for medi-
cal reasons, she would then no longer be able to return to her world. The romance
suffers from a classic long-distance relationship problem despite the actual physi-
cal proximity: the two lovers live in two different worlds, quite literally. Neither
can really live reasonably in the other’s world permanently. This naturally strains a
relationship and becomes one of the main themes of the episode.
When Melora is on an exploratory flight with Jadzia Dax aboard the shuttle
USS Orinoco in the Gamma Quadrant, the two women discuss exactly this prob-
lem of the relationship between Melora and Julian. To show that a relationship can
work even across a difficult interspecies boundary, Dax tells her about a couple
she once knew: one of the partners was a normal, oxygen-breathing humanoid.
The second partner was a hydrogen-breathing Lothra. So, the two were a couple
that couldn’t even stay in the same room for long periods.2
The question of how to imagine hydrogen-breathing organisms becomes really
exciting from a chemical perspective. Let’s start by looking at the oxygen breath-
ers we know, including us humans. Why do we actually breathe? It is primarily a
question of efficiency. All animal life forms live by chemically converting energy-
rich nutrients like sugar into lower-energy waste products. To do this, one does
not necessarily have to breathe. Many microorganisms are capable of anaerobic
living (the human body is also limitedly capable of this in situations of oxygen
deficiency during intense physical exertion). One waste product that results from
such anaerobic conversion is ethanol (also known as ethyl alcohol). This alcohol
is not only very popular as a component of countless beverages. It is also used as
a fuel.3 If something can be used as a fuel, it must contain a lot of energy. In other
words: if an organism converts sugar anaerobically into alcohol, much of the origi-
nal energy is still in the waste product alcohol (which is biochemically a waste
product). This portion of the energy is then not available for the organism’s energy
needs. This is where breathing comes into play.
A breathing organism does not convert sugars, fats, and the like into alcohol,
but into water and carbon dioxide. This reaction is called oxidation. The term
oxidation originates from the French chemist Antoine Laurent de Lavoisier. He

2 Jadzia reports that the two could spend up to forty minutes in the same room thanks to intensive
training. For a species other than humans, this might be realistic. However, an issue could be
explosion protection. Even if neither of them breathes in and out in the other’s atmosphere—to
“breathe” there is a risk of explosion. If they want to talk, they inevitably have to exhale. This
creates a mixture of air and hydrogen, also known as oxyhydrogen gas. Not to mention that the
atmospheres would mix when entering the room. The explosion limits of hydrogen are much
broader than those of other flammable gases. This means that even relatively low hydrogen con-
centrations in the air (or oxygen concentrations in hydrogen) are explosive. So, one can only
hope that the two are non-smokers (although this vice does not seem to be very widespread in the
future of Star Trek anyway).
3 Often,not pure ethanol is used, but gasoline is mixed with a certain percentage of biologically
derived ethanol. E10, for example, means that it is a gasoline with 10% ethanol content.
2.1 Breathing Hydrogen 27

originally used it to refer only to the reaction of any substance with oxygen.4 Over
time, chemists have found that there are many reactions very similar to reactions
with oxygen. These reactions were therefore included in the term oxidation. As a
modern definition of the term oxidation, it was finally established that oxidation is
a reaction in which electrons are given up.
When iron, for example, oxidizes, the iron atoms each give up two (and some-
times even three) electrons and become positively charged iron ions. The oxy-
gen takes up these electrons and forms negatively charged oxygen ions (these are
called oxide ions). The iron oxide formed during oxidation is held together by the
opposite charges of the iron and oxide ions. It works somewhat more complexly,
but fundamentally the same, when carbon is oxidized by oxygen. The carbon atom
gives up a total of four electrons. However, these do not completely transfer to the
oxygen atoms, so no charged ions are formed. Simply put, the carbon’s electrons
are now located between the carbon and the oxygen atom.5 In this way, one carbon
atom and two oxygen atoms are each connected to form a carbon dioxide mol-
ecule. As mentioned, the same type of reaction works not only with oxygen. The
more or less same reaction can also be carried out with the elements fluorine, chlo-
rine, or bromine, for example. All these substances can act as so-called oxidizing
agents. An oxidizing agent is a substance that takes up the electrons given off by
the substance being oxidized. The oxidizing agent itself is not oxidized but expe-
riences the exact opposite: it is reduced (or expressed as a noun: it undergoes a
reduction). It takes up electrons (the term reduction or reduce will become impor-
tant later).
To summarize: When a humanoid breathes, they inhale oxygen-rich air. The
oxygen then oxidizes various organic compounds in the body. It takes up electrons
from these. Energy is released in the process. Part of this energy is released in the
form of heat (which is why we get warm when we move, because more oxida-
tion occurs in the body). The rest of the energy is converted into another chemical
form, which we do not need to concern ourselves with at this point, and is used for
all sorts of functions (e.g., muscle contraction).
However, we have just seen that oxidation is not necessarily just a reaction with
oxygen, but generally a reaction with a substance that takes up electrons. This
allows us to start thinking about whether an organism could also breathe some-
thing other than oxygen-containing air. For an inhaled substance, it would be
helpful if it were a gas. This actually narrows our selection quite a bit. We need
a substance whose boiling point is lower than the ambient temperature in which

4 This is also where the term oxidation comes from. It is derived from the word Oxygenium,
which is the Latinized form of a word actually composed of ancient Greek elements meaning
“acid-forming” and ultimately nothing other than the Latin designation for oxygen.
5 This process is also referred to as atomic bonding or covalent bonding. The negative charge

of the electrons between the positive atomic nuclei is attracted by these two, so the atoms are
bonded together.
28 2 Hydrogen and the Infinite Vastness

our organisms live.6 A substance that meets this condition would be, for example,
chlorine. Anyone who paid a bit of attention in chemistry or history class7 knows
that chlorine is quite toxic.
But why is chlorine so toxic? Quite simply: Because it is a rather strong oxidiz-
ing agent. Chlorine loves to take electrons from other substances. Unfortunately,
it usually does this uncontrollably and causes quite a bit of damage. However,
if extraterrestrial organisms were to develop on a planet with a chlorine-con-
taining atmosphere, it is conceivable that they would develop a biochemistry in
which these undesirable reactions do not occur (or, if they do occur, are quickly
countered by the organism’s biochemical countermeasures). If chlorine is such a
good oxidizing agent, then one could imagine that it could be used specifically
for the oxidation of organic compounds in an organism. Instead of carbon diox-
ide (CO2), tetrachloromethane (CCl4) would then be produced. Its boiling point is
about 77 °C. It could not be exhaled as easily as we exhale carbon dioxide. But it
is not said that an organism must exhale all the products of oxidation that it uses
for energy provision. We humans do not do that either. While we exhale the carbon
dioxide, we excrete most of the water that is also formed with urine. An extrater-
restrial, chlorine-breathing creature could do the same with its tetrachloromethane.
Chlor itself tends to oxidize other things a bit too strongly. Therefore, living
beings would indeed have a hard time in a highly chlorinated atmosphere—even
if they had originated on a corresponding planet and were adapted to it. But it
doesn’t necessarily have to be chlorine. Its neighbor below it in the periodic table
of elements is, for example, bromine. It has very similar chemical properties but
is not quite as reactive. Pure bromine would be liquid at our atmospheric pres-
sure and room temperature. However, on another planets, a slightly lower pressure
and a slightly higher temperature could prevail, and the bromine would evaporate.
Moreover, it would not necessarily need to be pure bromine in the atmosphere.8
Together with another, non-reactive gas, a certain proportion of bromine could
thus remain in the atmosphere, even though the boiling point is below.9 A certain
dilution of bromine vapors by another gas could also be helpful because the still
quite reactive bromine would thus cause less damage to the cells of living beings.
So we can conclude: Extraterrestrial organisms would not necessarily have
to breathe an oxygen-containing atmosphere. There would be a number of other

6 Ideally,the boiling point should be significantly below the ambient temperature. It would be
very unpleasant if the atmosphere started to condense just because there was a slightly colder day
on the planet.
7 Chlorine was one of the many poison gases used in World War I to kill large numbers of people.

8 The Earth’s atmosphere, which we breathe, also consists of just a little over one-fifth oxygen.
That is not only sufficient. It is even good because pure oxygen would again be too strong an oxi-
dizing agent and would cause damage in the body.
9 Just think of the evaporation of water. At 20 °C, water evaporates, although its boiling point is

much higher, because the water vapor is diluted by the air, which simulates a lower pressure for
the water.
2.1 Breathing Hydrogen 29

gases that could chemically be considered as alternatives, even if they would be

deadly for life forms that originated on Earth.
What about the hydrogen that the Lothra breathe? Could there not be organisms
somewhere in the universe that inhale hydrogen and use it to oxidize organic com-
pounds? The answer is a clear no. Because hydrogen is not suitable as an oxidiz-
ing agent. Hydrogen is rather a reducing agent. We remember: Reduction was the
reverse of oxidation. When a substance is reduced, it gains electrons.10 Hydrogen
can provide electrons for this. What hydrogen molecules, on the other hand, can-
not easily do is accept electrons. Breathing hydrogen to oxidize organic (or even
inorganic) substances simply does not work. A hydrogen-containing atmosphere
is, after all, not an oxidizing but a reducing atmosphere.
So is Star Trek telling us nonsense at this point? Would the Lothra actually suf-
focate miserably? After all, one can inhale hydrogen without any immediate dam-
age. But hydrogen cannot support the biochemical process of oxidation, which is
the purpose of respiration. However, Jadzia Dax never said what the biochemis-
try of the Lothra actually does with the hydrogen. Realistically, the function of
respiration can only lie in the energy supply of the body. Could this not also be
achieved through reduction?
In principle, one might initially assume that the chances for this are not good.
After all, reduction is the reverse of oxidation. The first law of thermodynamics
tells us that energy is conserved. This means that the amount of energy released
(usually as heat) in a reaction corresponds to the difference in energy content
between the reactants and the products. Simplified, one can imagine it like this:
If the reactants have an energy content of 100 kilojoules and the products only
70 kilojoules, then 30 kilojoules of heat must be released.11 The analogous applies
to the reverse path. If the reverse reaction is carried out to obtain the reactants
again, then in our case, 30 kilojoules of energy must be supplied.
Biochemistry uses oxidation reactions for energy provision because they
usually release a lot of energy. Conversely, this means that the same amount of
energy would have to be put back into the reaction during their reversal (reduc-
tion). For a living being that wants to gain energy, this would be a highly disad-
vantageous approach. At least if it were to reverse the oxidation reactions that our

10 Atfirst glance, it may seem paradoxical that a process in which something is gained is called
reduction. After all, to reduce means to decrease, not to increase. It becomes somewhat more
understandable when one thinks of the history of the term. Reduction was originally understood
(analogous to oxidation) as the removal of oxygen. In doing so, the mass of the reduced sub-
stance actually decreases.
11 Thisnotion is somewhat simplified because, strictly speaking, one cannot say that a substance
contains this specific amount of energy. Energy has no zero point. Therefore, only energy differ-
ences can be specified. In practice, one helps oneself by indicating the energy of a chemical com-
pound as the difference to the energy of the elements from which it is composed.
30 2 Hydrogen and the Infinite Vastness

biochemistry uses for energy production. But elemental hydrogen does not appear
in these reactions at all.12
What if our extraterrestrial organism did not simply release oxygen as elemen-
tal oxygen, but in combination with hydrogen? As a product of oxygen and hydro-
gen, water would be formed. In this case, we would couple the reduction reaction
(which requires energy input) with the oxidation of hydrogen to water. It is well
known that a lot of energy is released during the reaction of hydrogen with oxy-
gen. In other words: hydrogen burns very well.13 If this oxidation of hydrogen is
now coupled with the reduction of an oxygen-containing organic compound, the
energy requirement of the reduction can not only be compensated but even over-
compensated. Since free, elemental hydrogen never appears in this reaction, there
is no risk of explosion.
A hydrogen-breathing organism could use secondary hydroxyl groups as food,
for example (this is a combination of an oxygen atom and a single hydrogen atom
attached to the side of a chain of carbon atoms). Such secondary hydroxyl groups
are abundant in all sugars. So, the Lothra could eat the same things we do, even if
they breathe something different. The hydroxyl group could be cleaved off with
hydrogen. What remains is a hydrocarbon, and water would be formed. Per mole14
of hydroxyl groups, almost 90 kilojoules of energy would be released in the form
of heat. The Lothra could use this energy.
Even though the formation of water usually releases a lot of energy, such reac-
tions have a disadvantage. The oxygen must not be present as an elemental gas
but must always be bound to an organic molecule (for example, in the form of a
hydroxyl group). Extracting the oxygen from there requires a considerable por-
tion of the energy that the hydrogen-breathing organism actually wants to use. Is
there not an alternative that does not involve oxygen? What if the hydrogen did

12 Inour biochemistry, hydrogen indeed plays a very large role. However, it does not do so as
elemental hydrogen, that is, as an H2 molecule consisting of only two hydrogen atoms. Rather,
hydrogen is part of larger molecules that, in addition to hydrogen, are primarily composed of
carbon and usually oxygen.
13 A popular example of this is the well-known image of the burning airship Hindenburg. The
Hindenburg was filled with hydrogen instead of helium when it crashed in 1937. The photo of
this disaster is very famous and still shapes the perception of hydrogen today. In fact, the prob-
lem was not the hydrogen itself, but the coating of the balloon fabric, which was supposed to
prevent the hydrogen from slowly escaping. This coating could be ignited by static electricity
and was also highly flammable. When the Nazi Propaganda Ministry had to explain the disaster,
they decided not to publicly blame German engineering errors. Instead, they preferred to shift the
responsibility to the American trade embargo, which prevented helium from being available in
Germany, forcing the use of hydrogen. This decision still affects the public perception of hydro-
gen today.
14 Since atoms and molecules are very small, individual atoms or molecules are not counted in
chemistry; instead, 6022 · 1023 are grouped together into one mole (this is a number with 24 dig-
its). However, this is still not a significant amount of mass. One mole of water weighs just 18 g
or, expressed as a volume, 18 milliliters.
2.1 Breathing Hydrogen 31

not extract oxygen from the molecules of the food but instead bonded with them
directly?
Sugars and other carbohydrates are not suitable as starting materials for such a
reaction, but there is a candidate in our food: fats. Not all fats, but at least the so-
called unsaturated fats. Fat molecules consist of two parts. The base is a glycerol
molecule. Three fatty acids are bound to this. There are many types of these fatty
acids. However, the basic structure is always the same. At one end of the fatty acid
is a so-called carboxyl group. This makes the fatty acid an acid and forms the con-
nection to the glycerol. The rest of the fatty acid is a chain of carbon atoms. Often,
14, 16, or 18 carbon atoms are lined up in a row. However, fatty acids differ not
only in the length of the chain (i.e., the number of carbon atoms). Strictly speak-
ing, the chain does not consist only of carbon atoms linked together but of carbon
atoms each with two hydrogen atoms attached (or three hydrogen atoms at the last
carbon atom of the chain). This is the structure of a saturated fatty acid. In addition
to saturated fatty acids, there are unsaturated fatty acids. In these unsaturated fatty
acids, there are pairs of two adjacent carbon atoms, each with only one hydro-
gen atom attached. Simplified, one could say that they are missing two hydrogen
atoms (which corresponds exactly to one hydrogen molecule).15 An unsaturated
fatty acid can now react with hydrogen and thereby become a saturated fatty
acid.16 This reaction is also energetically advantageous, so that about 125 kilo-
joules of heat are released per mole of hydrogen that reacts with an unsaturated
fatty acid. This energy could also be used by a hydrogen-breathing organism to
live on.

A few more details

The heat released during a reaction is equivalent to the reaction enthalpy.

However, reaction enthalpy alone does not determine whether and how a reac-
tion proceeds. There is another factor involved, which is called entropy.
Entropy is a somewhat difficult to understand but very important concept
from a discipline called thermodynamics. Entropy is sometimes referred to as
a measure of disorder. Let’s simply imagine hydrogen. It is a gas, and in a gas,
the individual molecules can move more or less freely. This is a very chaotic
state, and the entropy of a gas is correspondingly very high. A fatty acid is,
depending on the type of fatty acid, solid or liquid. In a liquid, the molecules
can move significantly less freely. The entropy is correspondingly lower. In a
solid, finally, the molecules are largely fixed to a specific location in the solid.
They can, depending on the temperature, oscillate a bit around this location, but

15 For this, the bond between the two carbon atoms is virtually doubled. This is why it is also
called a double bond.
16 The principle has been known for a long time. It has been applied for over 150 years, and the
product is called margarine. Margarine is nothing more than fat in which all unsaturated fatty
acids have been converted to saturated ones. This makes the fat more durable.
32 2 Hydrogen and the Infinite Vastness

by and large, they do not have much room to move. A solid is therefore very
ordered on a molecular level, and its entropy is low.
An important natural law, the second law of thermodynamics, states that
entropy cannot decrease. When hydrogen reacts with an unsaturated fatty acid
to form a saturated fatty acid, the entropy initially decreases. From a gas-phase
molecule with high entropy and a liquid-phase molecule, a liquid-phase mol-
ecule is formed. Although the entropy of the resulting liquid-phase molecule
(the saturated fatty acid) is somewhat higher than that of the original liquid-
phase molecule (the unsaturated fatty acid), this small increase in entropy is not
enough to compensate for the decrease in entropy due to the loss of the gas-
phase molecule (the hydrogen). On balance, the entropy therefore decreases. So
why can the hydrogen uptake still occur?
The heat released increases the entropy in the surroundings because the
molecules move faster and thus more chaotically. This compensates for the
decrease in entropy due to the hydrogen uptake and thus enables the reaction.
Biochemistry does not use reaction enthalpy alone but rather a reaction
enthalpy corrected for the entropy effect, the so-called free reaction enthalpy
(the free enthalpy G combines the information about the enthalpy H and the
entropy S: G = H - T · S, where T denotes the temperature). In the case of
the saturation of a fatty acid by hydrogen, only about 85 kilojoules of usable
energy remain from the 125 kilojoules of reaction enthalpy. ◄

Unfortunately, we cannot say exactly what kind of reaction the hydrogen-breath-

ing Lothra use to gain energy. Jadzia Dax’s account does not go into enough detail
for that. What we can note, however, is that it is indeed possible to breathe hydro-
gen and live off it. However, not for us humans and most other humanoids who
breathe oxygen in Star Trek. A hydrogen-breathing life form would need a com-
pletely different biochemistry than we know. Chemically, it would be possible, and
who knows what kinds of different life forms have developed in the vast expanses
of space.

Excursus

Can a planet even hold a hydrogen atmosphere?

An interesting question arises in connection with hydrogen-breathing life
forms. Can the planet on which they develop hold its hydrogen atmosphere?
The Earth’s atmosphere is attracted by the Earth’s gravity. Mars also had a
proper atmosphere a long time ago. However, it has now become very thin. The
problem is that Mars is smaller, and the gravity it exerts is therefore weaker. As
a result, Mars’s atmosphere has dissipated into space over time (a fate that will
sooner or later also befall Melora’s planet, the home of the Elaysians).
If the atoms or molecules of a gas have a high mass, they are attracted much
more strongly. This is the reason why there is almost no helium in the Earth’s
atmosphere. Helium is actually the second most common element in the uni-
verse and is constantly being newly formed in the Earth’s interior through
2.2 The Bussard Collector or Collecting from the Vacuum 33

radioactive decay processes.17 The small, very light helium atoms, however,
quickly escape into space, leaving behind the much heavier gases like oxygen
and nitrogen. No wonder, since helium is the second lightest element of all.
There is only one element that is even lighter: hydrogen.
The reason there is no elemental hydrogen in the Earth’s atmosphere is not
simply that it is so light. In our oxygen-rich atmosphere, it has largely con-
verted into water. So hydrogen does indeed occur in the Earth’s atmosphere,
but not as elemental hydrogen, rather in bound form as water vapor. Since a
water molecule is about nine times heavier than a hydrogen molecule, it does
not escape into space as quickly.
In the atmosphere of the Lothra’s homeworld, there is obviously no elemen-
tal oxygen, but there is elemental hydrogen. Wouldn’t this hydrogen escape into
space and leave the Lothra’s planet to the same fate as Mars? Not necessarily.
Because under one condition, a planet could also hold a hydrogen atmosphere:
if its gravity were much stronger than that of Earth. It can therefore be assumed
that the Lothra’s homeworld is a very large planet. ◄

2.2 The Bussard Collector or Collecting from the Vacuum

The starships of Starfleet feature an extremely elegant design. The front, upper
part forms a sometimes almost circular, sometimes slightly elongated disc, where
a large part of life on board takes place. At its rear end, there is a connection to a
second part of the spaceship. This slightly lower part is the drive section. Attached
to it, on corresponding arms, are two elongated warp nacelles oriented in the
direction of flight. This is the layout according to which almost all Starfleet ships
are built. Let’s take a closer look and examine a lesser-known detail on the warp
nacelles.
As the name suggests, the warp nacelles are an essential component of the
warp drive, which allows the spaceship to travel through space at faster-than-light
speeds. Most of the warp nacelles on 24th-century starships are occupied by a blu-
ish glowing part, which apparently has to do with the warp drive itself (at least it
lights up when the ship goes to warp and shines in the same blue tone as the warp
core of the Enterprise-D). The front part of the warp nacelles usually receives far
less attention. On many ships like the Enterprise-D or the Voyager, the front part

17 When heavy, radioactive elements decay by alpha decay, an alpha particle is released, which
is nothing more than the nucleus of a helium atom. As soon as it has collected two electrons
from the surroundings, a normal helium atom is formed. Since such alpha decays occur in large
numbers in the Earth’s interior (and have occurred throughout Earth’s history), a considerable
amount of helium has accumulated in natural gas. Depending on the natural gas deposit, helium
can make up to 16% of the natural gas. Technically, helium is obtained by separation from natu-
ral gas.
34 2 Hydrogen and the Infinite Vastness

does not glow blue but red. But what is actually behind the red glowing tip of the
warp nacelles?
One might suspect that it is used for flying backward. This assumption would at
least be close, as the impulse drive on many ships glows similarly red, and a for-
ward-facing thrust drive would indeed make the ship fly backward. However, upon
closer inspection, one finds something else here. The so-called Bussard collectors.
These are named after the American scientist Robert W. Bussard, who passed
away in 2007. Although he did not develop the Bussard collector (Star Trek engi-
neers will invent that in the future), he was involved in the research of nuclear
fusion. Shortly before Gene Roddenberry had Captain Christopher Pike travel to
the planet Talos IV in the first pilot film “The Cage”18, Robert Bussard proposed
a novel propulsion concept for spaceships in 1960. In this concept, interstellar
hydrogen was to be used in a fusion reactor to propel the spaceship. For this, the
interstellar hydrogen first needs to be collected. This is what the Bussard collec-
tors are for.
The operating principle of the warp drive then differs significantly from
Bussard’s concept. First, hydrogen is not used for energy provision through
nuclear fusion but through an antimatter reaction. Apart from a considerable risk,
this is a quite clever approach by Starfleet engineers. While a lot of energy is
released during nuclear fusion, much more energy is obtained through the com-
plete annihilation by antimatter. Furthermore, the warp drive is not based on a
ramjet engine as proposed by Bussard. He could not have known what Zefram
Cochrane would know over a hundred years later when inventing the warp drive.
The basic idea is definitely good. The propulsion of a spaceship and the many
other ship systems require a lot of energy, and the next space gas station is usually
quite far away. It makes sense to try to use what is found in space. The most com-
mon chemical element in the universe by far is hydrogen. The second most com-
mon chemical element is helium. However, it is significantly rarer and not really
suitable for power production.
The hydrogen is not to be collected from suns or on any planets. The Bussard
collectors are about interstellar hydrogen. In other words: hydrogen in the space
between the stars. But isn’t space actually a vacuum?
That’s correct. It is even an incredibly good vacuum. When vacuum technicians
on Earth today try to create an ultra-high vacuum, they have to go to great lengths.
And in the end, they still have a few residual molecules in the system.19 Compared
to that, the interstellar vacuum is a vacuum of the highest quality. So is it worth

18 “TheCage” is sometimes listed as the 1st episode, sometimes as the 0th episode of the 1st
TOS season.
19 Ultra-high vacuum plays a role in chemistry, for example, in the study of surface structures of
catalysts. If there were still air between the sensor and the atoms of the structure being studied,
it would significantly distort the result. On the one hand, one would partially measure the mol-
ecules of the air instead of the atoms of the surface, and on the other hand, electron beams used
for the study would collide with the air molecules and be deflected.
2.2 The Bussard Collector or Collecting from the Vacuum 35

collecting the remaining gas from this vacuum? After all, there is almost nothing
there.
The argument is correct on one side but overlooks the incredible size of space.
If the spaceship only collects the hydrogen that happens to fly into the Bussard
collector, it is not worth it. However, the Bussard collector collects hydrogen from
a wide area using magnetic fields. Even if one considers that there is almost noth-
ing per cubic meter of space, space still has an unimaginable number of cubic
meters. Therefore, interstellar hydrogen provides an indescribable reservoir of a
valuable energy carrier. This should, of course, not be left unused.
Nevertheless, the amount of hydrogen per cubic meter is actually very small.
This leads to some problems. To understand these, we first need to take a look at
chemical thermodynamics. Chemical thermodynamics is a discipline of chemistry
that deals, among other things, with the question of whether a reaction can occur
at all or what happens when a mixture starts to evaporate.20 Chemical thermody-
namics ultimately always asks whether molecules move from state A to state B
under certain conditions. State A in our case is hydrogen, distributed in the infinite
expanses of space. State B is hydrogen molecules in a hydrogen tank on board a
Starfleet spaceship. Let’s first take a look at state A.
In interstellar space, there are on average one million particles per cubic
meter21. That doesn’t sound too bad. A million is quite a lot, after all. Moreover,
matter in space is not evenly distributed. There are indeed clusters of particles
where the particle density is significantly higher. It becomes very high, of course,
in stars or planets. But even away from classical celestial bodies, there are large
areas with increased particle density. Just think of the so-called nebulae. The most
famous example, the Andromeda Nebula, is a bad example for this. Because it is
a galaxy, a collection of stars that only looks a bit nebulous from Earth. However,
within the galaxy itself, there are a large number of “real” nebulae; these are areas
with increased particle density without being a star or a collection of stars. These
nebulae could have formed, for example, as remnants of a supernova or as a pre-
cursor to the birth of a star that has not yet formed. The chemical composition
of the nebulae can differ somewhat. If it was formed by a supernova, there will
be more heavy elements like carbon, oxygen, or iron in the corresponding nebula.
The main component, however, is still the lightest of all elements: hydrogen. In
cosmic nebulae, we are not just dealing with a million particles per cubic meter.

20 Chemical thermodynamics explains, for example, why in the evaporation of a mixture of water
and alcohol, the alcohol does not evaporate first and then the water. Even if you are below the
boiling point of water but above that of alcohol, both will always evaporate. The alcohol merely
accumulates somewhat more in the vapor phase than the water. Conversely, when cooking a wine
sauce, the alcohol does not eventually “boil off.” What you taste in the sauce is not some omi-
nous alcohol flavor that would remain after the alcohol evaporates, but simply the alcohol that
has not completely evaporated. The idea that there would be a clean separation is a widespread
but completely nonsensical misunderstanding.
21 Particles here do not necessarily mean particles but can refer to individual atoms, molecules, or
ions, i.e., electrically charged atoms or molecules.
36 2 Hydrogen and the Infinite Vastness

Here we are talking more about 100 million particles minimum. The number of
molecules can rise to a trillion particles. A million particles in “normal” interstel-
lar space, a billion or even a trillion particles within nebulae: that’s something to
work with.
Really? What does it mean if there are a million molecules in a cubic meter?
We should not forget that atoms and molecules are very, very small. Let’s convert
this into amounts of substance. Because chemists do not want to calculate with
individual molecules and atoms, as the numbers would simply be too large, they
express particle numbers as amounts of substance. This amount of substance has a
unit called mol. Behind the mole is—simply put—just a very large number. Since
2019, the mole has been directly defined as a number: 6.02214076 times ten to the
power of 23 particles make up a mole. Scientists always use this notation when
they want to express very large (or small) numbers. Simply put, it is approxi-
mately a 6 with 23 zeros behind it (in words: 602 sextillion). That’s quite a lot. At
least as a number. But how much matter is that actually? Until 2019, the mole was
defined differently. The amount was ultimately the same, though. Back then, the
mole was defined as the number of atoms in twelve grams of carbon.22 602 sextil-
lion carbon atoms thus correspond to exactly twelve grams. The hydrogen atom is
significantly lighter than the carbon atom: 602 sextillion hydrogen atoms together
make up only about one gram, while 602 sextillion hydrogen molecules at least
weigh two grams, as they consist of two hydrogen atoms. Suddenly, a million par-
ticles in a cubic meter doesn’t seem like much anymore.
Considering that a sextillion is a quadrillion times a million, it becomes clear
how much space you have to harvest to get a usable amount of hydrogen. If you
want to collect just one gram of hydrogen from interstellar space, you have to
graze several hundred quadrillion cubic meters. Even in a very dense nebula, you
would still have to collect the gas molecules from several hundred billion cubic
meters. An absurdly large volume? There can’t be much hydrogen in interstellar
space, can there? One is amazed at how much there actually is.
One simply has to consider how many cubic meters are available in space.
The star closest to our solar system is Proxima Centauri. Between us and this star
lies about 4.2 light-years. That is a proud 40 trillion kilometers or 40 quadrillion
meters. If one imagines a cube between our solar system and Proxima Centauri
with this side length, it would have a volume of about 75 cubic light-years. That
doesn’t sound like much at first. However, if you convert it into cubic meters, you
get a number that most people have probably never heard of: about 65 octillion
cubic meters. That is a six with an impressive 49 zeros behind it. The ridiculous
hundred quadrillion cubic meters for one gram of hydrogen can be found several
hundred quintillion times in this cube. Even if every person on earth had their own

22 This
carbon had to be isotopically pure. That means that only the most common carbon isotope
C-12 was allowed to be present in this gram.
2.2 The Bussard Collector or Collecting from the Vacuum 37

spaceship and flew to Proxima Centauri, each collecting one kilogram of hydro-
gen (with which one could provide an indescribable amount of energy in a fusion
reactor), the interstellar hydrogen in this cube would still be enough for many hun-
dreds of billions of round trips for each individual person.
The amount of hydrogen in interstellar space is therefore easily sufficient for
more spaceships than we can imagine. So where is the challenge?
The net movement of many particles always follows a gradient. The term gradi-
ent refers to the change of a quantity over a distance in space. The easiest way to
illustrate this is with the example of heat flow (even though no particles flow in
this case): If an object is hot at one end and cold at the other, there is a tempera-
ture gradient within it. Following this temperature gradient, heat flows from the
end with the high temperature to the one with the low temperature. The principle
can be transferred to other quantities. In chemistry, for example, the concentra-
tion gradient is very important. Let’s imagine a cup of tea (Earl Grey, hot; just
as Captain Picard loves it). We add a sugar cube to it. In the tea around the sugar
cube, there is quickly a high sugar concentration, while tea that is further away is
still practically unsweetened. The sugar molecules now move along their concen-
tration gradient away from the sugar cube to the less sweetened part of the tea. The
molecules thus migrate from an area of high concentration to one of low concen-
tration. The opposite effect can never be observed, just as one cannot observe heat
voluntarily flowing from an area of low temperature to an area of high tempera-
ture against the temperature gradient. We call this movement of molecules diffu-
sion, and it follows the concentration gradient.23 For our question about collecting
interstellar hydrogen, another gradient is crucial: the pressure gradient. Flows
always occur along pressure gradients. Simply put: A gas always flows from an
area of high pressure to an area of low pressure. This is quite comparable to dif-
fusion along the concentration gradient. In a gas, there are more molecules in the
same volume at high pressure than at low pressure. By increasing the pressure (a
bit simplified), the concentration increases. The molecules therefore move analo-
gously from the area of high pressure to an area of low pressure. This is exactly
where our problem lies.

23 Strictlyspeaking, diffusion actually follows the gradient of the chemical potential, not the con-
centration gradient. Since the chemical potential of a substance is, simply put, high when the
concentration of the respective substance is high, it is almost always sufficient in practice to
assume that diffusion follows the concentration gradient. This no longer works when we think
of extraction, for example. In this case, molecules diffuse from a solvent with low solubility into
a solvent with higher solubility. At the so-called phase boundary between the two immiscible
liquids, the molecules may then diffuse from an area of low concentration to an area of high con-
centration. This is because the chemical potential does not depend solely on the concentration but
also on which other (solvent) molecules surround it. In a solvent with high solubility, the chemi-
cal potential is, simply put, lower at the same concentration than in one with low solubility. Apart
from this special case, the assumption that diffusion follows the concentration gradient is usually
a practical simplification.
38 2 Hydrogen and the Infinite Vastness

Let’s think about the opposite of collecting interstellar gas into the space-
ship. So let’s imagine the escape of gas from the spaceship. This is exactly what
happens when an airlock is opened. This is very impressively shown in the 23rd
episode of the 2nd season of ENT, “Regeneration.” There, two Borg drones are
blown into space after Malcolm Reed opens an airlock. There is a strong airflow
along a pressure gradient. From high pressure on board to the very low pressure of
space.
If you want to collect interstellar gas, you are always fighting against the pres-
sure gradient. You have to try to transport the gas from the very low pressure of
space into the inevitably much higher pressure of the storage tank (if the pressure
in the storage tank were not much higher than in space, there would again be just
as few molecules per cubic meter in it, making it practically empty and there-
fore useless). The interstellar hydrogen must therefore flow against the pressure
gradient.
To make a gas flow from an area of low pressure to an area of high pressure is
indeed possible. Just think of a compressor. When a compressor fills a compressed
air bottle, it sucks in air at atmospheric pressure and presses it into a steel bot-
tle, where the pressure inside may be more than a hundred times higher. A flow
from low pressure to high pressure is certainly possible. It merely requires a cer-
tain amount of effort in the form of energy and appropriate apparatus. This effort
becomes greater the more the pressure needs to be increased. Now, someone
might argue that the pressure in the case of Bussard collectors does not need to be
increased significantly at all. Let’s assume that the storage tank to be filled has a
pressure of 1 bar (which corresponds roughly to the pressure of the Earth’s atmos-
phere). The interstellar gas has a pressure of nearly 0 bar. Thus, there is a pressure
difference of about 1 bar. The compressor, which has to fill the compressed air
bottle with, for example, 200 bar, on the other hand, has to overcome a pressure
difference of 199 bar. So, one might think that the compressed air compressor has
to exert much greater effort.
In fact, the effort to transfer a gas from a low pressure to a high pressure is not
dependent on the pressure difference but on the pressure ratio. The air compressor
has to increase the pressure of the air two hundredfold. That is quite something,
but the compression from the interstellar vacuum can only laugh at that. So, the
question is: What is the actual pressure of interstellar hydrogen?
The pressure depends on two factors. One is the number of molecules per vol-
ume. As we have already seen above, this is very low. The second factor is the
temperature. Klingon General Chang hints at the temperature in space in the sixth
Star Trek movie “Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country” when he says: “In
space, all warriors are cold warriors.” Even if he actually wants to express some-
thing else, he ultimately expresses very well that it is very cold in space. The
temperature of the cosmic background radiation, which somehow represents the
temperature of everything that exists between the stars, is about 2.7 K: Less than
minus 270 degrees Celsius and thus just slightly above absolute zero. If you put
this temperature together with the number of particles per volume into the equation
2.2 The Bussard Collector or Collecting from the Vacuum 39

of state of the ideal gas, you get a pressure of less than one zeptobar.24 Written
out, we are talking about a pressure of about 0.0000000000000000000004 bar.
Even in a cosmic nebula, there is only a pressure of less than one femtobar. That is
one millionth of a nanobar. The compression of this interstellar gas to atmospheric
pressure represents only a comparatively small change in pressure when viewed as
a pressure difference. For the pressure ratio that is decisive for the energy require-
ment, however, the difference is enormous. Accordingly, the energy requirement is
high.
However, the effort is not only expressed in a high energy requirement. We
are also dealing with a tremendous technical effort. How is the compressor of a
Bussard collector supposed to work at all? The classic mechanical compressor
types are out of the question. Just imagine a screw compressor trying to convey
a gas between two screws when the average distance between the molecules is
greater than the distance between the two screws. This problem affects all mechan-
ical compressors in principle. Here, only chemistry can actually help. One con-
ceivable method could be a so-called electrochemical compressor. In this process,
hydrogen is transported through a membrane, as known from fuel cells. Unlike
in a fuel cell, however, the electrochemical compressor does not release electrical
energy but absorbs energy. With the help of this energy, it transports the hydrogen
through the membrane from an area of low pressure to an area of high pressure.
The energy requirement would still be considerable with our pressure ratio, but at
least it might be possible to carry out the compression electrochemically.
However, due to the low density that hydrogen exhibits in space, it is not
enough to simply mount an electrochemical compressor at the tip of the warp
nacelle and fill its hydrogen tank with it. If you were to collect only the hydrogen
that is exactly in the flight path of the spaceship (or even only in the much smaller
path of the Bussard collector), you would collect almost nothing. The engineers of
Starfleet have, of course, thought of this and therefore collect the interstellar gas
with enormous magnetic fields.
If you take a closer look at the hydrogen in space, you will find that it largely
does not consist of uncharged molecules of two hydrogen atoms. Rather, a signifi-
cant portion is ionized by cosmic radiation. So, we are not dealing with uncharged
atoms or molecules, but with electrically charged ions. These can indeed be influ-
enced by a strong magnetic field. If this magnetic field is not constant (which
would be the case just by flying the spaceship), it would also set the hydrogen ions
in motion. The cause of this is the so-called Lorentz force (named after the Dutch
physicist Hendrik Antoon Lorentz). If the whole thing is cleverly designed, one
could well imagine that interstellar gases are directed to the Bussard collectors,
where they are transported into a storage tank by an electrochemical compressor.
However, the spaceship should not be moving at warp speed, as it would other-
wise rush past the interstellar hydrogen at faster-than-light speed. However, Robert
Bussard did not think of faster-than-light speed in his concept anyway.

24 The prefix zepto stands for one sextillionth.

40 2 Hydrogen and the Infinite Vastness

Excursus

How is hydrogen stored at all?

Once the interstellar hydrogen has finally been collected (or simply refueled at
the last visit to the starbase), it needs to be stored somewhere. How is that actu-
ally done?
Hydrogen storage is a complicated matter. There are a whole range of meth-
ods to do this. The most common method today is to store hydrogen gas at high
pressure in a pressure-resistant and tight tank. However, even at a pressure of
300 or even 700 bar, as found in the tanks of modern hydrogen cars, there is
still comparatively little hydrogen in the tank. The density of hydrogen is sim-
ply too low. An alternative is cryogenic hydrogen. In this case, the hydrogen
is cooled to about minus 253 degrees Celsius and thus liquefied. This allows
for slightly more hydrogen in the same tank volume compared to the pressure
variant. However, the energy requirement is significantly higher and there are
storage losses because gas must be released repeatedly as liquid hydrogen con-
tinuously evaporates.
To address the problem of the low density of hydrogen in conventional stor-
age, chemistry has developed a number of methods. Simply put, hydrogen is
chemically bound to a carrier. This can be a metal, for example. The very small
hydrogen molecules settle into the spaces between the metal atoms and can
be stored there in much higher numbers per volume. To release the hydrogen,
the so-called metal hydride only needs to be heated. Another possibility is so-
called Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carriers (LOHC, named after the English term
“liquid organic hydrogen carrier”). In this case, hydrogen is bound to a liquid
organic compound through a chemical reaction called hydrogenation. The car-
rier liquid is chemically transformed in the process. An aromatic compound
becomes the corresponding saturated compound. In the simplest (though tech-
nically not sensible, because carcinogenic) case, benzene would be converted to
cyclohexane. In practice, substances like dibenzyl toluene are used as LOHC.
These LOHCs can be hydrogenated and thus absorb a lot of hydrogen. One
molecule of dibenzyl toluene can, for example, absorb up to nine molecules
of hydrogen. The hydrogenated, hydrogen-rich form of the LOHC can then be
stored under ambient conditions without high pressure or low temperature. As
a liquid, the LOHC is also easy to handle and can be transported relatively eas-
ily. To retrieve the hydrogen, the hydrogen-rich LOHC must be heated and the
reverse reaction of hydrogenation, called dehydrogenation, must be carried out
with the help of a catalyst. The hydrogen can then be used energetically, for
example by feeding it into a fuel cell. The dehydrogenated LOHC can be stored
and reloaded with hydrogen through hydrogenation when needed.
Such hydrogen technologies are enormously important for establishing a
functional infrastructure for a future energy system in which hydrogen is to
play a major role. But does a spaceship that wants to operate a fusion reac-
tor with hydrogen need such hydrogen storage? As a scientist who works on
2.3 Explosions in Space 41

chemical hydrogen storage himself, I say this very reluctantly, but the answer is
a clear: No!
Why? The hydrogen for a fusion reactor could simply be bound to oxygen
and stored as water. With electrolysis, hydrogen can be easily obtained from
water when needed. This would make no sense at all in our current energy tech-
nology (and the energy technology of the next decades). Electrolysis requires
significantly more energy than a fuel cell delivers. Even if electrolysis and fuel
cell technology are pushed to the limit, chemical thermodynamics shows that
the maximum energy that can be obtained from the fuel cell is what was put
into the electrolysis. A fusion reactor, on the other hand, generates such a large
amount of heat from hydrogen that the energy requirement of electrolysis does
not matter at all. Since water is the easiest to store, a fusion reactor would prob-
ably not use any overly complex storage technology. ◄

2.3 Explosions in Space

As we have seen, interstellar hydrogen is often collected in Star Trek. Apparently,

other things can be done with the hydrogen distributed in space. In the 5th episode
of the 2nd DSC season, “Old Friends,” the Discovery pursues a shuttle in which
they suspect Mr. Spock. He had been wrongly accused of several murders shortly
before, which is why he was on the run. However, at the time the shuttle was inter-
cepted by the Discovery, Mr. Spock was not in it. In fact, the shuttle was being
piloted by Philippa Georgiou, the deposed Terran Empress who now works for a
Starfleet intelligence service. When she does not respond to calls, Captain Pike
decides to stop the shuttle with a photon torpedo detonating nearby. The plan suc-
ceeds, but a Terran Empress does not give up so easily. To escape, she ignites the
hydrogen of the nebula she had just flown into.
Again, a whole series of questions arise. Why didn’t the photon torpedo ignite
the nebula (if it is even possible to ignite it)? Even more interesting is the question
of how it is possible to ignite the hydrogen of an interstellar nebula at all.
The explosive capability of hydrogen is generally well known. The problem
with igniting interstellar hydrogen should also be clear to some: The explosion of
hydrogen is a so-called oxyhydrogen explosion. This involves a sudden combus-
tion in a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen. The problem with igniting interstellar
hydrogen is obviously the lack of oxygen. On Earth, this is usually not such a big
problem. After all, air consists of about 21% oxygen. In space, however, this ele-
ment is very rare. Hydrogen is known to be the most common element in the uni-
verse. Helium follows in second place. Then there is a long gap. When comparing
the total amount of individual elements in the universe, these two elements make
up almost the entire universe. Oxygen is just a footnote in the composition of the
cosmos.
Now, one might argue that there are also larger amounts of oxygen on Earth.
However, oxygen (and other elements) are very unevenly distributed in the
42 2 Hydrogen and the Infinite Vastness

universe. If the Earth’s atmosphere is an area of the universe with an increased

concentration of oxygen, then it can also exist in other areas of the universe, can
it not? One should not overlook the mass of the elements. Hydrogen is the lightest
element, helium the second lightest. An oxygen atom has 16 times the mass of a
hydrogen atom and still four times the mass of a helium atom. Consequently, oxy-
gen atoms are attracted much more strongly in gravitational fields than is the case
with hydrogen or helium. That is why there is hardly any helium in the Earth’s
atmosphere, even though this element is so common in the universe. Because it
is so light, the atmosphere loses it to space. Oxygen, on the other hand, is sig-
nificantly heavier and can therefore accumulate in the Earth’s atmosphere. What
works on Earth can fundamentally happen just as well on other planets. Therefore,
it is quite plausible that there are so many planets with an oxygen-nitrogen atmos-
phere in Star Trek. A cosmic nebula, on the other hand, is virtually an atmosphere
without a planet. Due to the absence of a large, central mass, like a planet, there is
no mechanism that would enrich oxygen compared to hydrogen in a cosmic neb-
ula.25 The hydrogen in the nebula is therefore practically only mixed with helium.
There should hardly be any oxygen.
The fact that there are probably hardly any significant concentrations of ele-
mental oxygen in a cosmic nebula, which consists largely of hydrogen, has
another reason. That is simply stability. If it were possible to ignite the corre-
sponding oxyhydrogen mixture, it would have happened long ago in the millions
of years that the nebula has existed. And even if it did not occur in the form of an
explosion, there would certainly be a slow reaction over millions of years. Water
might not form in a large explosion. However, over a period of millions of years,
hydrogen and oxygen (if it is possible for them to react in this nebula26) would
indeed react. Even if it were only a creeping process. In the end, the nebula would
then consist of water and not of hydrogen and oxygen.
The real problem with creating an explosion by igniting interstellar hydrogen is
the density. Let’s assume that the nebula contained enough oxygen in addition to
hydrogen. Perhaps even a precisely tuned, stoichiometric mixture. Could this oxy-
hydrogen gas then really explode?
In space, as we have already seen, there is very low pressure and consequently
the density is very small. This initially affects how much energy is released per

25 Any astrophysicists among the readers may forgive the highly simplified picture of the “atmos-
phere without a planet.” In fact, many nebulae have a kind of central star. For example, nebulae
can arise from a supernova. At the center of the nebula, there is then a neutron star or a black
hole. From there, a tremendous gravitational force emanates. However, a nebula that arose from
a supernova has a very clear direction of movement away from the center. Unlike the atmos-
phere of a planet, which forms by “collecting from the outside,” a cosmic nebula did not form
by collecting heavy elements from the surrounding space. In fact, there can be quite a few heav-
ier elements in nebulae that originated from supernovae. These are actually primarily formed in
supernovae. However, an ignitable oxyhydrogen mixture should not form in the process.
26 The chemical reaction equilibrium could prove to be a problem here. We will address this
aspect shortly under the keyword “Le Chatelier’s Principle.”
2.3 Explosions in Space 43

volume. The amount of energy released in a chemical reaction is determined by

two factors. One is the reaction heat per amount of hydrogen converted, and the
other is the amount of hydrogen. Since the amount of hydrogen per volume in
space is very low, the same applies to the amount of heat released per volume.
Let’s take the assumptions about the density of cosmic matter from the previous
section again. Then, in an oxyhydrogen reaction, even at the highest density that
occurs in cosmic nebulae, only about 40 microjoules per cubic meter would be
released in the form of heat. That is an amount of energy needed (under Earth’s
gravity) to lift an object with a mass of four milligrams one meter high. In other
words: almost nothing. With an explosion of such intensity, the question arises
whether one would even notice it. How it is supposed to stop a spaceship like the
Discovery in any way is then another question entirely.
However, we do not want to deal with the question of how much (or how little)
explosion a Starfleet spaceship can withstand. We are concerned with questions of
chemistry, and in this context, there is another question: Can the chemical reaction
of the oxyhydrogen gas even take place?
The problem in this context is Le Chatelier’s principle. This concept, named
after the French chemist Henry Le Chatelier, states that the position of an equilib-
rium shifts in such a way that it avoids an external constraint. First of all: What is
an equilibrium in chemistry?
Any reaction that can proceed forward can also proceed backward. The more
product that has been formed, the more the reverse reaction begins to occur. At
some point, the same amount of product is converted back into reactants per unit
of time as reactants are converted into products in the same unit of time. The net
reaction comes to a halt.27 Consequently, a reaction can never proceed completely
but only up to equilibrium. This equilibrium can, as in the case of the hydrogen-
oxygen reaction, lie so far on the side of the products (i.e., water) that one might
get the impression that there is no corresponding limitation.
However, the exact position of the equilibrium between no reaction and com-
plete reaction is not fixed. Here, Le Chatelier’s principle comes into play. The
external constraint in our case is the very low pressure. When the pressure is low-
ered, a reaction system in equilibrium tries to compensate for this by increasing
the number of gas molecules. Through the additional gas molecules, it essentially
fights against the low pressure. In the hydrogen-oxygen reaction, two hydrogen
molecules react with one oxygen molecule to form two water molecules. Three
molecules become two. This is the exact opposite of what the system wants
according to Le Chatelier at low pressure. It must therefore do the opposite. If

27 Indeed,any reaction that can proceed forward can also proceed backward. Strictly speaking,
however, this is not even necessary to have a reaction equilibrium. The equilibrium is established
when the reaction reaches a minimum of Gibbs free energy. Such a minimum exists for every
reaction and is always somewhere between no reaction and complete reaction (never exactly at
no reaction or complete reaction). However, the corresponding excursion into chemical thermo-
dynamics goes a bit too far here and would require some mathematics.
44 2 Hydrogen and the Infinite Vastness

water is split into oxygen and hydrogen, then two molecules become three. This is
the favored reaction at low pressure. Therefore, the equilibrium of the hydrogen-
oxygen reaction begins to shift more and more to the side of the reactants (away
from water, towards hydrogen and oxygen) as the pressure decreases. If the pres-
sure is lowered slightly below atmospheric pressure, this is hardly noticeable.
However, in space, even in a relatively dense cosmic nebula, there is an unim-
aginably low pressure. Therefore, the position of the reaction equilibrium shifts
massively towards the reactants. The hydrogen-oxygen reaction can occur, but the
maximum conversion allowed by the equilibrium is very low.

Some more details

Le Chatelier’s principle not only says something about the influence of pressure
on the equilibrium but also about the influence of temperature. The hydrogen-
oxygen reaction is exothermic. This means that when it occurs, heat is released.
In space, the temperature is very low. This low temperature is again an external
constraint that the system tries to fight against by shifting the position of its
equilibrium. Since heat is released during the forward reaction (water forma-
tion), it can fight against the low temperature. This circumstance shifts the equi-
librium back to the product side at low temperatures. And since it is very cold
in space, the equilibrium position shifts very strongly towards the product water
due to the low temperature.
The low temperature could theoretically compensate for the low pres-
sure. Superficially, this would make almost complete reaction possible again.
However, at low temperatures, reactions also proceed more slowly. At about
minus 270 degrees Celsius, as it is in space, one can hardly speak of an
explosion in such a slow reaction. Moreover, the temperature would rise due
to the reaction. The pressure, however, would hardly rise. Therefore, the equi-
librium position could not effectively be shifted so much towards water that
a real explosion would be possible. The limitation of the reaction yield thus
remains. ◄

Another aspect must be considered when looking at the combustion of an inter-

stellar nebula. The low pressure causes even more problems. Even if we imagine
a nebula consisting of a flammable mixture of oxygen and hydrogen and assume
that the reaction equilibrium is not a problem, another problem arises: the reaction
rate.
No chemical reaction occurs instantaneously. Time always passes. This can be
a lot of time or very little. Similar reactions can proceed at very different rates.
This is referred to as the respective reaction kinetics. When a nail rusts, it is an
oxidation of iron. The reaction takes months or years to complete. When hydrogen
is oxidized, it is the hydrogen-oxygen reaction discussed in this section. This reac-
tion proceeds—literally—explosively. Within a few milliseconds, the reaction of
2.3 Explosions in Space 45

oxygen with hydrogen is complete. The reaction of oxygen with iron, on the other
hand, takes years. This has various reasons.
One significant point is accessibility. The outermost layer of iron atoms in
the nail is still easily accessible to the oxygen in the air. With the next layer, it
becomes more difficult, and the deeper it goes into the nail, the worse the acces-
sibility becomes. Accordingly, the oxidation reaction in the case of the iron nail
proceeds very slowly because the oxygen hardly reaches the iron atoms in the nail.
In contrast, if you look at iron filings, you will find that they oxidize completely
much faster. Due to the many small iron particles, there is a much larger total sur-
face area, and the deepest iron atoms are also not as deep inside the filing as in
the case of the nail. Accordingly, iron filings oxidize faster than an iron nail. The
smaller the individual iron particles become, the larger the total surface area and
the shorter the path to the interior. The smallest particles one can imagine are indi-
vidual atoms. Or in the case of oxygen and hydrogen: individual molecules. If the
molecules are perfectly mixed, accessibility is no longer a problem, and the reac-
tion can theoretically proceed at a very high speed. However, there are other fac-
tors that limit the speed of a chemical reaction. One of them is concentration.
The relationship between concentration and reaction rate is probably not very
surprising: The higher the concentration of the reactants, the faster the reaction
proceeds. Conversely, the lower it is, the slower the reaction. The more molecules
of the reactant are present per volume, the higher the probability that they will col-
lide, allowing more reaction to occur per unit of time. This relationship is actually
quite intuitive. But what does pressure have to do with it?
Simply put, pressure corresponds to concentration in gases. More precisely: the
partial pressure. This is understood as the pressure multiplied by the proportion
of the substance in the mixture. Why this partial pressure is essentially the meas-
ure of the concentration of a substance in a gas mixture can be understood from
the example just given. Concentration (in liquids) ultimately indicates how many
molecules are present per volume element (for example, per liter). Since the vol-
ume of a liquid hardly changes with an increase in pressure, the concentration also
does not change when the pressure increases. It is different with a gas. Here, the
volume does change when the pressure changes. If the pressure decreases, the vol-
ume increases. However, the total number of molecules remains unchanged with a
change in pressure. Thus, the number of molecules per volume element decreases.
Consequently, the probability that a molecule will collide with another and a
chemical reaction can occur decreases. Therefore, partial pressure can be thought
of as a kind of effective concentration in gases.
Now let’s imagine our hypothetical oxyhydrogen cloud. This consists of a
stoichiometric mixture of hydrogen and oxygen. That means we have two-thirds
hydrogen and one-third oxygen. In terms of the mixing ratio, everything is such
that the interstellar oxyhydrogen cloud could burn perfectly. However, the pres-
sure is very low. And low means really low in the context of pressure in space.
Accordingly, the partial pressures are very low. The partial pressure of hydrogen
would be only two-thirds of the already tiny total pressure. The partial pressure of
46 2 Hydrogen and the Infinite Vastness

oxygen would be only one-third of the tiny total pressure. The distances between
the hydrogen and oxygen atoms are enormous.28 Accordingly, the molecules rarely
collide. The reaction may be possible, but it is very slow. It would have little to
do with a rapidly occurring reaction. The explosion of an interstellar cloud of
hydrogen and oxygen would therefore probably not be a very impressive event.
At least a large shock wave would not be expected. Rather, a slow burn that glows
so faintly that it is hardly noticeable. After all, only a small part burns due to the
reaction equilibrium. And even if everything were to burn, it would still be almost
nothing in terms of energy per cubic meter. Even if it were possible to ignite the
hydrogen in a cloud and the combustion proceeded quickly, the result would prob-
ably still not be a particularly impressive explosion.

Excursus

What else could explode?

As we have seen, hydrogen clouds in space are not really suitable for ignition.
But could there be cosmic clouds with a different composition that would be
suitable for this?
In the ninth feature film “Star Trek: Insurrection”, the Enterprise is pursued
by two Son’a ships. To get the situation under control, William T. Riker devel-
ops a tactic referred to by Geordi La Forge as the Riker Maneuver. For this,
the Enterprise collects interstellar metreon gas with its Bussard collectors. The
metreon gas is then released directly in front of the Son’a’s bow, which ignite it
with their own weapons and cause it to explode. How can this work? And what
exactly is metreon gas?
In the Voyager episode “Jetrel”, we learn that unstable metreon isotopes
can be used to create a weapon of mass destruction called the metreon cascade.
This tells us a lot about what metreon is chemically. It is obviously not a com-
pound made up of atoms of different elements. Metreon is apparently an ele-
ment itself. Isotopes are different atoms that still belong to the same element.
The various isotopes of an element have the same number of positively charged
protons. As a result, they also have the same number of electrons, which in turn
determine the chemical properties. Chemically, isotopes are atoms of the same
element that differ only in their mass because they have different numbers of
neutrons in the nucleus. The chemical properties, however, are the same.29
Metreon thus seems to be a previously unknown chemical element. Like
all elements that are newly discovered today and probably in the future, it is

28 The term enormous is meant chemically. Of course, the average distance between two mole-
cules in an interstellar cloud is only a few millionths of a meter. For a molecule that is only a few
hundred billionths of a meter in size, however, this is an unimaginably large distance.
29 That is not entirely true. There is the so-called kinetic isotope effect. Heavy isotopes gener-

ally react more slowly chemically than lighter isotopes of the same element. This effect can be
noticeably observed at least in hydrogen isotopes.
2.3 Explosions in Space 47

unstable. However, the radioactive decays that transform the atoms of one ele-
ment into atoms of another element cannot be triggered chemically. To trigger
a metreon explosion, one would have to initiate nuclear fission.30 If the Son’a’s
weapons release neutron radiation, this could indeed happen.
Such a “nuclear chemical” process, in which a “reaction” occurs at the
nuclear level, would be a possible explanation. But could the metreon explosion
also be triggered by a “classical chemical reaction”?
Just because metreon is an element does not mean that metreon cannot exist
in the form of molecules. Many elements do this after all. In many nonmet-
als, two atoms of an element combine to form a molecule of the element. Just
think of hydrogen (H2), oxygen (O2), nitrogen (N2), or chlorine (Cl2). For indi-
vidual elements, it can even be significantly more atoms. For example, oxygen
can also exist as ozone. An ozone molecule consists only of oxygen atoms.
However, it is made up of three oxygen atoms (O3). Sulfur, for example, forms
ring-shaped molecules of eight sulfur atoms (S8) under certain conditions.
Metreon atoms may combine in a similar way to form molecules.
The formation of such metreon molecules would be associated with the for-
mation of bonds between the atoms. When bonds are formed, heat is released.
The reaction is exothermic, as they say in chemistry. If the formation reaction
of metreon molecules is very strongly exothermic and proceeds very quickly,
then one could at least imagine an explosion. However, in the negligibly small
pressure of space, the reaction equilibrium would again be a problem. When
metreon molecules are formed from metreon atoms, the number of particles
decreases. Le Chatelier’s principle tells us that such a reaction is favored at
high pressures. At low pressures, the equilibrium favors an increase in the num-
ber of particles. For this, metreon molecules would have to be broken down
into metreon atoms. However, no energy is released when chemical bonds are
broken. Rather, heat must be expended for this. It would therefore not get hot,
but cold. An explosion cannot be brought about in this way. The theory of a
nuclear explosion is therefore probably much more likely than a chemical reac-
tion of molecules.
Regardless of whether the explosion of the interstellar metreon gas is trig-
gered by neutron radiation or by a chemical reaction, the question arises as to
why this has not happened much earlier. A cosmic cloud consisting of an (in
whatever form) unstable substance that can be easily ignited would hardly have
survived for millions of years. The same would of course apply to an ignitable

30 Nuclear fusion, i.e., the merging of atomic nuclei, seems unlikely in the case of metreon.
Metreon isotopes are apparently very heavy atomic nuclei. This can be said because all light ele-
ments are already known. Atomic numbers 1 to 92 are already occupied by naturally occurring
elements on Earth. After that, there are over twenty more artificially discovered elements. The
largest natural elements are already very heavy. The artificial ones are significantly heavier. Each
additional element must be much heavier. While light elements tend to fuse (even if it is still dif-
ficult to achieve), heavy elements tend to fission. Therefore, only fission seems plausible for such
a heavy element as metreon.
48 2 Hydrogen and the Infinite Vastness

cloud of hydrogen and oxygen. The Riker Maneuver would fundamentally be

conceivable, however. Because first, metreon gas is collected and then released
again in increased concentration. This relatively dense metreon gas would
quickly disperse in space due to its (compared to the surroundings) high pres-
sure. However, since the Son’a fire their weapons within a few seconds, it may
be quite realistic that they ignite the cloud because it still has a fairly high den-
sity. ◄

2.4 One Moon Circles

Another example of the use of hydrogen as an explosive can be found in the

series Star Trek: The Next Generation. In the 17th episode of the 4th TNG sea-
son, “Night Terrors,” almost the entire crew of the Enterprise begins to halluci-
nate. Only two crew members are exempt from this. One is, of course, Data. As
an android, his positronic brain is naturally less susceptible to hallucinations and
other delusions. The second non-hallucinating crew member is the half-Betazoid
Deanna Troi. However, she has strange dreams in which she repeatedly hears a
voice talking about “one moon circling.”
What was going on? The Enterprise was searching for the USS Brattain. When
they finally found the missing ship, it was discovered that the hallucinations had
started earlier among its crew. Eventually, everyone went mad and killed each
other. In the attempt to leave the corresponding region of space, the Enterprise
faces the same fate as the Brattain. Initially, it is stuck. As it turns out after some
time, the Enterprise and the Brattain are trapped in a so-called Tyken’s Rift. A
Tyken’s Rift is a space anomaly named after the Melthusian captain who was the
first to be trapped in one. The only way to free oneself from it is by creating a
massive explosion. Massive here really means massive, as even the Enterprise’s
photon torpedoes are not sufficient.
However, the Enterprise (and the Brattain) are apparently not the only ships
trapped in the said Tyken’s Rift. Unnoticed by the Starfleet ships, another ship seems
to be stuck at the other end of the rift. We do not learn much about these strangers.
We only know two things: They are telepaths and need hydrogen to trigger the
freeing explosion. Their telepathic signals are apparently undecipherable for most
humanoid species and only disrupt their REM sleep. Therefore, the crew begins to
hallucinate and go mad sooner or later. Only the half-Betazoid Deanna Troi receives
the message correctly. However, she can initially make little sense of it.
Instead of a clear statement of what they actually need, the strangers repeat-
edly tell Deanna in her dreams that “one moon circles.” After much delibera-
tion, the correct conclusion is finally reached. It is supposed to be a reference to
hydrogen. One imagines a hydrogen atom as a planet around which a moon cir-
cles. Everything is, of course, greatly reduced in size. The image is based on the
Bohr model of the atom: a nucleus around which a single electron “moon” circles.
2.4 One Moon Circles 49

Based on this insight, the Enterprise then releases hydrogen into the rift. This is
then used by the strangers to create the freeing explosion.
Why the telepathic strangers cannot express themselves more clearly and
instead have to resort to the metaphor of the circling moon is another matter. For
dramatic reasons, it probably makes some sense. However, the question is whether
the metaphor is even an accurate description of what they need?
According to the Bohr model of the atom, a hydrogen atom is indeed a nucleus
around which a single electron circles. Whether the Bohr model of the atom is a
truly accurate description of reality is another matter. We will address this ques-
tion again in another chapter. For hydrogen atoms, it might even be a quite useful
approximation. However, the image of the circling moon still does not really fit.
First of all, what is a moon? A moon is a celestial body that circles a signifi-
cantly larger celestial body. Niels Bohr would agree with this analogy for the
hydrogen atom to this extent. However, a moon does not circle just any celestial
body. It circles a planet. A planet, in turn, is a celestial body that circles another,
significantly larger celestial body. A moon is thus a celestial body that circles a
planet that circles a sun. A somewhat strange image for a hydrogen atom. In a
hydrogen atom, after all, only one electron circles a nucleus. If one analogizes the
term moon for the electron and the nucleus as a planet, then the question arises,
where is the sun? A more fitting metaphor would therefore probably be “one
planet circles.” If one makes communication so difficult to understand that vital
information is conveyed in the form of dreams and no clear statements are made,
but metaphors are used, then at least the metaphors should be appropriate.
“One planet circles” comes closer to the reality of a hydrogen atom. But do the
strangers actually want hydrogen atoms? Hydrogen does not occur in the form of
hydrogen atoms but as hydrogen molecules. Two hydrogen atoms form a hydro-
gen molecule. Elementary hydrogen is therefore referred to as H2 in chemistry. It
is indeed possible to produce individual hydrogen atoms. However, creating and
storing a gas consisting of these atoms is not feasible. Individual hydrogen atoms
are called hydrogen radicals for a reason. The term radical comes from their high
reactivity. They have a very high tendency to engage in chemical reactions with
other substances. When a radical encounters a molecule or even another radical,
it tends to immediately form a bond. In a gas of hydrogen atoms, radicals would
constantly encounter each other. The gas would therefore not remain a collection
of individual atoms, as the encountering radicals would immediately form a mole-
cule. It would transform into a collection of hydrogen molecules in no time. Thus,
the image of a single moon/planet circling is again inappropriate.
A hydrogen molecule consists of two hydrogen atoms. Accordingly, not one
but two electrons belong to the molecule. In fact, one is dealing with two orbiting
planets. However, the aliens from the other end of the Tyken’s Rift did well not to
simply communicate “two moons circle.” That would have had to be interpreted
as an image for helium. If the Enterprise had introduced helium into the rift, the
alien spaceship on the other side of the Tyken’s Rift would have been able to do
50 2 Hydrogen and the Infinite Vastness

absolutely nothing with it. There is nothing in the entire universe that is less suita-
ble for inducing a reaction than helium.31 A hydrogen molecule, on the other hand,
consists of two “planets” orbiting two “suns.” After all, there are two atomic nuclei
in the molecule. The message “two planets orbiting two suns” would have been
much more precise. Whether it would have led to a correct interpretation as a hint
towards hydrogen more quickly is another matter.

A few more details

Strictly speaking, the two planets called electrons do not really orbit freely
around the two suns or each of the two suns. In the hydrogen molecule, the two
atomic nuclei share the two electrons in a certain way. This is the cause of the
bond between the atoms. If the electrons were simply orbiting the two centrally
arranged atomic nuclei or alternatively each orbiting their respective atomic
nucleus individually, there would be no bond.
To achieve a bond, the electrons must be located between atomic nuclei.
The two positively charged atomic nuclei (which would repel each other)
attract the negatively charged electrons. This attraction between atomic nuclei
and electrons ultimately holds the atomic nuclei together. However, the elec-
trons must not move freely in an orbit but must be located between the atomic
nuclei. Or more precisely: They must preferably be located between the atomic
nuclei. Partly they are in an orbit, partly they concentrate between the atomic
nuclei. This is the basis of the so-called covalent bond and cannot be really well
explained with the Bohr model of the atom.
Indeed, it would be somewhat difficult to communicate this telepathically in
a catchy way that fits into a dream. That is why the aliens from Star Trek prob-
ably used the simplified image of the single orbiting moon. ◄

In any case, the Enterprise draws the right conclusions. So, they send hydrogen
through the Bussard collectors into the interior of the Tyken’s Rift. A hydrogen
cloud moves in the form of a red glowing beam from the ship towards the anom-
aly. Is that actually possible just like that?

31 Chemically speaking, helium is a noble gas and as such is not capable of chemical reactions.
This is also true for the other noble gases. For some of them (krypton and especially xenon), it
has already been possible to carry out reactions in the laboratory and thereby produce noble gas
compounds. This works all the better the further down the noble gas is in the periodic table of
elements. For radon, the lowest naturally occurring noble gas, there is still relatively little knowl-
edge due to its radioactivity. For the xenon above it, the production of chemical compounds
works at least under laboratory conditions with great effort. Krypton, which is above that, can
still be converted into an unstable compound with fluorine with the greatest effort. So far, it has
only been possible to produce something like a compound from the argon that follows further up
at less than minus 260 °C. With neon, it becomes even more difficult, and with the highest noble
gas, helium, one does not even need to think about a reaction under laboratory conditions, let
alone an explosive reaction.
2.4 One Moon Circles 51

First of all, the question arises as to why the hydrogen glows red. Actually,
hydrogen is a colorless gas, isn’t it? In principle, that is correct. With the naked
eye, one cannot distinguish hydrogen from air. Both are colorless gases. But that
does not mean that hydrogen cannot have any colors. When atoms are energeti-
cally excited, it can happen that electrons temporarily move to a higher energy
level. When they return to a lower energy level, they emit light. The wavelength of
this light is inversely proportional to the difference between the two energy levels
and specific to the respective element. Depending on how far apart the individ-
ual energy levels are in an element, the emitted photons have different amounts of
energy. The energy of the photons corresponds to a certain wavelength of light and
thus a color.
Hydrogen, like all elements, has several possible energetic states and cor-
respondingly several wavelengths that correspond to the respective differences
in energy levels. When a hydrogen atom returns to its lowest energy state (the
K-shell), the most energy is released. The resulting light is therefore very energetic
and correspondingly short-wavelength. It is not visible to the naked eye because it
belongs to the ultraviolet part of the spectrum. If the hydrogen atom first returns
only to its second-lowest energy state (the L-shell), less energy is also released.
The resulting light is correspondingly longer-wavelength and now actually in the
visible range of the spectrum. Depending on which excited state the atom returns
from, the amount of energy released still differs a bit. If it returns from a very
high energy level, the released light is blue or even violet. However, if it has only
moved from the third-lowest energy level (the M-shell) to the second-lowest
energy level, light with a wavelength of 656.28 nanometers is emitted. This char-
acteristic wavelength belongs to red light and is known as H-alpha.32 H-alpha is
indeed the brightest visible spectral line of hydrogen. A red glow would therefore
not be entirely far-fetched for excited hydrogen.
However, the question remains as to what makes the hydrogen glow. Hydrogen
does not start emitting light on its own. It must be somehow energetically excited
to glow. Perhaps answering the next question will help us further.
Another problem with introducing hydrogen into the interior of the Tyken’s
Rift is the direction of movement. If hydrogen is released into space, it distrib-
utes evenly in the vacuum. It does not move as a beam directly to where it is sup-
posed to go. If the hydrogen exits at a very high speed, its molecules have a certain

32 In addition, hydrogen has a whole range of other characteristic wavelengths for the light it
emits. These are called spectral lines. Spectral lines are characteristic because they occur with
their specific wavelengths only in hydrogen. Every other element also has spectral lines, but these
are again specific to the respective element. This effect is used not only in chemical analysis but
also in astrochemistry. It involves determining the chemical composition of distant celestial bod-
ies (which is exciting in itself because it could reveal whether extraterrestrial life is fundamen-
tally possible in another part of the universe). Since one cannot simply fly to distant exoplanets
to take a sample (at least not until Zefram Cochrane will finally invent the warp drive), such
investigations can only be conducted based on light that has been emitted or absorbed by the cor-
responding substances.
52 2 Hydrogen and the Infinite Vastness

preferential momentum. The momentum corresponds to the product of the mol-

ecules’ mass and their speed. The principle of conservation of momentum states
not only that the numerical value of the momentum is conserved but also that
the direction of movement is conserved. In an elastic collision of two bodies, the
direction of movement of the individual bodies can change, but the total momen-
tum (considering the direction) remains conserved. So if the hydrogen atoms exit
the spaceship at high speed in the direction of the Tyken’s Rift, they retain this
direction of movement. In the vacuum of space, there is nothing to stop them.
However, the exit direction from the Bussard collector is only a preferential direc-
tion. It is by no means the only direction of movement that the molecules have.
In a gas, all molecules move randomly in all directions. In a fast gas stream,
this movement of the molecules inside is superimposed by the external move-
ment of the gas stream. There is a kind of preferential direction. Nevertheless,
hardly any molecule moves exactly in the direction of the target but a bit away
from the axis of the imagined hydrogen beam. This is not a problem as long as
the gas flows through a pipe. Once a gas molecule reaches the “edge” of the gas
beam, it hits the pipe wall. The collision with the pipe wall redirects it back into
the interior of the gas beam. Once the gas beam has left the spaceship and thus
the pipe, this no longer applies. If a molecule reaches the edge of the gas beam,
there is nothing to stop it. It would simply continue to move away from the axis
of the beam. Therefore, one would not observe a beam of hydrogen exiting the
spaceship but a cone. The faster the gas exits, the more pointed the cone becomes.
However, a widening of the beam into a cone would be unavoidable. In the case of
the hydrogen beam emitted by the Enterprise into the Tyken’s Rift, we do not see
this. Instead, we see a well-defined beam with a constant thickness.
The Enterprise must therefore do something to direct the hydrogen and pre-
vent its spread into the vacuum. This could ultimately also explain the glow of
the hydrogen. Since the hydrogen can no longer be enclosed by the wall of a pipe
outside the spaceship, this seems to be done by some kind of force field. The
hydrogen is expelled through the Bussard collectors. These are actually designed
to collect gases like hydrogen from interstellar space. This requires suitable force
fields. We do not know exactly how this works (after all, the Bussard collector
has not yet been invented). However, energy must somehow be transferred to the
hydrogen beam to prevent its widening into a cone. If energy is transferred to the
hydrogen, the hydrogen atoms are energetically excited. The result could be the
observed red glow of the hydrogen, as part of the excitation energy is released in
the form of light.
If it is possible in this way to direct hydrogen into the interior of the Tyken’s
Rift, the aliens can cause an explosion with it. But is this explosion suffi-
cient to dissolve the rift? Since we do not know much about (the yet undiscov-
ered) Tyken’s Rifts, we cannot say at first how much explosive power is needed
to destroy them. However, igniting hydrogen seems hardly suitable to provide
enough energy. Why can we say this when we do not know how much explosive
power is needed?
2.4 One Moon Circles 53

Well, what we learn from Commander Data is that a photon torpedo does not
have enough explosive power. Even if we do not know the exact amount of energy
released during the detonation of a photon torpedo, we at least know the basic
principle of its function. Photon torpedoes are a weapon technology from Star
Trek, where large amounts of energy are released suddenly by the reaction of anti-
matter with matter. When antimatter meets matter, both are completely converted
into energy. This means that all mass is converted into energy. Nuclear weapons
are also based on the conversion of mass into energy. However, only a small part
of the mass is converted into energy. When antimatter and matter collide, the
entire mass of both is completely converted into energy. Therefore, an unimagina-
ble amount of energy is released during the detonation of a photon torpedo. If this
amount of energy is not enough to destroy a Tyken’s Rift, then it really takes a lot
of energy. The question arises as to how a oxyhydrogen explosion is supposed to
provide this amount of energy.
If the Enterprise were to direct 1000 tons of hydrogen into the Tyken’s Rift
(which would be an enormous amount) and the aliens on the other side were
to mix it with 8000 tons of oxygen33, then 120 gigajoules of energy would be
released in the explosion. That would already be an enormous amount of energy.
One should not get too close to such an explosion. But how much is that compared
to a photon torpedo?
The answer is: almost nothing. With Einstein’s famous equation E = m · c2, we
can convert the amount of energy released into a “disappeared” mass. This mass
then corresponds to the total amount of antimatter plus matter used in the photon
torpedo. Since the speed of light c is very large, it does not take much mass m for
this amount of energy. We arrive at not even 1.4 milligrams. This means that a
photon torpedo with just 0.7 milligrams of antimatter could already produce such
an explosion. Even without knowing their detailed specifications, one can prob-
ably assume that Starfleet’s photon torpedoes in the 24th century have more explo-
sive power. Besides, it seems somewhat unlikely that the spaceship on the other
side has 8000 tons of oxygen on board and can use it to dissolve the Tyken’s Rift.
Moreover, it should be considered that the two gases must be well mixed before-
hand for a proper explosion. Even though I am very reluctant to contradict Data’s
calculations: the photon torpedoes would probably have been much more prom-
ising than the hydrogen explosion. Only then the episode would have been over
after just a few minutes.

33 For a stoichiometric combustion, one oxygen molecule must come for every two hydrogen
molecules. However, one oxygen molecule weighs 16 times as much as one hydrogen molecule.
Therefore, although only half the amount of oxygen molecules is needed, the mass of oxygen
required is eight times greater.
Atoms in a Completely Different
Way 3

3.1 When Atoms Burn

After three years aboard the Voyager, the Ocampa Kes, who had until then sup-
ported the medical-holographic emergency hologram as a nurse, left the space-
ship. This departure was quite impressive because it was accompanied by the full
development of her telepathic powers. She is supported on her path to develop-
ing her abilities by the Vulcan Tuvok. Vulcans are known to possess telepathic
abilities themselves, although these are not nearly as impressive as those of the
Ocampa. Vulcans must not only touch the other person for their famous mind meld
but are also primarily limited to telepathy. As a teacher on the complicated (and
not entirely safe) path of telepathy, a Vulcan with his disciplined mind still seems
quite suitable. In the case of Kes, however, it turns out that Ocampa are capable
of much more than even Tuvok can imagine. This includes, among other things,
telekinetic abilities. Ocampa are not only able to read the thoughts of other people
and communicate telepathically. They are even able to move things with the power
of their thoughts.
In the 2nd episode of the 4th VOY season, “The Gift”, Kes’s abilities finally
come to full fruition. She not only displays some physically remarkable abilities
but also demonstrates that she is far beyond our understanding of chemistry.
During one of her sessions with Tuvok, Kes begins not just to see the candle
in front of her with her eyes. Her gaze expands to the point where she sees the
fire itself with her mind. In doing so, she sees what a chemist thinks of when they
hear the word combustion: She begins to perceive the individual molecules mov-
ing quickly and reacting with each other. Then she starts to look even deeper and
actively intervene in the chemical process itself—on a subatomic level. Finally,
her mental gaze even extends beyond the subatomic, which Tuvok then considers
somewhat far-fetched.

55
56 3 Atoms in a Completely Different Way

Let’s stick to what she does with the flame. She intensifies it, making it signifi-
cantly larger. As mentioned, Kes makes this intervention in chemistry on a suba-
tomic level. How is this to be imagined, and does it make any sense chemically?
First, let’s look at combustion itself chemically. Combustion can be simplified
as a rapid total oxidation. Rapid means that we are not talking about a slow, creep-
ing process like the rusting of a nail, even if it may be a chemically quite similar
reaction. Total oxidation means that the (in this case organic) fuel is converted to
carbon dioxide and water. In other oxidation reactions, the reaction only runs par-
tially. Then, for example, alcohols or carbonyl compounds would be formed.
In practice, total oxidation does not necessarily mean that the entire fuel is
actually converted. Especially in the case of oxygen deficiency, part of the fuel
molecules is not or only partially burned. Incompletely burned fuel molecules usu-
ally aggregate into small particles known as soot. Since they are often very small,
they can penetrate deep into the lungs when inhaled and cause damage there.
These soot particles are one of the main causes of the problem often discussed
under the term fine dust. In clean combustion, as little unburned fuel as possible
should be carried away from the flame in the form of soot particles and distributed
in the room.
When the fuel is converted with oxygen, it is still not necessarily a total oxida-
tion. In an ideal combustion, the fuel molecules are completely broken down and
converted with oxygen. The hydrogen atoms are converted with oxygen to water.
The carbon atoms are converted with oxygen to carbon dioxide. And the oxygen
atoms that were already part of the fuel molecule also become part of water or car-
bon dioxide molecules. The more oxygen already contained in the fuel molecules,
the less atmospheric oxygen is logically needed for combustion.1
In reality, the oxygen available in the flame is not always sufficient to com-
pletely convert all the carbon to carbon dioxide. Soot particles, which essentially
consist of unburned carbon, are not the only possible byproduct of incomplete
combustion. Another possibility is the formation of carbon monoxide CO. In this
case, a carbon atom is not converted with two oxygen atoms as in carbon dioxide
CO2, but only with one. This is not only unfavorable because a significant portion
of the energy is released only in the final reaction step (the complete oxidation of
CO to CO2). Carbon monoxide is particularly problematic because it is very toxic.

1 An important example of a fuel that contains oxygen is ethanol, which is added to gaso-
line as a biofuel. Combustion-wise, oxygen-containing fuel molecules have both advantages
and disadvantages. One advantage is that they often burn cleaner. Less soot is formed, and the
fine dust problem is therefore less pronounced. A disadvantage, however, is that the molecules
are somewhat pre-oxidized. The first step of combustion has already taken place, so to speak.
Consequently, the energy released in this first reaction step of oxidation can no longer be uti-
lized. The energy content of oxygen-containing fuels is therefore lower. Another disadvantage is
that the molecules are more polar than pure hydrocarbons. As a result, more water can dissolve
in oxygen-containing fuels. This water increases the weight and volume of the fuel but not its
calorific value. Moreover, it must be vaporized during combustion. This requires energy, which
reduces the effectively usable energy of combustion.
3.1 When Atoms Burn 57

In the blood, it binds to hemoglobin like oxygen molecules—only much more

strongly. As a result, the hemoglobin is occupied, and less oxygen can be trans-
ported from the lungs to the body.
When looking at a flame from the outside, the chemistry within it can usually
be sufficiently described for most questions by the following reaction:
hydrocarbon + oxygen → carbon dioxide + water
Hydrocarbons can be all possible alkanes, alkenes, alkynes, and aromatics here.
Additionally, in our case, oxygen-containing molecules such as alcohols or fatty
acids are also meant. If one wants to be more precise, then one should also take
this already described side reaction into account:
hydrocarbon + oxygen → carbon monoxide + water
Otherwise, one should be aware of the fact that parts of the fuel often do not
burn properly, which leads to soot formation. In many cases, this is sufficient as
a chemical description of combustion. However, it becomes more complex if one
wants to engage in advanced combustion technology. Or if one, like Kes, wants to
influence combustion telekinetically on a subatomic level. For this, one must be
aware that the reactions described above do not actually exist in that form.
Let’s take a look at a candle flame. Before the chemical reactions can begin,
the wax must first evaporate. In the process, the first hydrocarbon molecules begin
to break into smaller fragments due to the high temperature. At the latest, upon
reaching the actual flame, the molecules break apart completely. In the process,
bonds are broken. The resulting fragments often have single electrons attached to
them. These can be thought of as half bonds. These half bonds have a very strong
tendency to combine with other half bonds, forming new molecules. Due to this
strong reactivity, these intermediates are called radicals (which we have already
encountered above). The various, differently sized molecules combine with each
other or with oxygen molecules (or individual oxygen atoms) to form other inter-
mediates. Most of these intermediates have a lifespan of only fractions of a sec-
ond. The whole process is so complex that the reaction mechanism of something
as simple as a candle flame has not been fully elucidated to this day. However,
the processes in a candle flame are now largely understood. The result is that one
arrives at a three-digit number of individual reactions. It begins with the aforemen-
tioned breaking of the large fuel molecules into smaller fragments.2 These react
with each other or with oxygen or with oxygen-containing intermediates or…
Well, in the end, carbon dioxide and water are essentially produced. In most cases,
it is sufficient to consider this global reaction. However, not if one wants to influ-
ence combustion on a subatomic level.

2 Given the fact that wax is not just a single, pure substance but a mixture of various hydro-
carbons, and each of these hydrocarbons can break down into fragments in different ways, an
incredible number of individual reactions arise from this step alone.
58 3 Atoms in a Completely Different Way

The above description refers to the molecular level. The submolecular level
would then be the atomic level (after all, molecules are made up of atoms). The
subatomic level would be the level of atomic nuclei and electrons. Wanting to
influence combustion on this level makes sense in a certain way. We have already
mentioned the bonds between atoms and the half bonds that we call radicals. The
bonds between atoms are mediated by two electrons each. In radicals, there are
single electrons that seek a partner to form a bond together. Essentially, combus-
tion (like any chemical reaction) is based on the breaking and forming of chemi-
cal bonds. The electrons are, simply put, responsible for the formation of bonds
and radicals. Changing these is one way to influence combustion. If Kes can actu-
ally manage to specifically shift electrons within the molecules with her teleki-
netic abilities so that, for example, bonds break, then she can indeed accelerate the
chemical reaction. In a way, she would be influencing combustion on a subatomic
level.
On the screen, however, it looks more like she is accelerating the atoms and
molecules. This would mean her intervention takes place on the atomic or molecu-
lar level.3 This would be just as conceivable. Possibly even somewhat simpler, as
one would not have to operate on such a tiny scale. Nevertheless, the scale would
still be incredibly small. Could one manipulate a chemical reaction without influ-
encing the electrons that are crucial for chemical bonds?
In order for two molecules to react with each other, they first need to meet.
In the flame, the molecules move more or less randomly back and forth. This
results in frequent collisions. If it were possible to influence the movement of the
molecules, one could increase the number of collisions. This could intensify the
combustion. However, merely having the molecules meet is not enough. It can cer-
tainly happen that molecule A hits the wrong part of molecule B. The probability
of an actual reaction could be significantly increased if it were possible to always
orient the molecules correctly. The strongest effect would likely be achieved by
increasing the speed of the molecules. The higher the speed, the greater the energy
that can cause a reaction upon collision.
To increase the speed, one would need to raise the temperature. This can be
achieved in two ways: by adding heat or by preventing the flame from dissipating
heat. In principle, this would be the simplest approach. However, it would ulti-
mately have little to do with an atomic (or even subatomic) influence on the flame,
as Kes does. How it could be physically realized is another matter entirely.
Nevertheless, it would be conceivable to increase the speed of the particles with-
out having to add energy. The molecules move at different speeds. Simply put, there
are relatively few slow molecules, many medium-speed molecules, and again rela-
tively few fast molecules. The higher the temperature, the higher the average speed.

3 However, it is also conceivable that the increased speed of the atoms seen in the episode is the
result of subatomic intervention by Kes. If she managed to accelerate combustion through suba-
tomic interventions, this would ultimately lead to a higher temperature. As a result, the atoms and
molecules would move correspondingly faster.
3.1 When Atoms Burn 59

At a high temperature, the proportion of sufficiently fast molecules for a reaction is

greater. However, even at low temperatures, there are always a few molecules that are
fast enough. The proportion is just significantly lower. That is why a fuel only ignites
when it reaches a certain temperature. Even if isolated reactions occur between mol-
ecules, the heat from the reactions is dissipated too quickly to the surroundings. As
a result, the system cannot heat itself up, and the reaction speed cannot increase. It
is not that there are three groups of molecules: slow, medium-speed, and fast. All
speeds occur, just with different frequencies. Or, in relation to the individual mol-
ecule: with different probabilities. Now, let’s imagine two molecules, each with a
speed that is too low for a reaction. If Kes could redistribute kinetic energy between
the molecules (let's ignore the issue of momentum conservation here), one could at
least imagine that almost all the energy would be transferred to one of the two mol-
ecules. This molecule would then be very fast and could trigger a reaction upon col-
lision. The other would then be very slow. But that ultimately makes little difference.
Its energy was already insufficient for a reaction before. In this way, one could theo-
retically intensify the combustion without having to add energy.
So much for the theory. Now we come to the real challenge. How does one tel-
ekinetically influence individual atoms, entire molecules, or even (on a subatomic
level) electrons? Just like with telepathy (often encountered in Star Trek), we do
not really know how the brain of an Ocampa is supposed to influence things out-
side their body.
It is likely to be particularly challenging to control things on a (sub)atomic
level. To be able to do that, one must first capture the corresponding thing. One
must, in a sense, see the atoms, molecules, or electrons before one’s inner eye. The
minimum requirement would be to be able to recognize the location and speed of
the molecules.4 Additionally, it would be at least very helpful if one could recog-
nize their nature. Ultimately, it is simply about knowing what kind of molecule
it is. So, one should not only recognize that something is there but also what it
is. We do not know exactly what the corresponding sensory organ should look
like. However, it is clear that a sensory organ can hardly capture things that are
smaller than the cells it is made of. Biological cells are microscopically small.5
Compared to atoms and molecules, however, they are huge. And that’s where the
problems begin. Kes does not “see” atoms in her brain, but rather distant atoms.
One might argue that Tuvok’s meditation lamp is directly in front of Kes and thus
anything but far away. Chemically speaking, however, a meter is an unimaginably

4 The Heisenberg uncertainty principle, which we will get to know later, would come as an addi-
tional challenge at this point. However, we do not want to consider that further here for now.
5 This example again illustrates that even recognizing things that are as large as the corresponding
sensory cells is not possible. At least not if one wants to recognize spatially resolved where the
thing is or even what it looks like in detail. However, molecules can fundamentally be perceived.
That is exactly what our two chemical senses (taste and smell) do. These senses can only funda-
mentally recognize that the corresponding molecules are there. Moreover, the molecules must
come to the body. The sense of smell is not a remote sense that could perceive molecules without
direct contact.
60 3 Atoms in a Completely Different Way

large distance. Not only measured by the size of the atoms but also measured by
the significantly larger distance between the molecules, a meter is an incredible
distance. The problem becomes clear when one realizes what lies in between.
Even if the Ocampa have a corresponding sensory organ outside the skull (which
at least saves having to look through the rather compact bone), there is still about
a meter of air in between. The particle density in gases may be relatively low.
Nevertheless, about 30 trillion molecules are found in a liter of air under stand-
ard conditions. The proverbial search for a needle in a haystack is probably no
longer an apt metaphor for this. It is much worse. Capturing individual molecules
through so many molecules, amidst an unimaginable number of other molecules,
is… well… let’s say challenging.6
Even if one gets the “seeing” of atoms under control, the difficulties continue.
Next, one must influence them. When we humans influence any things outside our
bodies, we touch them. Biology also knows a few chemical methods in which sub-
stances are released that influence things outside the body or cell. None of this
happens with telekinesis. Here, things must be influenced remotely without con-
tact, without adding another substance. In our case: molecules must be influenced
in their movement from a distance. Can that even work?
In the case of oxygen molecules, it would indeed be difficult. These molecules,
essential for combustion, are completely electrically neutral. Not only do they
have no net charge, but within the molecule, electrons and atomic nuclei are dis-
tributed in such a way that there are no local charge concentrations. In chemistry,
such a molecule is called nonpolar. It would be difficult to influence this molecule
without contact. However, this does not apply to all molecules that occur during
combustion. Many of the intermediate products are indeed polar. This means they
have a positive charge at one end of the molecule and a negative charge at the
other end. In total, they are electrically neutral. However, charges are present on a
small scale. One could at least theoretically do something with that. Additionally,
individual ionic species occur during combustion, meaning individual, albeit
short-lived, molecules are actually electrically charged. These so-called ions can
be influenced even better. On a subatomic level, we finally find the electrons. They
are negatively charged and could thus—at least in principle—be influenced and
shifted within the molecule. This would have an enormous impact on the chemical
bonds.
To influence charged particles from a distance, there are two related but differ-
ent effects that can be used. One could either apply an electric or a magnetic field.
With an electric field, one can move a charged particle directly in one direction.
With a magnetic field, one can at least influence moving charged particles.

6 Some might argue at this point that one can see through a meter of air without any problems.
For a sensory organ that captures relatively large objects optically, like the human eye, this is
indeed not a problem. For a sensory organ that “sees” individual molecules (in whatever way),
the molecules of the air are probably a problem.
3.1 When Atoms Burn 61

In principle, it is not particularly difficult to generate an electric or magnetic

field. For an electric field, for example, you only need to charge one metal plate
positively and another metal plate negatively. An electric field then forms between
them. A magnetic field can be generated with a coil. To do this, you wind a con-
ductor into a spiral and pass an electric current through it. You already have a
magnetic field. Technically, this is all no problem. Biologically, however, it is con-
siderably more difficult. Although living beings can generate electric current—our
nerves are based precisely on this—not much current would be needed to influ-
ence individual (charged or at least polar) atoms. However, Kes influences quite
a lot of atoms simultaneously when she seriously enhances the combustion in
the flame. Correspondingly, quite intense currents would have to flow through an
Ocampa brain, and a variety of different currents would be needed to influence
various molecules simultaneously. A human brain would hardly survive this (and
could simply not generate them). But Kes demonstrates quite clearly that Ocampa
brains can achieve significantly more than human brains.
The real challenge, however, lies elsewhere. This problem is ultimately closely
related to the problem of “seeing” the molecules described above. To influence
combustion with the power of thought, one must control very many, very small,
and very fast particles simultaneously. How can one specifically influence only the
atoms in the flame when countless trillions of atoms lie between one’s own brain
and the flame? A brain (which differs significantly from a human brain) might be
able to generate an electric or magnetic field. Extending this field significantly
beyond the area of the skull then becomes considerably more difficult. Focusing
the field on a specific area (the flame) far away from the brain makes the matter
even more challenging.
And the main problem is ultimately something entirely different. There are
indeed chemical reactions driven by positively charged ions being pulled to one
side and negatively charged ions to the other side in an electric field. This is called
electrolysis. Influencing combustion in the way Kes does, however, is something
entirely different. To intensify combustion, one must specifically bring together
molecules that otherwise move randomly with their reaction partners. One must
influence their direction and speed. One thing must be considered: the correct
direction is different for each particle. Unlike electrolysis, not all particles should
move in the same direction. Each particle must be directed in a different direc-
tion. Therefore, the electric or magnetic field would have to be oriented differently
for each molecule. Every few nanometers, it would need a different orientation.
And that’s not all. As soon as one particle is directed to its target, a new particle
enters the same spatial area. Who says this particle should be directed in the same
direction? The orientation of the electric or magnetic field would therefore need to
be changed—within fractions of microseconds or rather nanoseconds. To do this,
all molecules would have to be observed individually, encountering the problems
described above. Based on this observation, the telekinetic would have to make
billions of decisions about the reorientation of local electric fields within absurdly
short times and implement these decisions. Without wanting to offend Kes: This
seems (to put it mildly) very demanding.
62 3 Atoms in a Completely Different Way

Considering combustion on a molecular, atomic, or even subatomic level at the

individual electrons would certainly be very exciting. However, wanting to influ-
ence it directly on this level is far beyond anything that makes our understanding
of molecular processes seem realistic. Ultimately, the approach fundamentally dif-
fers from what chemistry is in practice. In chemistry, one must understand what
happens with individual molecules. However, one almost never handles individual
molecules but always many trillions or quadrillions simultaneously. In a chemi-
cal laboratory, so many molecules are always added simultaneously that they are
not counted but weighed. Accordingly, no one in a chemistry lab would think of
influencing the molecules individually. Instead, one changes the temperature
or pressure, adds a solvent, supplements a catalyst to accelerate the reaction, or
introduces a reactant to the reaction. This is ultimately what a practically-minded
chemist would do to intensify the flame. Instead of trying to influence the indi-
vidual atoms with the power of thought, one would rather try to improve the air
supply to the combustion.

3.2 Tiny Atoms

People who are shrunk to the size of ants or smaller are a popular theme in a
large number of films. The scientific backgrounds are all too often treated very
imprecisely. Star Trek makes exemplary efforts by considering aspects that are
otherwise often forgotten. But what scientific questions would actually need to be
considered in a shrinking ray or similar technology?
An example of this can be seen in the 14th episode of the 6th DS9 season,
“One Little Ship”. The crew of the space station is on a research mission with
the USS Defiant. To investigate a subspace anomaly more closely, Jadzia Dax,
Miles O’Brien, and Dr. Julian Bashir boarded the shuttle Rubicon and flew into
the anomaly. This subspace anomaly causes strong spatial distortions, which lead
to objects that come too close to it shrinking significantly. To somewhat protect
the shuttle and its crew from the effects of this phenomenon, the Defiant holds
the Rubicon with the tractor beam. Unfortunately, we are currently in the sixth
season of the series and thus in the year 2374. In other words: at the height of the
conflict with the Dominion. What must happen, happens: The Jem’Hadar attack at
exactly the wrong moment. It would be bad enough if they just captured and took
over the Defiant. Additionally, the tractor beam breaks off, and the poor Rubicon
along with its three-member crew remains in the subspace anomaly. Although the
three manage to escape from it, there is a problem. They have not grown back to
their original size. In hindsight, this annoying mishap turns out to be a lucky coin-
cidence, as it helps to drive the Jem’Hadar off the Defiant again. And of course, by
the end of the episode, the shrinking process is reversed. But initially, it presents
the three on the Rubicon with enormous challenges and also raises some scientific
and chemical questions for us.
First of all, the question arises as to what actually happens to the atoms and
molecules. Miniaturization in today’s technology means producing something in
3.2 Tiny Atoms 63

a smaller format. For example, if you produce a model of a real object at a scale
of one to ten, you use one-thousandth of the material that you would use for the
original.7 But can the amount simply decrease when shrinking in a subspace
anomaly? Or put differently: What would happen biochemically then? Since the
Rubicon and its crew look the same as before (just significantly smaller), nothing
could have simply been taken away from one end. Rather, the removed material
must have been evenly removed from the inside of the body. If it did not simply
dissolve into nothing8, then it must have somehow escaped from the body. Since
Dax, O’Brien, and Bashir did not explode when shrinking, which would inevitably
be the consequence, this obviously did not happen.
But even if the excess molecules simply disappear, problems arise. Because
all these molecules have a function in the organism. Let’s imagine a biologi-
cal cell. There is the DNA in the cell nucleus9, where the genetic information is
stored. In addition, there is an incredibly large number of proteins that have a pre-
cisely defined molecular structure, which enables them to fulfill their function. If
you were to remove atoms evenly from the body (and when shrinking a 1.70 m
tall person to the size of 1 cm, we are talking about removing 99.99998% of all
molecules), then only a few atoms would remain even from a very large protein.
So, almost nothing would be left of the protein molecule. This would destroy
the structure of the molecule, its function would be lost, and Dax, O’Brien, and
Bashir would die instantly. Even if the shrunken organism somehow managed to
survive the failure of, for example, the enzymes for a short time, they could not
be newly formed. First of all, the disappearance of most atoms would certainly
have destroyed the ribosomes, where proteins are formed. Moreover, the genetic
material, where the blueprints of the proteins are stored, would be just as little left
because the DNA would suffer the same fate as the proteins.
The creators of Star Trek were apparently aware of this problem. So, the atoms
on board the Rubicon do not simply disappear, but they become smaller. But what
would be the consequences of that?
In science, there are a few immutable principles. One of them is the conserva-
tion of mass. No matter what happens: The mass remains the same. A person can
indeed reduce their mass (otherwise diets would be pointless). Nevertheless, the
total mass remains constant. Although the mass of the person changes, the mass
of the universe remains the same. Atoms that were previously in our fat cells are

7 Ifyou scale down an object so that the original object with a diameter of, for example, 1 m
measures only 10 cm, the mass is reduced to one-thousandth because the volume (and with con-
stant density, also the mass) scales cubically with the diameter. That means if you multiply the
length by a factor of one-tenth, then the volume is multiplied by a factor of one-tenth cubed; in
other words: one-thousandth.
8 The German expression “in Luft aufgelöst” (dissolved into thin air) would not fit here either, as
air is always matter and, moreover, the volume does not decrease when transitioning to the gas
phase but increases significantly.
9 The abbreviation DNA stands for deoxyribonucleic acid.
64 3 Atoms in a Completely Different Way

simply somewhere else afterward. The atoms have not become smaller and lighter.
The process of weight change in humans also works in the other direction, as most
of us know from painful experience. However, the same principle applies again.
The additional mass does not come from nothing but was previously in the things
we ate. The change in mass (and thus the number of atoms) is always equal to the
mass (or number of atoms) added—for example, as food—minus the mass/number
of atoms removed:
Change in the number of atoms in the cell = number of atoms added—number
of atoms removed.
If the atoms were to shrink, it would mean that they have transformed into
some (as of yet unknown) new particles. For example, the transformation of neu-
trons, which are found in atomic nuclei, into other elementary particles is a well-
known process. In the so-called beta decay, it transforms into three particles at
once. A proton is formed, and in addition, an electron (the beta particle) and a neu-
trino (or more precisely: an antineutrino). If one were to measure the mass of the
new particles, one would find that it almost corresponds to the mass of the decayed
neutron. The only tiny difference is that the rest masses of the proton, electron,
and neutrino together are slightly smaller than the mass of the neutron. However,
the electron and neutrino are very fast and thus have considerable kinetic energy.
This energy closes the mass balance again. Therefore, the total mass remains
constant. The difference in masses and their compensation through energy is
described by a very well-known equation: E = m · c2 from Einstein’s general the-
ory of relativity.
Ultimately, the equation says nothing other than that energy E and mass m
are equivalent. If energy is released in a process, the mass seemingly decreases.
However, since the released energy is equivalent to the mass, the mass somehow
remains conserved. Since the speed of light (denoted by the parameter c) is very
large, very little mass corresponds to a lot of energy. Therefore, the change in
mass is usually not noticeable at all. When heat is released in a chemical reaction
such as combustion, the corresponding amount of energy can be converted into
mass, and it is found that it is almost nothing. When weighing the reactants and
products, the result is always that the masses are equal. The difference is smaller
than the measurement accuracy. An example where the mass differences between
reactants and products are somewhat larger is nuclear processes. For this reason,
nuclear fuel rods must be stored in an interim storage facility for years after use
to cool down. Due to the radioactive decay processes within them, energy is con-
tinuously released because the decay products are still lighter than the heavy start-
ing nuclides, even when the mass of the alpha particles released during decay (a
chemist would say: helium nuclei) is included. Consequently, they constantly heat
themselves and do not simply cool down within a few hours or days.
Similar nuclear processes, where the conversion of mass into energy occurs
much faster, are known in connection with an invention from the 1940s: the
atomic bomb. The fission products have a significantly lower mass than the reac-
tants. Although it initially involves only a very small mass difference, multiplied
3.2 Tiny Atoms 65

by the speed of light squared, it results in a large amount of energy. And this
energy is released abruptly. Just like the shrinking of the Rubicon.
In the atomic bomb dropped over Hiroshima, an amount of energy equivalent to
about one gram of mass was released. If a person were shrunk to a size of one cen-
timeter, they would subsequently weigh less than 1 g. Attention: That would be the
remaining mass. Their entire remaining original mass would be released as energy.
Per person, approximately 75 kg of mass would be converted into energy, depend-
ing on the specific individual. That would correspond to 75,000 Hiroshima bombs.
In the case of the shrinking of the Rubicon, the mass of three adult humans10 plus
a small spaceship would have to be converted into energy. The resulting explosion
would likely completely destroy even a spaceship like the Defiant from many kilo-
meters away. Albert Einstein should better not look too closely at this part of the
episode.
However, the creators of Star Trek considered an aspect that filmmakers usu-
ally completely overlook when shrinking people. After the Rubicon returns to the
Defiant and flies into the ship through a plasma opening, its three shrunken crew
members find that it has been boarded by the Jem’Hadar. Before they can deal
with growing back to normal size, their main task is to help liberate the ship. To
regain control of the ship, Chief O’Brien must manually reroute the encryption
sub-processors. To do this, Dax must beam him into the corresponding circuit
housing. The Chief is not thrilled with this idea for two reasons. First, he suspects
that a one-centimeter man would be fried by the smallest mistake while wander-
ing through the circuit housing. Second, Dr. Bashir points out an important cir-
cumstance: The oxygen molecules outside the Rubicon are all normal-sized. The
hemoglobin molecules in the Chief’s blood, however, are tiny (even tinier than
“normal” molecules already are). The oxygen could not bind to his hemoglobin, so
the oxygen could not be transported in the body. As a result, he would suffocate in
a very short time (apart from the fact that the problems with binding the much too
large oxygen molecule to the transport substance hemoglobin would continue in
the biochemical processes inside the body). Fortunately, we are dealing with smart
Starfleet officers. Calculating that the housing is airtight11, Jadzia Dax first beams
some air from the shuttle into the interior of the housing. This way, the Chief can
breathe there for about 20 minutes and save the ship from the Jem’Hadar.

10 Apologies. It is, of course, two adult humans and one Trill. For the calculation, it does not mat-
ter whether they are humans or aliens.
11 Inthis case, the tightness is a bit tricky. Even if the housing is airtight, it is airtight for normal
oxygen molecules. However, the molecules beamed in by Dax are many times smaller. Gases of
smaller molecules tend to diffuse through even the smallest cracks or even through the material
of the wall itself much more than large molecules do (Anyone who has ever tried to seal some-
thing so that hydrogen, the smallest of all real molecules, cannot escape knows the problem; with
the even smaller molecules from the shrunken Rubicon, this problem will certainly be even more
pronounced).
66 3 Atoms in a Completely Different Way

At this point, one can really be proud of Star Trek, because I don’t know of any
other film with a shrink ray or something similar that would have thought of this
problem.

Excursus

What problems do 1 cm tall people face?

What difficulties or even advantages would people who are only 1 cm tall actu-
ally face? Let’s assume that our miniature people are not shrunk like the crew
of the Rubicon, but are made up of completely normal atoms and molecules. In
nature, we can observe countless animals of this size class or smaller. Basically,
there is nothing to prevent higher beings from being that small. But what conse-
quences would such a small size have for a human?
One problem might be the brain. Although such a small creature can also
easily have a brain, this brain would naturally be significantly smaller. Much
smaller, in fact. The entire one-centimeter miniature human would, in terms of
mass, not even have a ten-thousandth of the size of an average human brain.
Consequently, our miniature people would probably hardly be capable of any
special intellectual achievements—let alone being as smart as Jadzia Dax,
Miles O’Brien, and Dr. Julian Bashir. To achieve the intellectual abilities
of a human, the brains of the miniature humanoids would therefore have to
be built much more efficiently. Biologically, a lot is conceivable. The human
brain encompasses large areas that are little used. In fact, human cognitive
abilities are performed in a remarkably small part of the brain. With a differ-
ent brain structure, a lot could therefore be rationalized. Nevertheless, the brain
of the miniature people would still be far too small to achieve even average
intelligence.
So, could the brain be made more efficient on a smaller scale? That also
becomes difficult. Biological brains are based on nerve cells and their connec-
tions to each other. These cells simply have a certain size. There is a certain
range of variation, but the order of magnitude is fixed. If one were to try to cul-
tivate brain cells that were much smaller, these cells would probably no longer
be viable.
In addition, the storage of information (better known as memory) could
become a problem. The brain stores information biochemically in the long
term. Just as the corresponding molecules are housed in the human brain, a
one-centimeter man (or a one-centimeter Trill woman) would probably have
only a very limited memory capacity. However, studies on so-called savant syn-
drome suggest that humans are fundamentally capable of storing much larger
amounts of information than most of us do. The brain structure of the miniature
people would therefore have to be significantly different from ours. In princi-
ple, however, it would be conceivable that they could have the same memory
performance as we do.
Another problem that miniature people would face is that the surface area
of their bodies would be very large. At first glance, this seems paradoxical, and
3.2 Tiny Atoms 67

indeed the surface area of a one-centimeter person is naturally much smaller

than that of a normal-sized person. However, relative to body volume, it is
huge. As we have already seen above, the volume decreases with an exponent
of three compared to the diameter when shrinking. Therefore, the volume (and
with it the mass) decreases much faster than the linear dimensions. The sur-
face area also decreases faster than the diameter, but here the exponent is only
two. This means that a person half as tall (half the height) with the same body
proportions would have only one-eighth (one-half cubed) of the volume. The
surface area would decrease to one-quarter (one-half squared). Consequently,
the body surface area relative to the volume would have increased by a factor
of two.
1 1
Surface: 22
= 4

1 1
Volume: 23
= 8

1/
Surface per Volume: 4 8
=2
1/ = 4
8

This game can be continued. If you imagine a 1.70 m tall person being shrunk
to 1 cm, then their body surface area would have shrunk to one 28,900th (1
divided by 170 squared). However, their volume would be just over one five-
millionth (to be precise, one 4,913,000th = 1 divided by 170 cubed) of
the original value. Consequently, their surface-to-volume ratio would have
increased by a factor of 170.
1 1
Surface: 1702
= 28,900

1 1
Volume: 1703
= 4,913,000

1/
Surface per Volumen: 28,900 = 4,913,000
= 170
1/ 28900
4,913,000

Why is this important now?

In technical chemistry, the surface-to-volume ratio plays a significant role.
This is because all exchange processes occur over the surface. In chemical
processes, it is crucial that substances, for example, are absorbed or released
by a particle as quickly as possible. The smaller the particles, the faster this
happens because the surface is larger in comparison to the volume. To illus-
trate this with an example from daily life: This is the reason why powdered
sugar exists. The same amount of powdered sugar has a much larger surface
area than regular granulated sugar. As a result, it dissolves faster upon contact
with water. Consequently, a larger portion of the powdered sugar dissolves in
the mouth and contributes to the sweetness. “Regular” sugar, on the other hand,
68 3 Atoms in a Completely Different Way

dissolves more slowly because the large sugar crystals have a smaller surface
area relative to their volume. Therefore, only a part of the sugar is available
in the mouth to trigger a sweet taste sensation. A similar effect would affect
our miniature humans. Humans evaporate large amounts of water through their
body surface. This process is known as sweating and serves to regulate body
temperature. If the body surface is 170 times larger relative to the body volume,
then, in the first approximation, evaporation is also 170 times greater relative to
the body’s water reserves. Therefore, the miniature humans would have to drink
a lot to avoid dehydration.
Yet, the miniature humans would hardly sweat at all. Their problem would
be quite the opposite. There is another exchange process that occurs over the
surface and also plays a significant role in technical chemistry. This is heat
exchange. Chemical processes are constantly taking place inside the body,
releasing heat. The purpose of these processes is to provide energy for all kinds
of bodily functions, primarily muscle contraction, i.e., movement. The heat
released in the process is initially a kind of loss. This energy cannot be used
for muscle movement. However, the heat is not useless. It ensures that the body
temperature remains permanently above the ambient temperature. This not only
protects us from freezing into ice blocks in winter but also helps maintain bod-
ily functions properly. Biochemistry operates best at a temperature of about
37 °C. The constant heat production inside the body is exactly balanced in the
medium term by the constant heat dissipation through the body surface. The
body temperature remains constant. If the body surface is increased 170-fold
relative to the body volume, then the body also dissipates about 170 times more
heat per body volume. To compensate, each cell would have to metabolize 170
times more carbohydrates or fats per unit of time. What initially sounds like a
fantastic diet program would mean that the miniature humans would have to
eat constantly. This is one of the reasons why, although there are very small
animals, all animals below the size of a mouse are cold-blooded. This means
they do not heat their bodies to a temperature of about 37 °C but adapt to the
ambient temperature. Otherwise, the energy requirement would simply be too
large. This relationship between body size and heat dissipation leads, among
other things, to the fact that animals living in a polar climate are often signifi-
cantly larger than their relatives from the tropics and is known as Bergmann’s
rule. It is one of the so-called ecogeographical rules that describe how the char-
acteristics of closely related organisms differ in different habitats. A one-cen-
timeter human with the same body proportions as a 1.70 m tall human would
therefore constantly freeze. The episode does not report on this, but it can be
assumed that Jadzia Dax has therefore set the temperature regulators on board
the Rubicon to 35 or 36 °C.
However, miniature humans would have a significant advantage due to
the high surface-to-volume ratio (which is not really of a chemical nature):
Not only does the body surface increase in comparison to the volume. The
3.3 Tiny Atoms—Part 2 69

cross-sectional area also increases in comparison to volume and mass. With

respect to the cross-sectional area, their bones only have to bear one 170th of
the weight. This is extremely helpful in falls. This can be observed in insects.
If an ant were to fall from the tenth floor, it would not be seriously injured. On
the one hand, it has to absorb hardly any body weight relative to the cross-sec-
tional area. On the other hand, it does not fall very fast because it experiences
a large air resistance relative to its body weight due to the high surface-to-vol-
ume ratio.12 The same applies to the miniature humans. If the shrunken Miles
O’Brien falls from a 1.5 cm high component in the circuit housing, it would be
a significant fall relative to his body size, but he would not be seriously harmed
(unless his fear comes true and he falls into a circuit). ◄

3.3 Tiny Atoms—Part 2

Also in the year 2374, an event occurs that raises further questions related to
things smaller than atoms. Although there is hardly any time between the incident
of the shrunken Rubicon and this event, there is a very great distance between
them, even by Star Trek standards. This second event takes place at the other end
of the galaxy. More precisely: in the Delta Quadrant. The crew of the stranded
spaceship Voyager has to endure quite a lot on its seven-year journey home. The
events of the 7th episode of the 4th VOY season, “Scientific Method”, even cost a
crew member his life. Quite apart from that, they raise some chemical questions
again. What happened?
The Srivani are a technologically advanced species. To advance their research,
they sometimes use highly questionable methods. This includes, among other
things, conducting certain medical experiments. They do not conduct these tests
on themselves but on the crew of the Voyager.
Now, there are ethical principles that apply to science. These are especially rel-
evant for medical and biochemical research. This mainly concerns experiments
on animals and humans. Experiments on living animals may only be conducted,
among other things, if the corresponding experiment is unavoidable to find a cure
for a disease, for example (animal testing for cosmetics is—at least within the
EU—fundamentally prohibited, and even the import of such cosmetics is banned).
The question of whether an experiment on living animals is scientifically justified
is, of course, a question that every scientist must scrutinize closely. This is man-
dated by scientific ethics. But that is only the first step. If scientists themselves
conclude that an experiment on vertebrates is unavoidable and ethically justified,
the experiment must still be additionally approved by an external body. No sci-
entist can approve such an experiment themselves. For experiments with humans,

12 Thisshould not be misunderstood as an invitation to throw small animals out of the window to
test whether they really do not get injured.
70 3 Atoms in a Completely Different Way

which are sooner or later always necessary in the development of drugs, signifi-
cantly stricter rules apply.13
In science, one repeatedly comes into contact with ethics (even if one is not
a philosopher or theologian). An example of this is the so-called peer review.
Scientific results are not simply published on a homepage, and if they are pub-
lished in a scientific journal, the responsible editor does not simply decide alone
whether the corresponding article will be published. If the editor of a reputable
scientific journal14 concludes that a contribution could be fundamentally suitable,
they ask external scientists who are themselves active in this field and therefore
potentially able to evaluate current research from this area. These scientists create
reviews in which they give recommendations for acceptance, rejection, and pos-
sibly improvement of the contribution. The reviewers (“peer reviewers”) are sup-
posed to examine various aspects. The most important is, of course, the scientific
methodology. That means: Is the approach suitable to answer the corresponding
question, and was it conducted properly. Besides that, there are other questions
of good scientific practice for the reviewers to examine. One question a reviewer
should evaluate is whether they have ethical concerns regarding the corresponding
research.15
Thus, scientific ethics has a high significance. At least for terrestrial science.
The Srivani obviously see this much less strictly. Apparently, they are aware of
the fact that their experiments can have extremely unpleasant consequences for
the subjects. Therefore, they do not want the experiments to be conducted on

13 When, which experiments are justified to what extent, is a difficult ethical question with very
different views. These different views probably all have their justification. In Germany, there
are legal regulations on this in the extremely lengthy paragraphs 7 to 10 of the Animal Welfare
Act. But that does not absolve anyone from repeatedly asking the relevant ethical questions
themselves. At this point, I am really glad that I research chemical energy storage and physico-
chemical fundamentals. But even if no experiments on living beings are involved, every scientist
should always think about the ethical questions related to their research. Not only when research-
ing living beings or atomic bombs, it is worth repeatedly questioning one’s research in terms of
its ethical consequences.
14 The point “reputable” is unfortunately a big problem. There are a large number of so-called
“predatory publishers” who publish anything for money. This is one of the reasons why it can
play a significant role in science where something is published. With a well-known, reputable
journal, one can assume that the review process has been properly conducted. Being able to clas-
sify the journal in this regard requires some experience among scientists and is often difficult for
laypeople and yound students to understand.
15 Thisquestion is, of course, very much aimed at experiments on living beings, but it is by no
means limited to that. On the online platforms of some journals for submitting reviews, one even
has to explicitly select whether one sees any ethical problems with the corresponding research
(the system sometimes automatically asks this question to a reviewer, even if it is a theoretical
work on energy storage).
3.3 Tiny Atoms—Part 2 71

themselves.16 Therefore, they decide to conduct secret experiments on the visitors

from the Alpha Quadrant.
They apparently anticipate that the crew of the Voyager would be less than
enthusiastic about these experiments and would refuse consent even if asked
politely. Accordingly, they simply come on board unasked and unnoticed. To do
this, they use highly advanced cloaking technology that not only hides their two
ships docked to the Voyager but also themselves. The phase-shifted Srivani can
thus wander undisturbed through the ship and implant the craziest, also invisible,
things into the crew. The phase shift used in this process raises some physical
questions. One of the implants, in particular, also raises exciting chemical ques-
tions: a marker on the DNA.
The DNA, in which our genetic information is stored, is, simply put, a large
molecule. Many atoms are lined up in two long chains, which are multiply con-
nected and twisted into a double helix. Using a scanner she developed, B’Elanna
Torres is now able to examine Chakotay’s DNA. DNA examinations are no longer
unusual even today. There are a whole range of biochemical methods to do this.
However, the scanner developed by Torres is a microscope with capabilities that
far exceed our current options. This scanner shows sharp images of the DNA,
where you can even see the individual atoms. That’s already quite good, but the
truly remarkable part is yet to come. You can see even more. On individual atoms
of the DNA, there are small markings that faintly resemble barcodes from the
supermarket. Even viewers from the 24th century are astonished by such a level of
submolecular technology. The Starfleet is far from this level. Ultimately, this is no
wonder. The image of these tiny signs placed by the Srivani raises three questions
from a chemist’s perspective. First: How can it actually be seen? Second: How can
it sit on the surface of an atom? Third: How can it exist at all?
Let’s start with question number one. How can B’Elanna’s scanner even pro-
duce an image of this marking? Quite obviously, this scanner does not create an
image using visible light. In practice, the resolution of a microscope is often lim-
ited by factors such as the quality of the optical lenses. However, if you push the
technology to its limits, you eventually reach another boundary for resolution: the
wavelength of light. Simply put, you cannot resolve structures that are smaller
than the wavelength of the light used.
For light visible to us humans, the wavelength is approximately between 380
and 750 nm. The short-wavelength light at 380 nm (or slightly more) is violet. The
long-wavelength light at 750 nm (and slightly less) is red. The entire spectrum of

16 At this point, one can, of course, ask whether the human decision to conduct corresponding

experiments on other species does not have parallels to the behavior of the Srivani. Quite obvi-
ously, the Srivani not only practice the corresponding experiments but also see no reasons to
restrict them in any way for ethical reasons.
72 3 Atoms in a Completely Different Way

the rainbow spans between these two extremes.17 If you want to take a picture of a
DNA molecule with visible light, it would be difficult to even recognize the indi-
vidual atoms. A carbon atom has a diameter of only about 140 picometers. Most
of the other atoms in the DNA are even slightly smaller. Only the few phosphorus
molecules are slightly larger at 200 picometers. Comparing these sizes, it becomes
apparent that even the largest atoms are smaller than the wavelength of the shortest
visible light. The difference becomes especially glaring when you not only look
at the numerical values but also at the unit. The unit of wavelength is nanometers.
That is one billionth of a meter. The unit of atomic diameters is picometers. That
is one trillionth of a meter. The atoms are therefore more than a factor of 1000
too small to be seen with visible light—not to mention resolving any even smaller
structures on them.
With shorter-wavelength light, which is no longer directly visible to the human
eye, the lower limit of resolution can be shifted downward. If the wavelength is
only slightly reduced, it is referred to as ultraviolet light. If the wavelength is fur-
ther reduced, one eventually enters the range of X-rays. With very hard X-rays,
one indeed slowly enters a range where resolutions on the order of individual
atoms would theoretically be conceivable. Chemists are already using such tech-
niques today. For example, X-ray diffraction (XRD) is used to determine the
arrangement of atoms in crystals. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) is used
to analyze the chemical composition of surface layers that are only a few atoms
thick. Such techniques are used, among other things, in the investigation of cat-
alysts. To achieve microscopy with even higher resolution, one leaves the realm
of electromagnetic waves, to which light and X-rays belong. Instead, one can
use electron beams. However, it should not be forgotten that even electrons have
a wavelength. With very high-energy electrons, this wavelength is quite small,
which is why resolutions of about 100 picometers are challenging but fundamen-
tally possible. The individual atom is thus slowly coming into the visible range for
today’s chemists. Structures smaller than an atom, however, are still far outside
the realistic range for the foreseeable future. Besides the technical implementa-
tion, which has not yet been achieved, there is currently not even a type of radia-
tion known that could resolve something so small. If we are slowly approaching
the resolution of individual atoms at the beginning of the 21st century, it does not

17 The spectrum of light has great significance in chemistry. Even in the first semester (and hope-
fully earlier in school chemistry classes), every chemistry student must conduct practical experi-
ments on flame coloration. For example, if you hold a sodium salt in a flame, the color of the
flame changes due to the characteristic spectral lines of sodium and becomes yellow. With a lith-
ium salt, it would turn red, and with a potassium salt, violet. Each chemical element has its own
characteristic spectral lines by which it can be optically identified. Individual elements were even
discovered this way. One of them was discovered in 1868, for example, when an unexplained
bright yellow spectral line was found during the examination of the sun’s chromosphere during a
solar eclipse. Since this line could not be assigned to any known element, it was concluded that it
came from a previously unknown element. This element was eventually named helium, after the
Greek word for the sun.
3.3 Tiny Atoms—Part 2 73

seem entirely far-fetched for the middle of the 24th century. Even if we currently
cannot say how.
The second question is more difficult: Can a tiny, submolecular structure be
simply placed on the spherical surface of an atom? Even B’Elanna Torres finds
it a mystery with which tool this should be done. But let’s assume that such a
tool exists. The question remains: Is there even a spherical surface of the atom on
which the structure can be placed?
According to the classical atomic model, there is indeed a solid surface of the
atom. The term atom itself implies this. The Greek word “atomos” means indivis-
ible. The idea was that the atom is the smallest unit and that it does not consist
of other, smaller components. Modern chemistry, however, abandoned this idea at
the beginning of the 20th century. Today we know that atoms consist of two parts:
the atomic nucleus and the electrons.18 The internal structure of an atom is some-
what complicated, and it becomes even more complicated when considering atoms
that are bound into molecules. A very popular and simple representation of this is
the so-called Bohr model of the atom, which we already touched upon when dis-
cussing hydrogen. It was developed by Niels Bohr in 1913 and is fundamentally
well-suited to appeal to a Star Trek fan. The Bohr model of the atom assumes that
atoms are structured like small solar systems. In the center is a large, heavy star
(the atomic nucleus), and around this central star, one or more small planets (the
electrons) orbit.19 Let’s imagine the atom in this way as a first step and also think
of the markings applied by the Srivani. Where should these be placed? The atom is
not a sphere with a surface. It is a solar system with (in the case of carbon atoms)
six planets called electrons. Accordingly, one cannot simply place something on a
non-existent outer surface.
The Bohr model of the atom was an important step towards understanding
atomic structure. However, it is far from the final word on the matter. In reality,
electrons are not solid particles that orbit the atomic nucleus. Just like light, elec-
trons have a dual nature: they are both wave and particle.
The dual nature of light often leads to confusion because people ask whether
light is a wave or a particle. The answer is truly: both at the same time.
The wave nature of light is evident, for example, in light scattering. When
observing water waves hitting an obstacle, one notices that they seem to bend
around the obstacle. Another example is the superposition of waves, known as
interference. Depending on how two waves overlap, they can either amplify or
weaken each other. What can be observed on a water surface can also be observed

18 Strictly speaking, the atomic nucleus (apart from the simplest hydrogen isotope) consists of
several smaller particles; primarily protons and neutrons, which are held together by the media-
tion of other particles. For chemistry, the division into atomic nucleus and electrons is usually
sufficient, as chemical bonds are mediated by the electrons.
19 What the Trekkie might miss in this model to be completely happy are moons orbiting the elec-
trons. Then it would be truly perfect.
74 3 Atoms in a Completely Different Way

with coherent light. The Michelson-Morley experiment, the fundamental discovery

that led to the theory of special relativity, is based precisely on this.
At the same time, light is transmitted in the form of particles, called pho-
tons. Ultimately, photovoltaics or the biochemical conversion of carbon diox-
ide and water into oxygen and sugar in photosynthesis is based on this. Both
natures are always present. However, there is a tendency for the particle nature to
come to the forefront when the light is very short-wavelength, that is, very high-
energy. Conversely, the wave nature is more pronounced when the light is rather
long-wavelength.
However, this dual nature is not limited to light. All particles are simultane-
ously waves. The more energetic (practically speaking, usually: the more massive)
they are, the less the wave nature emerges. For heavy particles, the wavelength
is significantly smaller than the particle itself. Thus, the notion that the atomic
nucleus is a particle and not a wave is generally already a very good assump-
tion. In contrast, the wave nature is much more pronounced in the much lighter
electrons.
Instead of imagining electrons as particles that orbit the center like planets,
it is better to envision them as a cloud. The location of the electron is not really
clearly defined, but there is only an area called an orbital within which the elec-
tron resides. As mentioned, it does not have a clearly defined location, but only a
probability of being at individual points within the orbital. Since each orbital can
accommodate a maximum of two electrons, all atoms, except for hydrogen and
helium, have multiple orbitals. These additional orbitals are then no longer spheri-
cal but take on complex shapes to fill the space around the atomic nucleus as effi-
ciently as possible. In practice, however, the atom is often simply imagined as a
sphere with a clearly defined surface. For many questions, this is a reasonable and
quite practical approximation of reality. However, an atom does not have a solid
spherical surface on which a mark could be placed.

Some More Details

Upon closer examination of the image of the DNA recorded by B’Elanna’s

scanner, one notices that the surface of the spherical atom is not uniform but
has a certain shading. Here, the creators of Star Trek have once again proven to
be very precise, as the distribution of electrons described only by a probability
density also undergoes fluctuations (in the Bohr model of the atom, this can
be simplified by imagining that the electrons orbit the nucleus and sometimes
there are more electrons on one side than on the other). Since the electrons are
negatively charged and the atomic nucleus is positively charged, this leads to an
unequal distribution of charge within the atom, resulting in a so-called sponta-
neous dipole. Overall, the particle is still electrically neutral, but it temporar-
ily has a positive and a negative end. This can, in turn, induce a dipole in a
neighboring atom or molecule (meaning: electrons are shifted within the mol-
ecule, so that this molecule also temporarily becomes a dipole). Since the posi-
tive side of the spontaneous dipole is closer to the negative side of the induced
3.3 Tiny Atoms—Part 2 75

dipole than to its positive side (or vice versa), the two molecules attract each
other. This effect is the cause of the so-called van der Waals forces between
molecules. ◄

Finally, there remains a third, already hinted-at question raised by the submolecu-
lar marking of the Srivani: Can such a small structure even exist?
Every known structure is made up of chemical elements and compounds.
However, they all consist of atoms. Printing a barcode on an atom, therefore,
requires an ink that is not made of atoms. Such a thing does not exist. Neither does
it exist today, nor does it seem to be known to B’Elanna Torres in the 24th century.
The Srivani are obviously much further advanced. How exactly they manage this,
we cannot say, but is it fundamentally unthinkable?
In chemistry, one usually deals with no more than three elementary particles:
electrons, protons, and neutrons. In the practical work of a chemist, it is almost
always only the first two.20 However, there are many more elementary particles
in the universe. Hundreds have already been discovered today, and the names of
many of these elementary particles are certainly familiar to Star Trek viewers.
Although no one today would have any idea what a chemical compound based on
other elementary particles might look like.21 But that does not mean it could not be
possible. In principle, it would be conceivable to build structures from other ele-
mentary particles that are much smaller than the elementary particles that make up
the matter surrounding us and of which we ourselves are composed. However, if
one were to attempt to build structures significantly smaller than atoms, one would
run into trouble with a gentleman named Werner Heisenberg.
The Heisenberg uncertainty principle, formulated in 1927, states that the posi-
tion and velocity of a particle cannot be determined with arbitrary precision. In
practice, this limit of accuracy is mostly completely irrelevant because the prac-
tically achievable measurement accuracy is significantly worse. However, if one
were to push the measurement technology to its limits and perform the best possi-
ble measurement, one can still never measure more accurately than the Heisenberg

20 Electrons are enormously important in chemistry because they ultimately mediate the bonding
between atoms to form molecules. Additionally, they are transferred from one atom to another in
a very important class of chemical reactions, the redox reactions. Protons are also transferred in a
specific type of reaction. These are the so-called protolysis or acid-base reactions. In this process,
no elementary particle is removed from one atomic nucleus and transferred to another nucleus.
Rather, it is simply a positively charged hydrogen atom (or better, ion). The atomic nucleus of the
most important hydrogen isotope consists of just a single proton, and if you take away its only
electron, only the proton remains as the hydrogen ion. In protolysis, these protons are transferred
from an acid molecule to a base molecule.
21 Muonium could be understood as a kind of atom made of other elementary particles. In this

structure, discovered in 1960 by a team led by Vernon W. Hughes, an electron orbits an anti-
muon (as in conventional atoms). Muonium thus has a certain similarity to a hydrogen atom.
However, its mass is significantly smaller. The same applies to its lifespan, which is in the range
of microseconds.
76 3 Atoms in a Completely Different Way

uncertainty principle allows. In fact, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle does

not say that one cannot determine position or velocity with arbitrary precision.
However, if one does, the other quantity becomes arbitrarily imprecise.22
If we now use miniature atoms, consisting of whatever elementary particles, to
build such small microstructures as the Srivani do, we would have to determine
the position of the individual atoms incredibly precisely. To form something like
chemical bonds, each miniature atom would need to have a position relative to
the other miniature atoms that is enormously precise; much more precise than in
normal molecules. Consequently, the velocity of the particles would become very
imprecise. How one is supposed to form molecules with such an indeterminate
velocity into a solid structure is a completely unresolved question.23
However, it can be assumed that there is a solution for this in Star Trek. In the
12th episode of the 6th TNG season, “Ship in a Bottle”, we learn, for example,
that the transporters have a Heisenberg compensator. The Heisenberg uncertainty
principle would actually make beaming impossible. Fortunately, the engineers in
Star Trek have found a solution for this. Unfortunately, we do not learn how the
Heisenberg compensator works.

22 Strictlyspeaking, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle is not about an uncertainty in velocity,

but in momentum. Momentum is the product of mass and velocity. If we assume that the mass
of a particle is fixed, then it is ultimately the velocity whose accuracy is coupled with the posi-
tion by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The limit in accuracy results from the product of
the accuracy of position and momentum. This product cannot be greater than Planck’s constant.
Since this constant, with a value of about 0.00000000000000000000000000000000066 J·s, is
very small, the effect is hardly noticeable in practice. In our case, however, the Heisenberg uncer-
tainty principle causes serious problems.
23 The same effect would most likely have caused difficulties for the crew of the shrunken
Rubicon from our previous example. The 1 cm tall humans would not have been able to observe
it visibly, but with the shrunken atoms, their biochemistry would probably have already started to
behave significantly differently than it should.
Chemistry and Its Speed
4

4.1 The Salt Vampire of M-113

The 5th episode of the 1st TOS season, “The Man Trap”, was one of the first epi-
sodes of Star Trek ever. In it, Dr. McCoy meets his old flame Nancy Crater again
on the planet M-113. As the episode progresses, it turns out that she is not only
married but has been dead for quite some time. The alien creature that consumed
her, however, is capable of taking any form and is now posing as Nancy. Although!
It didn’t really consume her. It only needed one component of her body: salt.
This life form has many suction cups on its hands. With the help of these, the
creature seems to be able to suck all the salt out of its victims’ bodies. For this salt
vampire, as it is fondly called by Star Trek fans, table salt (chemically: sodium
chloride; NaCl) is apparently of central importance. This is a statement that ini-
tially applies equally to the human organism. We cannot live without salt. On the
other hand, the daily requirement of a human for table salt is only a few grams.
Today, unlike in the past, salt is very easily available. However, our bodies are still
conditioned to get as much of this vital and sometimes scarce mineral in nature as
possible. As a result, we modern humans in Europe mainly have the problem that
we tend to eat too much salt. This has some significant medical consequences.
Of course, our biochemistry doesn’t work without salt either. If a salt vampire
from the planet M-113 were to suck all the sodium chloride out of our bodies
within seconds, it would indeed be fatal. And also within seconds, as some crew
members of the Enterprise have to experience firsthand. The reason for this is sim-
ple. Salt has a number of vital functions in the body. Removing all salt from the
nerves would kill us instantly. It plays a role in the transmission of nerve impulses.
Without nerve impulses, there is no muscle contraction. Without muscle contrac-
tion, there is no heartbeat. Without a heartbeat, there is no oxygen supply to the
brain and other organs. This would mean the death of the victim in a very short
time.

77
78 4 Chemistry and Its Speed

The need for salt is significantly greater in the salt vampires of M-113 than
in us humans.1 What exactly they need the salt for is unfortunately not clari-
fied. From a chemical point of view, however, it is clear that the consumption
of salt cannot really serve as an energy source. Salt may look similar to sugar.
Nevertheless, it can only very limitedly take over its function as an energy carrier.
Salt cannot be oxidized to gain energy for any body functions. There is also no
chemical reaction with table salt as a starting material that would be suitable as an
energy source for living beings. But would it really be unthinkable for alien life
forms to use salt for energy provision?
There is indeed a type of power plant that is based on salt: the so-called
osmotic power plant. For this, you need water sources with different salt concen-
trations. In practice, you find this, for example, at the mouth of rivers into the sea.
There, large amounts of both saltwater and freshwater are available. In an osmotic
power plant, as the name suggests, an effect called osmosis is used. We will get
to know osmosis in more detail later. In short, osmotic power plants use the fact
that freshwater passes through certain membranes even when there is saltwater
with a significantly higher pressure on the other side. This allows an even higher
pressure to be built up in the saltwater, which can be used in a turbine to gen-
erate power. This is possible. However, this technology has not yet progressed
beyond the stage of individual demonstration plants. In the foreseeable future, it
is unlikely that osmotic power plants will play a significant role in our energy sup-
ply. Nevertheless, it is possible to generate energy from salt. At least as long as
you can get a solution with a low salt concentration from somewhere. As we will
see, this will be somewhat difficult for a salt vampire. But who knows what their
organism actually needs the salt for so urgently? Maybe it has a completely differ-
ent function for their biochemistry.
The much more exciting question, however, is how the salt vampire sucks
the salt out of its victims. As mentioned, it has several suction cups on its hands.
However, it is not the case that the bodies of humans or other living beings have
taps where it could dock with its suction cups to suck out the salt. A “normal vam-
pire” has it much easier in this regard. Although there are no taps for blood on the
human body either, it is relatively easy to create one. As we know from countless
vampire books and movies, the vampire only needs to pierce its victim near an
artery with its sharp teeth. In a pinch, it could even pierce a vein, of which there
are several near the surface of the body. Then it would have to suck a bit harder

1 The salt requirement seems to be so high that the species eventually became extinct because all
the salt on M-113 was used up at some point. It can’t really be used up. No matter what chemical
reaction you do with salt: the sodium and chlorine atoms from which it is built remain as such,
and the total amount on the planet does not change. Nevertheless, it is conceivable that at some
point all the table salt is “used up” in the sense that we “use up” water. Water is not destroyed
when washing and drinking. It is still water. However, it becomes contaminated, meaning it is
dirtier after use than before. It is “used up” in the sense that it is still there but can no longer be
used immediately. Something similar could have happened with the salt on M-113.
4.1 The Salt Vampire of M-113 79

itself, as the blood pressure is lower there. In principle, however, it is still a fairly
simple process. The situation looks much more complicated for a salt vampire.
The problem is the distribution of the salt. There is no salt chamber in the
human body, even if the salt concentration may slightly differ in the various
organs. By and large, the salt is quite evenly distributed in the human body. This
applies not only to humans but ultimately to all higher living beings. So, it is not
enough for the salt vampire to apply its suction cups in the right place, analogous
to the teeth of its bloodsucking namesake, because there simply is no right place.
No matter where it starts to suck its victim: It would not simply suck out the salt,
but every liquid or dissolved chemical substance.
Let’s take a closer look at the salt vampires from M-113. As mentioned, there is
a kind of suction cup on their hands. The function of a suction cup is normally not
to suck out, but to suck on. Octopuses and other animals have their suction cups not
to suck out prey animals, but to suck on. On the one hand, the eponymous effect
can serve this purpose. By creating a vacuum at the suction cups, the animal holds
onto a surface (this surface can then again be the body of a prey animal). Besides
the vacuum effect, rather chemical effects can also come into play with suction
cups. Some animals secrete glandular secretions to hold on. Such a secretion can
not only serve the (very important) sealing of a vacuum. It can also contribute to
adhesion itself. This effect is called adhesion and is a significant working mecha-
nism for adhesives. There are attractive forces between molecules. However, the
strength of these attractive forces can vary greatly. Many factors come into play.
Among other things, the size of the molecules and their chemical structure play
a significant role. Simply put, an animal must apply a glandular secretion over its
suction cups in such a way that it maximizes the contact between the surface and
the suction cup. On the other hand, the molecules of the secretion must have strong
attractive forces both to the surface and to the body of the animal.
However, the salt vampire does not suck onto its victim at all. While it extracts
the salt from them, the victims seem to be almost paralyzed. This suggests that it
actually secretes a substance that chemically incapacitates the victims. However,
this cannot explain the actual function of salt sucking. For this, it needs something
that allows it to absorb only the salt. The other components of its prey’s body must
remain where they are. Accordingly, the beings from M-113 do not need openings
(like a mouth), but membranes. Only in this way can salt be absorbed and every-
thing else be retained by the membrane. Thus, the mystery seems to be solved.
The suction cups represent membranes through which the salt vampire selectively2
sucks the salt out of its prey’s body.

2 Selective is a term that appears more often in chemistry. Selectivity means that only one of sev-
eral possible chemical reactions occurs or, as in the case of the membrane, only the molecules of
a specific substance are allowed through and all others are retained. In practice, there are rarely
selectivities of 100%. Instead, one often has to deal with side reactions or other substances pass-
ing through the membrane. Therefore, the goal in practice is often to achieve the highest possible
selectivity (a lot of the desired substance, little of the undesired).
80 4 Chemistry and Its Speed

Even if that is the answer, it raises three new questions at once:

1. How can a membrane let salt through and retain everything else?
2. How does the salt vampire get the salt to pass through the membrane at all?
3. How can it extract the salt from its victims so quickly?

Let’s start with the first question. We need a membrane that allows salt to be sepa-
rated from water. Blood or lymph fluid contains the desired salt along with a lot
of water (in addition, there are many other things, but these are all larger mol-
ecules or even whole particles that can be easily separated). Membranes that sepa-
rate water and salt do exist. In technology, they are used, for example, in seawater
desalination. The process is called reverse osmosis. As the name already suggests,
the principle is derived from another effect that is “reversed” in technology: The
biological effect of osmosis. In osmosis (just like in reverse osmosis), there are
selective membranes. Such a selective membrane lets one substance through (the
chemist says: it is permeable to it). It does not let the other substance through (for
it, it is impermeable).
The cell membranes that enclose not only the cells of us humans but the cells
of all living beings are such semipermeable membranes. The Latin prefix “semi-”
means half. Half is let through, the other half is not. Whether it is really exactly
half is another matter. What is crucial is something else. The membrane is permea-
ble to water and impermeable to salt. In other words: Exactly the wrong substance
is let through. The salt that the salt vampire actually wants to let through does not
pass through.
Therefore, it would need a completely different type of membrane. A mem-
brane that is permeable to salt but impermeable to water. At this point, the salt
vampire would need a membrane in its suction cups that is significantly different
from what known biology offers. This is not entirely trivial. Compared to the fur-
ther challenges, however, it is rather the smallest problem. The second question
proves to be considerably more critical: How does one get the salt to pass through
the membrane at all?
Let us assume for a moment that the salt vampire possessed a hypothetical, per-
fect membrane. This membrane would not only be one hundred percent selective.
That is, it would only allow the desired salt to pass through, while not a single
water molecule or other substance would manage to get through. At the same time,
the diffusion resistance for salt would also be negligibly small. With membranes,
there is often the problem that the desired substance does pass through, but it is
slowed down by the membrane. The unwanted substances are merely slowed down
even more. This is how the separation effect of the membrane comes about. Let us
now simply imagine that our perfect membrane poses no obstacle to salt at all. We
assume that the salt can move through the membrane as if it were not there at all,
but the membrane would magically only hinder the water. What would salt in an
aqueous solution do at this membrane?
Let us imagine such a membrane. On one side, there is salt water, and on the
other side of the membrane, there is also salt water. Both the sodium and chloride
4.1 The Salt Vampire of M-113 81

ions that form the salt can pass through the membrane unhindered. The water,
however, cannot. Let us say that on the left side of the membrane is Captain Kirk’s
blood. On the right side is the blood of the salt vampire, who is trying to extract all
the salt from the Captain. There would be nothing to stop the sodium and chloride
ions from migrating through the membrane to the salt vampire. Since the water
would be held back, the poor Captain would lose more and more salt over time. At
least if there were not the salt on the other side. There is also salt in the salt vam-
pire’s blood. Even if there had been no salt in his blood at the beginning, his blood
would also contain salt as soon as he had extracted a significant amount. This salt
on the right side could also migrate through the membrane and replenish Kirk’s
body’s salt supply. Ultimately, what matters is the net salt exchange. This means
nothing other than the amount of salt that migrates from left to right minus the
amount of salt that migrates from right to left.
Let us put ourselves on the molecular level. This means in this context the order
of magnitude of the ions of the salt. To migrate through the membrane, an ion
must first hit the membrane. The more ions hit the membrane per unit of time, the
more migrate through the membrane. In the end, there is a net migration of ions
from the side where many ions hit the membrane to the side where few ions hit the
membrane per unit of time. The number of ions hitting the membrane per unit of
time depends on two factors: temperature and concentration.
The molecules and ions in saltwater are not rigidly arranged so that each has
its fixed place, but they move more or less freely. The higher the temperature,
the faster they move. As a result, more ions hit the same area per unit of time.
However, different temperatures on both sides of the membrane are not a really
practical method to drive a substance through a membrane. On the one hand, the
temperatures on both sides of a thin membrane equalize very quickly. On the other
hand, the body temperatures of humans and salt vampires do not seem to differ
significantly. Much more important is the effect of concentration. When the con-
centration is high, many ions are present in the same volume, and thus many ions
hit a given membrane area per unit of time. If there is a high salt concentration on
the left side and a low one on the right side, there is a net migration of the salt ions
from left to right. Ions also migrate from right to left, but many more ions migrate
from left to right. This is the net migration called diffusion. In summary, the rule
is: A substance diffuses from an area of high concentration to an area of low con-
centration. This ultimately applies regardless of whether there is a membrane in
between or not. The membrane can only inhibit diffusion, not cause it.
This has a very crucial consequence for the salt vampire: He must have a lower
salt concentration in his blood than in the blood of his victim. At first, this does
not sound so difficult. At the beginning, it is not. However, if he extracts more and
more salt from his victim, the salt concentration on both sides changes. On the left
side (in Captain Kirk’s body), it decreases. On the right side (in the salt vampire),
it increases. If the salt vampire really wanted to extract all the salt from his victim,
he would have to reduce the concentration in his body to zero. For the salt ions
to still migrate through the membrane to the salt vampire, he would have to keep
the salt concentration in his blood at zero as well (strictly speaking, even below
82 4 Chemistry and Its Speed

zero, which, however, makes no chemical sense). Since salt is constantly flowing
into his body from his victim’s body, this is somewhat difficult. Since his body is
obviously not infinitely large, the salt concentration will inevitably increase. The
extraction of salt will therefore come to a halt as soon as the concentrations on
both sides are equal. If we assume that salt vampires are about the same size as an
average human and at the beginning of the extraction process there was no salt in
his body (which explains why he urgently needs some), then he could at most steal
half of his victim’s salt. Once he has extracted half, the salt concentrations would
be balanced due to the approximately equal body volume. The net diffusion would
come to a halt, and the victim would have a massive salt deficiency. However, not
all the salt would be extracted, but only half.3
So, is the salt vampire doomed to a cruel death from salt deficiency because his
process of salt absorption from human victims does not work properly at all? Well,
it is indeed difficult. However, there is still one possibility: electrodialysis.
Salts consist of ions. In the case of table salt, these are sodium ions and chlo-
ride ions. The sodium ions are positively charged cations, while the chloride ions
are negatively charged anions. When an electric field is applied, the sodium ions
move towards the negative pole and the chloride ions towards the positive pole.4 A
sufficiently strong electric field can indeed cause the ions to move against the con-
centration gradient; in other words, from an area of low concentration to an area of
high concentration.
For a salt vampire, however, it is not enough to simply generate an electric
field and thereby pull the ions of the salt towards itself. If it charges its suction
cups positively, for example, it attracts the anions (i.e., the chloride). The cations
(the sodium), on the other hand, would be repelled. This would not only cause
it to miss out on half of the ions. In no time, its positive charge would be gone,
as the attracted negative chloride ions would compensate for the positive charge.
Conversely, the same would apply if it charged its suction cups negatively to
attract the sodium ions. This is where electrodialysis comes into play. This process
uses a combination of membranes and an electric field. The method is quite com-
mon in technical chemistry. It is not yet known in biological organisms, but who
knows what nature on M-113 might produce. Let’s take a look at the process (Fig.
4.1).
First, there would need to be a membrane on the outside of the suction cups
that allows both ions to pass through. Inside the suction cups, the salt vam-
pire would need to generate an electric field. Technically speaking, we would

3A little more could theoretically be possible if the salt vampire’s blood had a significantly
higher solubility for salt than that of humans. However, since water is already one of the best sol-
vents for table salt, it would be chemically difficult to find a suitable substance.
4 The negative pole is also called the cathode, from which the term cations comes, because

they migrate there. The positive pole is called the anode, from which the term anion is derived
analogously.
4.1 The Salt Vampire of M-113 83

Anion
exchange
membrane
Sodium ion
Chloride ion

Acid-base balance
Suc
on
cup
Human

Concentrate

Membrane
(permeable for Caon
Na+ and CI )- exchanger-
membrane

Fig. 4.1  Schematic representation of an electrodialysis with which the salt vampire could selec-
tively extract only the salt from its victims

be dealing with an electric capacitor. Within this capacitor, there are two differ-
ent types of membranes responsible for the chemistry. The membranes differ
in what they allow to pass through. On the one hand, there are anion exchange
membranes. As the name suggests, they only allow anions to pass through.
Unsurprisingly, the second type is cation exchange membranes. They only allow
cations to pass through. These membranes are arranged perpendicular to the elec-
tric field (i.e., parallel to the plates of the capacitor). When the negatively charged
chloride ions move towards the positive pole, they encounter an anion exchange
membrane. Since they are anions themselves, they pass through without any prob-
lems. Conversely, the positively charged sodium ions eventually encounter a cat-
ion exchange membrane during their migration. As cations, they also pass through
largely unimpeded. However, this is not the end of the process. We would now
have separated sodium and chloride ions. This would lead to strong accumulations
of electric charge. These charges need to be balanced. For this, the salt vampire
would need to use other ions. The obvious solution would be positive hydrogen
ions H+ and negative hydroxide ions OH−.5 These two ions are always present in
water. Through the so-called autoprotolysis, water molecules continuously split
into these two ions, which then recombine into water molecules. Through another
anion exchange membrane, hydroxide ions can reach the sodium ions. Through a

5 Strictly speaking, there are no individual hydrogen ions H+ swimming around in the water.

Instead, the hydrogen ions combine with water molecules to form oxonium ions H3O+. For sim-
plicity, however, we will pretend here that they are simple hydrogen ions. This makes no differ-
ence for understanding the basic principle of electrodialysis.
84 4 Chemistry and Its Speed

cation exchange membrane, hydrogen ions can reach the chloride ions. This bal-
ances the electric charges again.
The last problem remaining is the pH value. The pH value indicates whether
an aqueous solution is acidic (then it is less than 7) or alkaline (then it is greater
than 7). Roughly speaking, it is a measure of the concentration of hydrogen and
hydroxide ions. If a large number of hydrogen ions accumulate in an area (or
hydroxide ions are removed), an acid is present. If many hydroxide ions accumu-
late (or hydrogen ions are removed), a base is present. Both would be disadvanta-
geous in the long run. Therefore, it is important that the acid and base are each
neutralized. This can be achieved by mixing them. When hydrogen and hydroxide
ions meet, they neutralize each other and form a water molecule. This is exactly
what the salt vampire would need to do in its electrodialysis suction cups.
Overall, this would require two separate blood circulations. In one, the salt
accumulates. In the other, acid (hydrogen ions) and base (hydroxide ions) are con-
tinuously exchanged and thus neutralized.
Extracting all the salt from a human in this way and transferring it to the body
of another living being would certainly be challenging. The question alone of how
a biological organism is supposed to generate the corresponding electric field
would be anything but trivial. The correspondingly intricate membranes, perme-
ated by different blood systems, would also be complex. When you look at the
variety of living beings in nature, at least this part does not seem so far-fetched.
The salt vampire could therefore fundamentally be a reality.
Finally, we should also take another look at the third question. How can he
extract the salt from his victim so quickly? His victims are all dead and completely
saltless within a few seconds. If Dr. McCoy had not used a phaser quickly enough
to stop him, Captain Kirk would have shared the fate of several crew members
in no time. However, the speed at which salt can travel through a membrane is
limited.
The larger the membrane surface area, the faster it goes. However, this area
is rather manageable because he only absorbs the salt through his palms. Even if
the salt absorption through the membrane were fast enough, the question would
still remain how the salt gets there so quickly. In the human body, the salt is, as
mentioned, more or less evenly distributed. Even if everything were in the blood
(which is by no means the case), it would certainly take a few minutes for all the
blood to pass by the salt vampire’s hand once. Moreover, most of the salt is not
in the blood but within the cells of the body. These are surrounded by cell mem-
branes, which are nothing other than osmosis membranes. They let water through.
Salt, on the other hand, does not come out so easily. Consequently, most of the
salt is retained by the membranes in the cells and does not immediately enter
the blood. Therefore, it would take a very long time to extract all the salt from a
human.
Although we have found a possible explanation for the basic functionality of
salt extraction, the speed remains one of the mysteries that still need to be solved
in the infinite expanses of space.
4.2 A Thirsty Virus 85

Excursus

The Cloud-Shaped Iron Vampire

The salt vampire from “The Man Trap” is not the only extraterrestrial being
that extracts an essential substance from humans. Another example is the cloud-
like creature based on dikironium6 that the Enterprise encounters some time
later in the 18th episode of the 2nd TOS season, “Obsession.” This bodiless
creature feeds on the hemoglobin of its victims. Hemoglobin is a very complex
chemical compound. At its center is an iron ion, around which four complex
proteins are arranged. Hemoglobin is vital because oxygen binds to it. Thus, it
helps transport the essential oxygen from the lungs to the other organs. Without
hemoglobin, we would die within a very short time, as some crew members
have to experience for themselves.
Extracting hemoglobin from human blood is significantly more challenging
than extracting salt. While the ions of salt are dissolved in the blood and the
water inside the cells, hemoglobin is part of the red blood cells (even though
these themselves consist of about 90% hemoglobin). Therefore, it is not a free
molecule that can be individually extracted. First, bonds must be broken to
release hemoglobin. The dikironium cloud creature could inject an appropriate
enzyme into the blood of its victims for this purpose. Subsequently, the hemo-
globin must be extracted from the body in some way. Doing this selectively
is significantly more challenging because it is not dealing with small single-
atom ions but with a large, highly complex molecule. Selectively detaching the
hemoglobin from the red blood cells and then extracting only the hemoglobin
while leaving all other proteins in the body would be a true masterpiece of cos-
mic biology. However, the dikironium cloud creature is a much more highly
developed life form than the salt vampire or us humans. ◄

4.2 A Thirsty Virus

In the 25th episode of the 2nd TOS season, “The Omega Glory,” an away team
from the Enterprise makes a strange discovery. The group had beamed aboard the
Starfleet spaceship USS Exeter. However, they find no one there. The only thing
they find are the crew’s uniforms. These are simply scattered around the ship.
Empty, without the people who belonged in them. Well, almost empty. The away
team finds a few crumbs in them. Small crystals that are all that remains of the
crew.
As it turns out later, everyone on board is dead. Killed by a virus. What is truly
remarkable, however, is what this virus did to the people. It caused all the water to

6 The chemical nature of dikironium would also be an exciting question. Unfortunately, this sub-
stance will probably only be discovered in the distant future.
86 4 Chemistry and Its Speed

be extracted from their bodies. All that remained were the crystals. These contain
everything that was not water in the human body.
What happens aboard the Exeter is not only an extremely threatening situation.
After all, the away team from the Enterprise faces the same fate. It is also a highly
fascinating process.
The whole thing raises a number of questions. The removal of water from the
body of a multicellular organism by a virus is remarkable. First of all, the question
arises of how the virus does this. And secondly, one wonders why it does it at all.
To understand this, we first need to consider what viruses actually are and what
they do.
Viruses are microscopically small… Well, what exactly? In biology, we deal
with organisms. But viruses are not organisms. What characterizes an organism
is that it has a metabolism. This means that it converts chemical substances. For
example, organisms take up sugar and convert it with oxygen so that they can use
the released energy. Or they link amino acids at their ribosomes to form proteins,
which are then used to build the structures of the cell. A virus, on the other hand,
does none of this. When you look at it more closely, you find that it is not even a
proper cell. Practically everything that makes up a cell is missing. There are no
ribosomes, no mitochondria. Essentially, there is only the genetic information and
a shell that surrounds it. That’s all.
Therefore, a virus cannot reproduce on its own. After all, it does not have a
metabolism. Reproduction means that one “organism” becomes two (or more). For
this, everything must be duplicated. In the case of the virus, the nucleic acid with
the genetic information must be duplicated. Likewise, the protein shell must be
duplicated. Both would be a chemical reaction. Exactly that is something a virus
cannot do. It does not have a metabolism. It cannot provide the necessary chemi-
cal building blocks for the new nucleic acid and the new proteins at all. And even
if they were available, it still could not do anything with them. For that, it would
need its own metabolism. To reproduce nonetheless, viruses use a completely dif-
ferent strategy. They use organisms and make them do this work for them.
The envelope of viruses is such that host cells take up the viruses upon contact.
The virus essentially tricks the cell into thinking it is something worth taking in.
Instead of valuable nutrients or the like, the cell only gets the virus’s nucleic acid.
This viral genetic information is now inside the cell. Some cunning viruses do
not start right away. Instead of reproducing immediately, they first integrate their
genetic information into that of their host. Sooner or later, however, all viruses
begin to reproduce. But they do not do this themselves. Their nucleic acids with
the viral genetic information are replicated inside the cell. The same chemical pro-
cess that is supposed to duplicate the cell’s genetic material during cell division
now multiplies the virus’s genetic information. This nucleic acid does something
else as well. Normally, nucleic acids like DNA or RNA serve to form proteins
with the information stored on them. For this, amino acids assemble at the ribo-
somes as specified by the nucleic acid. But now it is no longer the cell’s nucleic
acid, but that of the virus. The ribosomes thus begin to produce the proteins for
viral envelopes instead of things that would be useful for the cell. This consumes
4.2 A Thirsty Virus 87

the cell’s valuable resources. When enough viral nucleic acids and proteins for
viral envelopes have been formed, they exit the cell again. In the worst case for the
cell, it bursts in the process. In the best case, the viruses exit through the cell mem-
brane without killing the cell. The cell then just has to keep producing new viruses
and using its own resources for the virus.
This description of the mechanisms of viruses is undoubtedly greatly simpli-
fied. However, it is sufficient to understand what happened to the crew of the
Exeter and where the problems lie. Before we turn to the question of how the alien
virus does this, let us first ask why it does it. Why does it drain all the water from
its host’s body? Since it does not have a metabolism, it cannot absorb the water
itself. Rather, it must make its host cells release all the water into the environment.
This kills its own host and dries out the cells in which it is replicated. So why
would it make the cells release water into the environment?
The explanation could be the same as why one has to cough or sneeze when
having a cold: to spread the virus. A virus is not only interested in having its
nucleic acid and protein shell replicated by the host cells. It also wants to spread.
Other hosts need to be infected; otherwise, its reproduction remains very limited.
Therefore, many viruses trigger processes that serve their spread. Coughing or
sneezing are examples of this.
If a cold virus succeeds in making its host sneeze, the host exhales very quickly
in the process. Small water droplets are carried along. An aerosol is formed. Many
small droplets float in the air. These small droplets contain viruses. If someone
else inhales these droplets, they can become infected themselves. The viruses can
now use their body for reproduction as well. Perhaps the viruses on board the USS
Exeter do something similar. They might (through some much more sophisticated
mechanism than sneezing or coughing) distribute the water in their host’s body
into the air. Not as vapor, because then the water molecules would float through
the air individually. A virus cannot cling to a single water molecule to be trans-
ported. After all, it is many times larger than a water molecule. Instead, it is more
effective for a virus to form a mist. This consists of many small droplets. And
viruses could be present in these droplets. This would explain why the entire crew
of the Exeter became infected so quickly. If the entire air is indeed contaminated
with virus-laden aerosol droplets, it is difficult to defend against it.
The fact that it is not foggy on board the Exeter does not necessarily mean that
the water from the crew’s bodies did not form a mist. After all, some time passes
before the Enterprise arrives. In the meantime, the droplets could have settled. The
smaller the droplets in an aerosol, the longer this takes. However, after several
days, this process should certainly be complete.
The question still remains, however, how the virus makes the water leave the
body. Since the away team on the Exeter is not constantly stepping in puddles, the
water seems to have actually transitioned into the gas phase. Whether it evaporated
(i.e., dispersed molecule by molecule into the air) or distributed itself in the form
of small droplets as an aerosol in the air (as speculated earlier), we do not know.
How the virus makes the host do this is another interesting question. What is truly
mysterious, however, is how it manages to do this completely. As described above,
88 4 Chemistry and Its Speed

a virus does not have its own metabolism. Therefore, it cannot actually do any-
thing on its own. It always has to make its host do it for it.
Let’s first take a look at the matter on the cellular level. When the infected cell
has produced enough viruses, the virus could cause the cell membrane to rupture.
This releases the newly produced viruses, which can then infect other cells. In the
process, the leaking cell loses all its water. Well, at least if it is—literally—high
and dry. Most cells (and this includes the cells in the human body) are in an envi-
ronment that consists mainly of water. Destroying the cell membrane could be a
significant contribution to extracting all the water from the body. However, it can-
not explain the actual dehydration. Moreover, rupturing the cell membrane would
not even be strictly necessary. As we saw with the salt vampire, cell membranes
are semipermeable. Water can easily diffuse through them. A hole would only
potentially speed up the process a bit.
The much bigger problem, however, would be osmosis. The virus from the epi-
sode “The Omega Glory” does, in a certain way, the exact opposite of what the
salt vampire from “The Man Trap” does. The salt vampire extracted all the salt
from the body. The water remained. The virus, on the other hand, extracts all the
water from the body. Everything else, including the salt, remains. The two may do
the exact opposite of what the other does. However, the problem is ultimately the
same for both. It may initially succeed in extracting the substance to be removed
from the body, whether it is salt or water. In the process, its concentration inside
the cell decreases. The virus may, in a certain way, have an easier time. After all,
water simply passes through cell membranes. Salt, on the other hand, does not.
However, the transport would come to a halt relatively quickly. Otherwise, there
would be a diffusion from areas of low concentration to areas of high concentra-
tion. Here, the virus has the same problem as the salt vampire.
For the virus, there is also the fact that it does not have its own body with which
it could take any measures for extraction. It has to use the infected host cells for this
purpose. Initially, the cells may still participate in any forced measures to release
water. However, this does not go on indefinitely. This has nothing to do with the
cells eventually losing interest or realizing that it is not good for them. Eventually,
they simply die. This would happen well before all the water is completely extracted
from the body. The cell would simply die at some point. And certainly before the
last bit of water was removed. Since the virus itself cannot do anything, it is there-
fore not capable of actually extracting all the water from the body.
So much for the more biologically influenced aspects of this case. There is also
a purely chemical question: the question of the material balance. Both the mass
balance and the atomic balance pose puzzles.
First of all, it applies to every process that the total mass cannot change. A virus
may trigger chemical reactions. In the process, substance A becomes substance
B. Additionally, a chemical substance (water in our case) can be transported from
place A to place B. Nevertheless, the total mass remains constant. What was a kil-
ogram before is still a kilogram afterward.
Extended to the atomic balance, this means that not only the mass remains con-
stant but also the amount of each individual type of atom. So if the virus removes
4.2 A Thirsty Virus 89

all the water from the body, the number of hydrogen and oxygen atoms decreases
(at least in the body itself; they are now just in a different place). All other atoms,
however, remain where they are. This applies to the calcium in the bones, the iron
in the hemoglobin, the phosphorus from the DNA, the nitrogen and sulfur from the
proteins, the oxygen from the carbohydrates, and the hydrogen and carbon from…
Well, actually from everything that occurs in the body. The human body consists
of a very large proportion of water. But that is not all. There is also a lot of carbon.
The fine crystals left behind by the humans do not really fit the picture. If you
were to extract all the water from a human, you would not simply be left with such
white crystals. There are several reasons for this.
For one, there is the matter of quantity. It is true that the human body consists
mostly of water. However, the remaining substances make up significantly more
than the meager pile of crystals that the Enterprise away team finds aboard the
Exeter. For this, significantly more than just the water would have to be extracted
from the human body.
There is also another problem. The human body is a wild mixture of thousands
of different chemical substances. If you only extract the water, you do not sim-
ply get nice, white crystals. From the metals in the body (calcium, iron, sodium
& Co.), such crystals could certainly be produced. Additionally, some of the non-
metals could be used. Some of the oxygen, phosphate, and chloride ions could
form salts with the metals. The crystals found might arise from these. But what
about the carbon?
White crystals formed from carbon compounds are not entirely unusual. Just
think of sugar crystals. Part of the carbon in the body is indeed bound in the form
of sugars. As mentioned, crystals could form from these. However, part of the car-
bon is bound in substances like fats. Different people may have varying amounts
of fat in their bodies. Fundamentally, however, fats make up a significant portion
of every human body. We all know sugar crystals. But when was the last time you
heard of fat crystals? Here, we need to look at the relationship between chemical
structure and crystal formation.
A crystal is a highly ordered structure. This means that all atoms, ions, or mol-
ecules in the crystal not only have their own fixed place (around which they oscil-
late slightly depending on the temperature). What is also crucial: The fixed places
are regularly arranged. In a salt crystal, for example, sodium and chloride ions
alternate. Their arrangement is so uniform that it is referred to as a lattice. Sodium
and chloride ions can be very easily assembled into a crystal. Both ions are almost
spherical. Spheres can be well arranged into an ion lattice. However, if the parti-
cles become asymmetrical, it becomes more difficult to arrange them into a regu-
lar lattice.
If you look at the molecular structure of chemical substances, you can often
already derive statements about the melting point. For this, you need to know
two rules. First, the larger the molecule, the higher the melting point usually is.
Second, the more asymmetrical the molecule, the lower the melting point. The
second rule can be explained by crystal formation. Melting is nothing other than
the opposite of crystallizing. The easier a substance crystallizes, the less willing
90 4 Chemistry and Its Speed

it is to leave this crystal form again. The melting point is correspondingly high.
Conversely, a substance whose molecules cannot be easily arranged into a regular
lattice has a low melting point. The more asymmetrical molecules are, the more
difficult it is to pack them into crystals. Therefore, the melting points of asym-
metrical molecules are usually lower than those of equally sized, symmetrical
molecules.
If molecules are very asymmetrical, it can even happen that the formation of a
crystal is practically impossible. At low temperatures, such substances still seem
to be solid. However, no crystal has formed. The atoms or molecules are still
irregularly arranged like in a liquid. They can no longer move freely. It gives the
impression that they are solid. However, a crystal is not formed when such sub-
stances solidify. This state is called amorphous. According to the strict thermody-
namic definition, they are still liquid.7
Regardless of whether you want to consider such substances as solids or liq-
uids, they do not form beautiful, regular crystals like those found on the USS
Exeter. This is exactly where the problem with fats lies. Fats consist of a glyc-
erol molecule to which three fatty acid molecules are bound. These elongated
fatty acids are not straight rods. In particular, unsaturated fatty acids have kinks.
Moreover, the three fatty acid residues from the glycerol do not necessarily all
point in the same direction. A fat molecule is therefore anything but symmetrical.
Additionally, there are different fatty acids. As a result, the fatty acid residues pro-
truding from the glycerol are of different lengths. In a biological fat, the fatty acids
are also randomly distributed among the individual fat molecules. Thus, you are
dealing with asymmetrical molecules that are also of different sizes. This is illus-
trated in Fig. 4.2. How is a crystal supposed to form from this?8 Many components
of the human body may remain as crystals after the removal of water. This would
not be so easily possible with fats.
Even if it were possible to crystallize all the remaining components of the body,
the question still remains why this should happen. Why are all substances crystal-
lized? And why do the individual crystals draw together into a small heap? If you
remove all the water from a body, you would rather expect a kind of dried-out
mummy as a result.

7 This is the reason why glass is sometimes referred to as a liquid. The atoms in it are also not
regularly arranged. Since glass decidedly does not form a crystal, it is strictly speaking not a
solid. Since it is usually not practical to pretend that glass is liquid, there is a second defini-
tion for solids. This is not quite as scientifically clean. In this definition, a boundary in viscosity
is simply defined. If the viscosity exceeds this boundary, the substance is referred to as a solid
according to this definition.
8 For this reason, the melting points of mixtures are often significantly lower than those of the
corresponding pure substances. The different molecules interfere with each other during crystal-
lization. Such mixtures, which have a lower melting point than the pure substances, are called
eutectic. A well-known example of this is road salt in winter. Water melts at 0 °C. The salt melts
only at several hundred degrees Celsius. However, their mixture melts even at temperatures well
below 0 °C.
4.2 A Thirsty Virus 91

Sodium chloride Fat molecules (examples)

Regular arrangement Regular arrangement
simple difficult

Fig. 4.2  Simplified representation of the ions or molecules in solid salt or fat; in the case of
sodium chloride, the arrangement of the ions in the form of a regular lattice is quite simple,
whereas crystallization is difficult with the asymmetrical and irregular fat molecules

Excursus

Very Fast Drying

A similar process can be observed in the 21st episode of the 2nd TOS season,
“By Any Other Name”. In it, an away team from the Enterprise encounters a
group of Kelvans. They first capture the away team and eventually gain control
of the entire spaceship. To do this, they use a technical device built into their
belts. When they press a button on their belt, humans are transformed into a
plaster-like structure in the form of a cuboctahedron.9 Again, it seems that all
the water has been extracted from a human body.
Essentially, the same questions arise as with the crew of the Exeter. The
only difference is that it happens very quickly. Within seconds, humans are
transformed into handy cuboctahedrons. How long it takes in the case of the
virus from “The Deadly Years” is unknown. However, it can be assumed that it
takes much longer. Again, the question arises as to where the water disappears.
Additionally, the question now arises as to how it can happen so quickly.
Two problems would arise if one wanted to completely extract the water in
a fraction of a second. One of them would be more of a mechanical nature. On
its way out of the body, the water would have to possess an enormous speed. In
doing so, it would inevitably drag a lot along with it. In fact, it would simply
tear the body apart in an explosion.

9A cuboctahedron is a polyhedron with a total of 14 faces. Of these, six are squares and 8 are
regular triangles. The cuboctahedron belongs to the so-called Archimedean solids.
92 4 Chemistry and Its Speed

The second problem is at the molecular level. During the transformation, the
water does not simply flow out as a liquid. Therefore, it must leave the body
through the air. To do this, it must be vaporized. We will simply accept that
the Kelvans’ device can deliver the required amount of energy so quickly. After
all, they belong to a highly developed civilization. How they apply this energy
specifically to the victim is another matter. One thing is clear, though. Through
this energy supply, water might be vaporized. However, it would require a rise
in temperature. To vaporize all the water in a human body in a fraction of a
second, one would have to supply heat at a very high temperature. Otherwise,
the heat transfer into the body would not be fast enough. But even if the tem-
perature in the body did not rise above 100°C, it would be enough to denature
all proteins. So, it may be conceivable—somehow—that the Kelvans transform
humans with their device into something that looks like a plaster cuboctahe-
dron. The process would just be very difficult to realize. The reversion, how-
ever, would be truly challenging. If all proteins are denatured, then the reverted
humans would certainly be dead.
An effect known from terrestrial biology can be seen in the 5th episode of
the 1st DSC season, “Choose Your Pain”. In it, the tardigrade contracts into a
small, spherical structure and loses 99% of its water in the process. Terrestrial
tardigrades actually exhibit this behavior, known as cryptobiosis. They almost
completely shut down their metabolism to survive in inhospitable environ-
ments. This allows them to survive extremely low temperatures or radioactiv-
ity, for example. This was demonstrated, among other things, by a space flight
in 2007. Tardigrades, also known as water bears, are, however, a maximum of
1.5 cm in size. Most species are even significantly smaller. With a specimen
several meters in size, the reverse problems arise that we have already encoun-
tered with 1 cm tall miniature humans. The bodies of animals with a maximum
diameter of 1 cm, for example, are structured in such a way that a large part of
the substance transport simply occurs through diffusion. Active pumping, like
in the human heart, is not really important for such small animals. Due to the
short distances, it is sufficient for substances to simply diffuse from one end of
the animal to the other. If the animal grows to several meters, it suddenly has
a problem. The transport of ingested food to the interior no longer works as
usual. While it works for elephants, their bodies are designed to transport heat
and chemical substances over several meters internally.
If giant tardigrades with a diameter of several meters wanted to switch to
cryptobiosis, then substance transport would become a problem. In principle, it
might be possible. The challenge, however, is the speed. Terrestrial water bears
can usually switch to this state quickly enough to survive the onset of extreme
conditions. A giant like the one we find on Discovery, however, would take a
very long time. If the transport of water from the interior were to occur within
seconds, it would probably tear the poor animal apart. ◄
4.3 Simply Being Someone Else 93

4.3 Simply Being Someone Else

It would sometimes be quite practical if one could simply take on the appearance
of another person. If one could simply adapt the shape of one’s own body to the
circumstances at any time, that would be useful. Shape-shifters are far ahead of
us in this regard. Apart from a lot of mischief one could cause and some criminal
options that would arise, the possibilities would be immense. What would be a real
problem from the perspective of crime fighting would offer incredible opportuni-
ties for data protection.
Over time, the heroes of the various Star Trek series encounter different, mostly
intelligent life forms that can take on the appearance of other living beings. As
early as 1966, Gene Roddenberry had the Enterprise crew under Captain Kirk
meet the M-113 creature, which would later become famous as the Salt Vampire.
The crew of the Enterprise-D under Captain Picard later made the acquaintance of
Allasomorphs in the 10th episode of the 2nd TNG season, “The Dauphin.” Even
the entire Voyager crew of Captain Janeway is eventually copied by the so-called
Silver Blood in the 24th episode of the 4th VOY season, “Demon.” Captain Archer
was misled by a life form known as a Phantom, which appeared to him as a scant-
ily clad woman, in the 18th episode of the 1st ENT season, “Rogue Planet.” Our
heroes also encounter shape-shifters in the Star Trek films, such as the Chameloids
from “Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country.” So far, there have been no real
new shape-shifters in Star Trek: Discovery, but the integration of the Klingon Voq
into the body of Ash Tyler10 , which no one can subsequently prove, also goes a
bit in that direction. However, the most well-known and probably most important
example of a shape-shifting species is undoubtedly the Founders from Star Trek:
Deep Space Nine.
Odo11 , the security chief of the Deep Space Nine space station who hails from
the Founders, struggles somewhat with the authentic replication of humanoid
faces. However, his “more practiced” fellow beings from the so-called Great Link
are already so good that they can not only appear convincingly as humans. They
can also take on the appearance of any human. They are so good at it that they can
deceive not only the human eye. Even the sensors that Starfleet has in the 24th
century cannot detect the deception. When Odo transforms into a rock, the scanner
only detects a rock. This is an impressive ability. Nevertheless, it raises a number
of chemical questions again.
At the beginning of the series, Odo already demonstrates his shape-shifting
abilities when he eavesdrops on a conversation between the Bajoran terrorist

10 His first appearance occurs in the 5th episode of the 1st DSC season, “Choose Your Pain.”
11 Odomakes his first appearance in the 1st episode of the 1st DS9 season, “Emissary,” and sub-
sequently in almost every other DS9 episode.
94 4 Chemistry and Its Speed

Tahna Los and the two Klingon women Lursa and B’Etor in the 3rd episode of the
1st DS9 season, “Past Prologue,” by transforming into a rat. This is a very practi-
cal trick, but one question remains unanswered: What happens to the rest of his
mass? Very large rats may weigh half a kilogram. Most rats weigh significantly
less. We do not want to speculate about the weight of Odo (and thus his now-
deceased actor René Auberjonois). But it is definitely certain: He weighs more
than half a kilogram.
One of the immutable laws of nature is the conservation of mass. No matter
what chemical reaction takes place, no matter how much substance diffuses from
one place to another, the mass remains conserved. It may be in a different place,
and the chemical form may have changed. But its value remains the same all the
time. The density may change. When a liquid evaporates, the vapor has a much
lower density. This means its mass per volume is significantly smaller. This exam-
ple makes it clear why it is so important to speak of mass and not weight in this
context. Water vapor rises, while liquid water flows downward. Seemingly, water
vapor even has a negative weight, which is why it rises and can even lift weights in
a balloon. However, during evaporation, neither the mass nor the weight becomes
negative. If you evaporate one kilogram of liquid water, you get one kilogram of
water vapor afterward. Nothing changes in the mass. Even the weight does not
change. The term weight refers to the force with which a certain mass of a sub-
stance is attracted by gravity. For a mass of one kilogram, this weight force is
about ten newtons on Earth. During evaporation, nothing changes in the mass and
thus nothing in the weight. What changes, however, is the volume. From about one
liter of water, you get (depending on the exact conditions) over one cubic meter
of water vapor. This displaces significantly more air, which in turn has its own
weight. The weight of the displaced air is the so-called buoyancy. If this buoyant
force is greater than the weight force of the vapor, it rises. This is the case with
water vapor. Most other vapors (e.g., ethanol) are heavier than air under the same
conditions.
Another reason why it only makes sense to speak of mass conservation and not
weight conservation is gravity. The stronger the gravitational field, the lower the
weight. And this, although nothing has changed in the respective body. In weight-
lessness the weight has a value of zero. Nevertheless, mass conservation applies
not only on Earth but throughout the universe. All chemical substances must
adhere to this. Regardless of whether they belong to a spaceship, a potted plant, a
human, or an alien. Apparently, this fundamental principle of chemistry does not
seem to apply to the shape-shifters known as the Founders. When Odo shrinks to
the size of a rat, he violates a fundamental law of nature. A circumstance that is
not without a certain irony, considering how much the policeman Odo values the
observance of laws.
The conservation of mass is, however, only the simplest form of a conserva-
tion law that complicates shape-shifting. If one really looks at it chemically, then
one must also consider the atomic balance. One must bear in mind that every
body consists of specific chemical substances. This applies regardless of whether
it is living or non-living matter. If a shape-shifter assumes a new form, chemical
4.3 Simply Being Someone Else 95

reactions could indeed occur in its body. In the process, chemical transformations
can easily take place. Thus, a shape-shifter can certainly change the chemical
composition of its body. However, it is strictly bound to the atomic balance. This
means that, for example, it can convert a glucose molecule (C6H12O6) into two
alanine molecules (C3H7NO2) to form proteins. However, it must consider what
to do with the excess oxygen atoms, as two alanine molecules contain a total of
only four oxygen atoms and not six like the glucose molecule. Conversely, it must
find an additional two hydrogen atoms from somewhere, as the glucose molecule
had only twelve, but it needs fourteen. Not to mention the nitrogen, which is not
present in glucose at all, but is very much present in amino acids like alanine. If
another substance is available that provides the missing hydrogen and nitrogen and
absorbs the excess oxygen, then this is chemically possible. If such a substance is
not available, then it becomes difficult.
The atomic balance ultimately tells us that the number of atoms of each ele-
ment must be conserved. After the transformation, there must be just as many
oxygen atoms as before. No more and no less. The same applies to the atoms of
hydrogen, nitrogen, carbon, sulfur, phosphorus, and so on. So, if Odo transforms
into a stone, then it seems that not only is there the restriction by the conservation
of mass that it must be a stone weighing about 75 kg. Additionally, the conserva-
tion of the atoms of each individual element must also apply. Many stones contain
a lot of silicon, which is present in very small amounts in the human body. On the
other hand, biological organisms contain a lot of hydrogen and carbon, which are
generally rare in stones. Every time a shape-shifter wants to assume not just a new
form but a truly new shape, it will face this problem. Not only will the conserva-
tion of mass (already known from physics) set tight limits for the shape-shifter.
Beyond that, chemistry with the atomic balance sets another limit regarding what
shapes it can truly assume. Otherwise, the shape-shifter can only take on the outer
form but would have a completely different composition inside than the person
whose identity it assumes.
Let’s assume that the Starfleet scanners are significantly more advanced than
today’s measuring devices. Then the question arises as to why they cannot dis-
tinguish shape-shifters from real humans. Otherwise, the scanners are capable
of revealing all sorts of information about the internal structure of the scanned
objects—including the chemical structure. So, it really seems that the shape-shift-
ers adopt the complete chemical structure of those they copy. Which in turn raises
the question of how they can transform back after the complete transformation.
If a shape-shifter transforms so completely that the 24th-century scanners,
despite the greatest efforts of Starfleet, are not able to distinguish a Founder in
human form from a human, then a complete adoption of the form down to the last
chemical detail must have taken place. There must be nothing left inside the body
that could reveal the shape-shifter as such. This consequently means that the organ
controlling the transformation must also be transformed. On the one hand, the cor-
responding organ must change itself, which is already difficult enough. On the other
hand, and this is probably much more dramatic, it is no longer present as such after-
ward. Therefore, it becomes difficult for the shape-shifter to transform back.
96 4 Chemistry and Its Speed

The transformation organ is overall an exciting matter. Because how does it

actually effect the transformation? First of all, it must ensure that all the neces-
sary atoms are transported to the right place in the body. Where bones are to form,
there must be enough calcium. Where an eye is to form, on the other hand, there
should not be too much calcium. A shape-shifter must therefore be able to trans-
port chemical substances very quickly within its body. What challenges arise when
it wants to transform as quickly as we are used to from Star Trek, we will see in
the next section.
In addition to transporting substances, it must primarily control the chemical
reactions. These reactions, in turn, should proceed very quickly and selectively.
For this, the shapeshifter needs appropriate catalysts. The concept of a catalyst is
well known. However, catalysts are not just the tube systems with platinum par-
ticles found in the exhaust system of gasoline engines to chemically convert car-
bon monoxide and nitrogen oxides and thus render them harmless. Catalysts are
something very widespread in chemistry. Generally, catalysts are solid or liquid
substances that accelerate certain chemical reactions. Fundamentally, they are not
consumed in the process. If you look at the chemical processes on a molecular
level, they do indeed participate in the reaction itself. The addition of a catalyst
changes the reaction mechanism. This means that the intermediate steps of the
reaction are different. It takes a different chemical path. This is also referred to
as a new reaction pathway. If this reaction pathway is more favorable,12 then the
reaction proceeds faster with a catalyst than without. Catalysts are not only neces-
sary for a shapeshifter to transform quickly but also to transform into the correct
result. After all, only the desired reactions should occur, and as few as possible of
the “wrong” reactions, which are also chemically possible.
If it is possible to specifically accelerate the desired reactions and not the unde-
sired ones, then a reaction system can be steered in a desired direction. In techni-
cal chemistry, catalysts are very often used for this purpose. Biochemistry does the
same, using (mostly) water-soluble catalysts.13 The catalysts of biology are called
enzymes. If a living being wants to change its chemical structure, it must produce

12 Roughly simplified, one can imagine it as the path becoming less rocky. A certain amount of
energy must be expended for a reaction to proceed. This energy is subsequently released again,
but initially, it must be expended. This energy is called activation energy. If the activation energy
is lower on a reaction pathway with a catalyst, an alternative path with fewer obstacles opens up.
Therefore, the reaction proceeds faster with a catalyst.
13 In biochemistry, one usually deals with so-called homogeneous catalysts. These are catalysts
that are dissolved in the reaction mixture. Homogeneous catalysts can make many reactions pos-
sible even at low temperatures. They are therefore very popular in organic chemistry. Technically,
they are usually very impractical because the expensive catalyst must subsequently be separated
from the reaction mixture. Therefore, heterogeneous catalysts are often used in technical chem-
istry. These are solid bodies (like the three-way catalyst in a car) that come into contact with the
reaction mixture but do not dissolve in it. Here, separation is not a problem. For biochemistry, on
the other hand, this is quite impractical, as an organism would have to carry corresponding parti-
cles when using heterogeneous catalysts.
4.3 Simply Being Someone Else 97

(or transport) one or more enzymes in the corresponding part of the organism.
This is not unusual. In biochemistry, this happens constantly. However, unlike a
complete transformation of the entire organism, only individual reactions always
occur in the organism. Moreover, in most cases, these are stationary processes.
This means that, for example, during respiration, sugar is continuously converted
with oxygen to carbon dioxide and water, which is coupled with a reaction in
which ADP (adenosine diphosphate) is converted with phosphate to ATP (adeno-
sine triphosphate). ATP, in turn, provides the energy for all kinds of chemical pro-
cesses and is converted back to ADP and phosphate. The cycle is closed, and the
formation and consumption of ATP do not lead to an accumulation of ATP. It is
said that the system is in a stationary state.14 A shapeshifter, on the other hand,
does not need a stationary process for transformation. It needs a reaction that pur-
posefully and quickly converts all the chemical substances in its body into those
chemical substances that should occur in the assumed form.
For this, the shapeshifter will need many different enzymes to carry out all
these reactions. These enzymes must be produced very quickly in large quan-
tities. And it must know very precisely which enzymes to use. This means that
the shapeshifter can initially only transform into things it knows at least in princi-
ple. If it wants to transform into something new and unknown (to it), it first needs
time to learn. It will have to find out how an enzyme must be structured to pre-
cisely accelerate the reaction needed to produce the product required for its trans-
formation. Therefore, shapeshifters will have difficulty assuming a completely
new form. For a humanoid, biological creature in the broadest sense, like the salt
vampire of M-113, it may well be conceivable to take on the form of a human.
However, the use of enzymes would have to be considerable to accomplish this
at the shown speed. The ability of the Founders to immediately assume any shape
that has nothing to do with their previous form is, on the other hand, at least enzy-
matically demanding.
Copying another being exactly is also difficult for a completely different rea-
son. After all, one must first know what to transform into. Actually, that doesn’t
sound particularly complicated. In all scenes where a shapeshifter decides to take
on the form of another living being, he has already seen the corresponding living
being beforehand. So he knows what he needs to transform into. Or does he?
If a shapeshifter only wants to take on the rough outer form, then that might
be enough. In some scenes, he has only seen the person whose identity he wants

14 Stationarity should not be confused with equilibrium. In a stationary process, as much is pro-
duced or supplied as is consumed or removed in the same period. Therefore, the concentrations
remain the same. However, there can very well be a net reaction. In equilibrium, the net reac-
tion comes to a halt. On a molecular level, there may still be a lot of reaction. For every product
molecule formed, a reactant molecule is formed again. Thus, the composition remains constant
even without the addition or removal of reactants and products. For this reason, chemists never
strive for their “inner equilibrium” because they know that the state of equilibrium means death
(strictly speaking, even only after complete decomposition, because a corpse, although no longer
in a stationary state, only slowly reaches equilibrium through decomposition).
98 4 Chemistry and Its Speed

to steal from one side. Accordingly, he only has incomplete information. We will
set aside this small inaccuracy for now. Let’s assume that shapeshifters have very
good eyes. Then they might indeed have enough information to copy a person’s
appearance sufficiently to deceive another person. But the Starfleet scanners
should not be fooled by this. To adapt to the template to the extent that even the
ship’s sensors are deceived, the shapeshifter needs much more information.
Basically, the optical impression can provide a lot of information. This includes
chemistry. Light transports a lot of information about the substances from which it
was emitted or reflected. Depending on which chemical substances interact with
light, there can be a change in wavelength. The Raman effect is an example of
this.15 The so-called Raman spectroscopy is based on this and provides important
information about substances and mixtures of substances. Moreover, it is not said
that shapeshifters only see the light visible to us. If they can see slightly longer-
wavelength light, then they additionally have the information of infrared light (IR).
In chemistry, this wavelength range is used to elucidate chemical structures using
IR spectroscopy. However, all these methods only provide information about the
surface. They do not reveal what it looks like inside.
To see inside, radiation is needed that is not completely absorbed at the sur-
face or the top millimeter of the skin. X-rays or gamma rays could help with that.
However, there is darkness regarding these types of radiation in most places. This
is also good because we would all get cancer if we were permanently exposed to
significant X-ray or gamma radiation. Therefore, the shapeshifter would have to
emit X-rays himself. It is to be assumed that the spaceship sensors would notice
this. And there is another problem with X-rays and other radiations that are not
completely absorbed at the body surface. The initially helpful circumstance that
they pass through the body becomes a challenge here. Because they penetrate the
body, they hardly interact with it. They contain correspondingly little information.
You can still read from an X-ray image how the bones are distributed in the body.
With very good X-ray technology, you can also recognize a bit more than that. But
you don’t get much information about the chemistry.
One method to obtain chemical information would be nuclear magnetic res-
onance spectroscopy, usually abbreviated as NMR. The NMR method provides
very precise information about chemical structures and is therefore very wide-
spread in chemistry. And even better: It can be modified to provide not only
information about the chemical composition but also about the spatial distribu-
tion of substances in the body. This modification of the NMR technique is known

15 In short, the Raman effect is based on an inelastic scattering of light by molecules. When
atoms or molecules absorb light, they become excited. This means they transition to a state of
higher energy. When they return to their original state, they emit the light. In Rayleigh scatter-
ing, they return to their initial energetic state. As a result, they emit the same amount of energy
as light, and the light has the same wavelength as before. However, it is also possible for them to
return to a slightly different state. Then the amount of energy released is slightly different from
the previously absorbed amount, causing the wavelength to change. The wavelength change is
characteristic of a substance and can thus be used for its spectroscopic identification.
4.4 Why Does a Dead Shapeshifter Revert to Its Natural Form? 99

as MRI (magnetic resonance imaging). However, the shapeshifter would have to

rotate around the person he wants to copy (at least according to today’s tech-
nology). It would be conceivable to obtain important information for copying a
person in this way. However, the shapeshifter must possess sensory organs that
far exceed anything biologically known to us. And by the way, he would have
to generate a magnetic field. In principle, this would not necessarily have to be
particularly strong at first. He could—at least hypothetically—even simply use
the Earth’s magnetic field—at least as long as there is such a field at the cor-
responding location in space. However, in chemical analysis, much stronger
magnetic fields are usually used for good reason. The higher the field strength,
the better the resolution. This does not only mean spatial resolution (in terms of
small pixels) but above all precisely evaluable information about which chemical
substances are present. If a shapeshifter wants to create an exact copy, he needs
very precise information. However, the ship’s sensors would probably quickly
raise the alarm if a shapeshifter were to generate a very strong magnetic field on
board.
A final challenge that all shapeshifters we meet in Star Trek have to deal with
will be discussed in the next section. It is not enough to quickly transform sub-
stances through chemical reactions. The corresponding substances must also be
transported to the right place. Achieving this quickly is not easy at all.

4.4 Why Does a Dead Shapeshifter Revert to Its Natural

Form?

When I first saw the already mentioned 5th episode of the 1st TOS season, “The
Man Trap,” there was a brief moment when I wondered. At the end of the epi-
sode, the salt vampire dies. As a shapeshifter, it had taken on the form of Nancy
Crater shortly before its death. To save Captain Kirk’s life, Dr. McCoy had to kill
the salt vampire, appearing as Nancy, with his phaser. It then falls to the ground
and remains dead. What did I wonder about? Why does it retain Nancy’s form?
Shouldn’t it revert to its natural form now that it is dead?
Maybe one or two seconds passed, then the reversion began, and another sec-
ond later, it was complete. I had wondered: Because maybe two seconds after the
shapeshifter’s death, it still had the foreign form. This ridiculously short duration
was enough to trigger a contradiction to an expectation. A shapeshifter must revert
to its original form after its death! And immediately!
I think it is a good example of how what one has seen in countless movies and
series shapes one’s own imagination. We assume that a shapeshifter reverts to its
“natural” form immediately after its death. We have seen this in numerous epi-
sodes of Star Trek and other science fiction films. Anything else surprises us. Even
if it only takes a few seconds for it to actually happen.
Why people unconsciously let themselves be so strongly influenced by what
they see would certainly be an exciting psychological question. However, this
book is supposed to be about chemistry. Chemistry may have little to contribute
100 4 Chemistry and Its Speed

to the formation of expectations. But it has quite a bit to say about the question of
whether a shapeshifter reverts after its death. If this is introduced so prominently
here, then there will probably be some difficulties.
First of all, the question arises as to what actually drives the reversion. If the
shapeshifter dies, then it can no longer actively revert to its original form. After
all, the organ that controls and initiates the shapeshifting also dies with it. If a per-
son dies while wearing a mask, then they still have that mask on their face after
death. At least until someone removes it from the corpse’s face. What should cause
a shapeshifter to transform again after death? It would no longer be able to do so.
Can dead matter remember its original form and revert to it?
The answer can indeed be: Yes! There are substances that can “remember”
their previous form. Before homeopathy enthusiasts start to cheer, let me disap-
point you right away: I’m sorry, there is no molecular memory. If you dilute a sub-
stance so much that it is no longer there, then it is no longer there and can have no
effect. There is no memory of water molecules for other molecules that were once
there. This (and all of homeopathy) is unfortunately just a fairy tale (with which an
entire industry makes good money). The so-called shape-memory effect has noth-
ing to do with it.
The shape-memory effect is known in both organic and inorganic chemistry.
In organic chemistry, they are called shape-memory polymers, and in inorganic
chemistry, they are called shape-memory alloys. How does it work?
First, let’s imagine a relatively simple case of a shape-memory polymer. A solid
consists of two components. One of them is elastic, the other thermoplastic. Most
people are probably familiar with elasticity. A well-known example is rubber. An
elastic object can be deformed. However, it constantly exerts a force to return to its
original form. If the external deforming force is removed, it returns to its original
form. An example of a thermoplastic material is wax. At low temperatures, it is
more or less solid. At high temperatures, it becomes liquid. If you cool it down
again, it becomes solid again.
Now let’s imagine a material that is actually a kind of mixture of an elas-
tic and a thermoplastic material. At low temperatures, the material is solid. If
the temperature rises, the thermoplastic melts. Due to its close mixture with the
elastic material, the melted thermoplastic cannot flow away and remains dis-
tributed inside. Since the thermoplastic material is now liquid, the elastic mate-
rial can be deformed by an externally applied force. If you cool the whole thing
down again, the thermoplastic becomes solid. If you have maintained the deform-
ing force until then, the body could not be returned to its old form by the elastic
component. Once the thermoplastic component has solidified, the external force
can be removed, and the body remains in its new form. The elastic component
wants to return it to its original form, but the solidified thermoplastic prevents this.
However, if the temperature rises again, the thermoplastic becomes soft or even
liquid again. The elastic component can now return the body to its original form.
This form of the shape-memory effect is called the one-way memory effect.
In the two-way memory effect, there are two forms that the material permanently
remembers. One for high and one for low temperatures. In some materials, the
4.4 Why Does a Dead Shapeshifter Revert to Its Natural Form? 101

transformation to the original form can also be triggered by effects other than tem-
perature. In some substances, the effect can be triggered by magnetic fields or light
of certain wavelengths. How exactly the reversion after death is supposed to be
triggered in a shapeshifter remains a mystery that still needs to be explored in the
infinite expanses of space. However, it is fundamentally possible for a shapeshifter
to revert after death. Whether it is a necessity that its body consists of a shape-
memory material is another matter. However, it is not entirely far-fetched. If the
shapeshifter wants to completely take on the copied form, then its shapeshifting
organ must also transform. To return to its natural form, a shape-memory effect
would at least be an interesting option. However, the requirements for such a
shape-memory material exceed everything we know in this area today.
The second aspect to consider in the reversion after death is the speed. This is
not only a problem if the shapeshifter reverts to its original form within seconds
after its death. It is also a problem if it wants to take on a new form within seconds
while alive. This requires substances to move very quickly from one part of the
body to another and to get to exactly the right position there.
We know very rapid transformations of this kind from Star Trek not only from
shape-shifters. An important example comes from the medicine of the future. The
so-called dermal regenerator ultimately does nothing different than a shape-shifter,
which takes on a new form within seconds.16 The dermal regenerator is one of the
medical devices that almost everyone would sometimes wish for. If a patient’s skin
is severely or slightly injured, Starfleet doctors resort to exactly this device. It is
aimed at the injured area from about ten centimeters away. At the push of a but-
ton, a beam emerges that makes the wound disappear within seconds. The device
is even so good that it simply makes blood drops sticking to the skin disappear.
Within a few seconds, the injured Starfleet officer is back in perfect health. The
wound is gone, and everything is fine. Who wouldn’t wish for that today?
Why is it unfortunately not quite so simple in practice? If you get injured nowa-
days, the best you can get is a cream that accelerates healing. But it is not about
healing within seconds. A wound cream may shorten a multi-day (or multi-week)
healing process by a few days. This has little in common with the medical miracle
of the dermal regenerator. Why has no one invented such a device to this day? And
why is it unlikely that anyone will invent something like this anytime soon? And
what does this have to do with dying shape-shifters?
In both cases, we experience a very rapid substance transport. This means that
chemical substances are transported from one part of the body to another. Why
should this be a problem? After all, humans can move not only a few centimeters
within seconds but up to several meters in a second.
When a person moves their arm or leg, they can indeed do so very quickly.
However, this movement process is quite simple for one reason: Everything moves
in the same direction. The skin moves from place A to place B. The muscles move

16 Dermal regenerators appear in numerous episodes of Star Trek; one example is the 11th epi-
sode of the 4th DS9 season, “Homefront”.
102 4 Chemistry and Its Speed

from place A to place B. The bones move from place A to place B. Simply every-
thing that belongs to the arm or leg moves from place A to p lace B. There is no
serious resistance to overcome. The path is practically clear. The only thing in the
way is some air. You can feel this during fast movements. Especially when driving
fast, air resistance becomes quite noticeable. Even when a person moves their arm
very quickly, the air resistance is ultimately manageable. Some air has to flow from
place B to place A. That’s basically all there is to it. The reason why the resistance
to movement through the air is so low lies in a property called viscosity. Viscosity is
something that all liquids or gases possess. Simply put, it is the thickness. Honey has
a fairly high viscosity, and water has a rather low one. Accordingly, the resistance is
much greater when you try to stir honey than when you stir water. The concept of
viscosity can be applied to gases like air in the same way. Their viscosity is very low,
and correspondingly, the resistance of the air to movements within it is low.
What does this have to do with the transformation of shape-shifters and der-
mal regenerators? Well, when a shape-shifter takes on a new form (this includes
returning to the “natural shape”), a lot of movement takes place. This often goes
unnoticed at first. When a shape-shifter changes from the shape of one person to
another, the external shape remains largely the same. Similarly, the dermal regen-
erator does not seriously deform the patient from the outside. However, in both
cases, considerable movements must occur inside the body. And the difficulty is
that the path is not clear.
Let’s consider the process using the example of the dermal regenerator. We
are dealing with a piece of skin that has been injured by some external impact.
The dermal regenerator must now cause several movements simultaneously. First
of all, all contaminants that occur in a fresh wound must be removed. In other
words: They must be moved out. Here we already have the first difficulty because
the question arises as to where. Since the contaminants must be removed from the
body, but the dermal regenerator apparently does not suck them up and absorb
them, only the air remains. All contaminants must therefore be vaporized. To
vaporize something, you normally heat the thing to be vaporized. Therefore, you
would have to deal with very high temperatures at least locally. This might even
be helpful for disinfecting the wound. At the same time, however, the proteins of
the still intact body cells would denature. This is referred to as the coagulation of
proteins. The manufacturers of dermal regenerators must ensure that their devices
do not make the injury worse instead of healing it.
The transport of cells and the extracellular matrix then becomes really com-
plicated. Whether a dermal regenerator repairs skin or a shape-shifter changes its
form, cells always have to be moved to the right place. And not only that. The
same must happen with the extracellular matrix. What is this about? The human
body is not just an accumulation of cells. If it were, it would simply fall apart,
to put it simply. Because what would hold the cells together? Therefore, the bio-
chemistry of humans includes the entire area between the cells. Here, the extra-
cellular matrix holds the cells together. The extracellular matrix not only serves
the function of holding the cells together but also acts as a water reservoir, among
other things.
4.4 Why Does a Dead Shapeshifter Revert to Its Natural Form? 103

Chemically speaking, the extracellular matrix is a collection of macromolecules

that do not directly belong to a cell. Macromolecules are molecules that, unlike
oxygen or water, do not consist of two or three atoms but rather hundreds or even
thousands. Often, macromolecules are chain-like in structure. They do not simply
form a lump of interconnected atoms. Instead, atoms are arranged in one (or often
several) rows. A well-known example is our genetic material. This is stored in the
form of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). The DNA forms the well-known double
helix. Many atoms are arranged in two rows. Each of the two chains is not just a
row of atoms but has small branches. The atoms of these branches form, among
other things, a connection to the second chain. As a result, the two chains are not
free but closely bound together. Because the two chains form parallel spirals (heli-
ces), it is called a double helix.
DNA is just one of many examples of macromolecules. Another example is
starch. In it, many sugar molecules are lined up in a long chain. The most impor-
tant type of macromolecules in our context are proteins. These macromolecules,
built from chains of amino acids, perform a multitude of functions in the body.
One of these is the construction of the cell membrane, the envelope of the cells.
The function important to us in this context is holding the cells together. Here,
a group of proteins called collagen plays a significant role. As connective tissue,
collagen essentially holds the cells together. And this is exactly where our prob-
lem lies. We not only have to transport cells, but we also have to transport them
through collagen (aside from the fact that collagen probably also needs to be trans-
ported). Collagen was historically used to make glue. This makes sense because
collagen’s function in the body is precisely to hold things together. However, it
also highlights the problem: we need to move cells through a mass that is chemi-
cally designed to hold cells in place. This might work. But one thing it certainly is
not: fast.
When regenerating skin or shape-shifting, not only entire cells need to be
transported. Sometimes, it is just individual substances. One could imagine, for
example, that amino acids need to be transported from point A to point B in the
body to form proteins for skin regeneration or shape-shifting. Due to their chem-
ical structure, amino acids are quite water-soluble and can thus be easily trans-
ported. However, this also takes time. After all, we do not just want to move a few
molecules a few micrometers or perhaps millimeters. This is where we transition
between two disciplines of chemistry: organic chemistry on one side and technical
chemistry on the other.
Organic (as well as inorganic) chemists are capable of synthesizing all sorts of
things chemically. There is hardly anything they cannot produce. However, there
is one problem. Organic chemists like to produce a few milligrams of a substance.
Sometimes they produce a few grams. If you ask your colleagues in organic
chemistry for a few hundred grams, it becomes difficult, not to mention tons. The
methods with which organic chemists carry out their—truly remarkable—chemi-
cal syntheses work quite well on the scale of milligrams or perhaps a few grams.
If you want to produce larger quantities, entirely new problems suddenly arise.
Therefore, there is another discipline of chemistry called technical chemistry.
104 4 Chemistry and Its Speed

Technical chemistry deals with producing in large quantities what organic, inor-
ganic, or biochemistry creates in the lab.17 One of the major challenges in this is the
transport processes. If you are producing only a few milligrams, it is not a problem.
However, if larger quantities need to be processed quickly, entirely new effects arise
that were not noticed in the lab. One transport process is heat transport. For exam-
ple, the reaction heat must be removed from the reaction site. If you work in the
lab with very high dilution of the reaction mixture in a solvent, it is not a problem
because the reaction medium hardly heats up due to the reaction heat. If you work
at higher concentrations, the mixture heats up significantly more. Additionally, if
you have a larger quantity, the paths the heat must take are much longer. This leads
to local overheating. Technical chemistry takes care of this. Similarly, technical
chemistry deals with mass transport. The reactants must reach the reaction site. In
our case: amino acids must reach the place where proteins are needed to restore
damaged skin. We are not dealing with a package of amino acids that can simply
be moved from A to B. Even in this case, we would have the aforementioned prob-
lem of having to move through the rather tough collagen. However, amino acids are
not transported in a package but individually. And in chemistry, individually means
truly individually. Each molecule must reach its destination individually.
The transport of molecules that are not packed in a larger package occurs
through diffusion. Anyone who wants to observe the speed of substance transport
through diffusion should drop a piece of sugar into their coffee and wait. If you
do not stir, the coffee is usually cold before the sugar has evenly distributed in the
cup. This is precisely the problem of the dermal regenerator. If the mechanism of
diffusion has to bring the substances needed for the regeneration of injured skin to
the right place, it takes time. The transport of the necessary substances to the right
place is one of the reasons why a wound does not heal within seconds but takes
days or weeks. The speed of substance transport is one of the main difficulties in
building a dermal regenerator. And it is the great challenge for any shape-shifter
who wants to take on a different form quickly and cannot take days or weeks.
To make the whole story even more complicated, substance transport presents
another problem. What should actually cause the molecules to move not only
quickly but especially in the right direction? How does a dermal regenerator or a
shape-shifter get substances to diffuse to where they are supposed to go?
Let’s think back to the sugar in the coffee cup. The sugar dissolves over time.
Chemically speaking, its molecules leave the solid structure of the sugar crystals,
dissolve in the water of the coffee, and diffuse away from the sugar crystal. In the
long run, the sugar distributes itself evenly in the cup. What we cannot observe,

17 There is a specific field of study for this, called chemical engineering. Chemical engineers are
responsible, among other things, for technical chemistry, i.e., producing large quantities with rea-
sonable effort. Additionally, chemical engineers ensure that the final product is pure. Chemical
syntheses often occur in solvents that need to be separated. Moreover, there are often by-products
or unreacted starting materials that need to be separated. Chemical engineering deals with all
these issues.
4.4 Why Does a Dead Shapeshifter Revert to Its Natural Form? 105

however, is that the sugar molecules suddenly simply wander back to the sugar
crystal. The cause is the concentration gradient mentioned earlier. The molecules
diffuse from an area of high concentration to an area of low concentration. Not
the other way around. The direction of diffusion is not controllable. It simply fol-
lows the change in concentration. Always from the area of high concentration to
the area of low concentration.
If a dermal regenerator is to quickly repair defective cell membranes and
other structures through the synthesis of appropriate proteins, it needs very large
amounts of amino acids directly at the site of protein synthesis. The amino acids
would therefore have to accumulate in certain places. In other words: places with
a high concentration of amino acids would have to be created. However, from a
place with a high concentration, the respective substance diffuses away. The last
thing that would happen is that the amino acids diffuse to a place in the wound
where their concentration is higher than in the rest of the body. If they do not do
this, then the wound cannot be healed within seconds. Here, chemistry makes life
difficult for both the designer of a dermal regenerator and a shape-shifter who
wants to transform quickly.
New Materials in the 23rd and 24th
Century 5

5.1 How many Elements are there Actually?

Verterium, Tritonium, Veridium, Element number 247. The list of chemical ele-
ments encountered in Star Trek is long. Now, the list of elements encountered
in daily life is also not exactly short. We breathe oxygen and additionally draw
nitrogen into our lungs and out again. We often handle things made of iron or
aluminum. We know metallic objects coated with zinc or chrome. We often hear
about hydrogen and carbon. We use portable electronic devices in which batter-
ies based on lithium are installed. Ultimately, all matter is made up of atoms, and
each atom can be assigned to an element. Often a substance consists of atoms of
several elements. When different atoms form a common molecule, we call it a
compound. Different metal atoms that form a metallic material are called an alloy.
Many substances we deal with daily are not pure substances, even if they look like
it. Such mixtures that look like pure substances are called homogeneous. But even
mixtures can be traced back to elements. These are partly mixtures consisting of
different elementary substances (like air, for example). Partly, they are mixtures
consisting of compounds (like saltwater, for example). But even that can all be
traced back to elements.
How many elements are there actually? And is there an upper limit to their
number? Can there be an unlimited number of (previously unknown) elements?
Classical chemistry was known to assume four elements: earth, water, air, and
fire. The idea of four elements was not only prevalent in the Middle Ages but
extended well into modern times. However, it was developed in antiquity. This
concept already had precursors in ancient Greece.1 The so-called pre-Socratic

1 The three philosophers mentioned below came from Miletus and Ephesus. These places are not
in Greece but are all in present-day Turkey. Culturally, however, they belonged to the Greek cul-
tural sphere at that time.

107
108 5 New Materials in the 23rd and 24th Century

philosophers assumed a single primordial substance from which everything

derives. Thales considered water to be this primordial substance, and Anaximenes
considered air to be it. Heraclitus, on the other hand, assumed that fire must be
the primordial substance. His reasoning was that everything in the universe is con-
stantly changing. Fire seemed to him to best correspond to this, which is why he
declared it the primordial substance.
In the fifth century BC, Greek philosophers like Empedocles finally developed
the doctrine of the four elements from this. Among others, Plato and Aristotle con-
tributed to its further development. The idea behind the four-element doctrine was
that different substances have different properties. Some are solid. Others are liq-
uid. Some are gaseous. For each of these states, it was thought, an element was
needed. Solids can melt, as is well known. The idea was that such substances
consist of earth and water. Today, we no longer describe solid, liquid, and gas-
eous as manifestations of individual chemical elements but as states of matter.
Incidentally, fire also fits into this scheme. The so-called plasma is sometimes
referred to as the fourth state of matter. A plasma is initially a gas. However, the
individual atoms of this gas are (usually due to high temperature) broken down
into electrons and atomic nuclei or atomic cores (an atomic core is an atom that
has only given up part of its electrons). Flames have a plasma-like character. In
this respect, the four classical elements actually represent the states of matter quite
well.
The idea of only four elements has a certain charm. It provided a model that
seemingly could explain the entire chemistry. Everything newly discovered could
somehow be traced back to the four elements. But even in antiquity, there were
considerations to expand the circle of elements. Thus, not only the alchemists
searched for the fifth element, the quintessence (“quinta essentia”, the fifth being).
All these thoughts are extremely fascinating from a history of science perspective.
However, they have little to do with the actual functioning of chemistry.
As we know today, matter consists of atoms. The first thoughts in this direction
also go back to Greek philosophers of antiquity. The modern concept of atoms, of
which there are different kinds, was then developed, starting in the 17th century
with Robert Boyle, by scholars like Bernoulli and Dalton. But how many kinds of
atoms are there actually?
First of all, the number of types of atoms is very large. However, two differ-
ent types of atoms do not necessarily belong to two different elements. An atomic
nucleus (or nuclide) is initially determined by two parameters. The number of pro-
tons and the number of neutrons. Generally, as the number of protons increases,
the number of neutrons also increases. This is not a necessity, of course. There
are indeed atomic nuclei that have the same number of neutrons but differ in their
number of protons. Such nuclides are called isotones. Conversely, there are atomic
nuclei that have the same number of protons but differ in the number of neutrons.
Such nuclides are called isotopes. Additionally, there is the case where two atomic
nuclei differ in both the number of protons and the number of neutrons. However,
5.1 How many Elements are there Actually? 109

the sum of both (the so-called nucleon number) is the same. Such nuclides are
called isobars. In one of these three cases, the atoms belong to the same element.
In which one?
The considerations regarding protons and neutrons belong to nuclear chemistry.
Often, the question of the structure of atomic nuclei is simply assigned entirely to
physics. This is somewhat simplified, although chemistry generally does not con-
cern itself much with the structure of atomic nuclei. What interests chemistry are
the bonds that exist between atoms. Accordingly, the chemical bonding properties
determine which atoms belong to the same chemical element and which do not.
Which of these two factors influences these bonds between atoms? The number of
neutrons or the number of protons?
The chemical bond is mediated neither by protons nor by neutrons. The cause
of chemical bonds is that electrons distribute themselves in specific ways between
atomic nuclei. If there is a concentration of electrons between atomic nuclei, then
one is dealing with a so-called covalent bond. If electrons do not distribute them-
selves in a small area between two atomic nuclei but rather across the entire solid
body, this is referred to as a metallic bond. If there is a redistribution of electrons
such that one of the atoms has “too few” and the other “too many” electrons, the
oppositely electrically charged atoms attract each other. This is called an ionic
bond. In any case, it is always the electrons that determine the chemical proper-
ties. Therefore, atoms with the same number of electrons should be counted as the
same element. The neutrons in the atomic nucleus hardly influence the electrons
at all. Thus, the number of neutrons is also irrelevant. On the other hand, protons
influence the electrons significantly. The positively charged protons attract the
negatively charged electrons. To be electrically neutral, an atom must have exactly
one electron per proton. Therefore, the number of protons determines the number
of electrons and thus the chemical properties. Two atoms with the same number
of protons have the same chemical properties. Therefore, they belong to the same
chemical element.
The number of chemical elements is therefore significantly smaller than the
total number of types of atomic nuclei. Almost all elements have different iso-
topes. However, the number of neutrons cannot be varied arbitrarily. If the atomic
nucleus contains too many or too few neutrons per proton, it becomes unstable.
This means that it is transformed into another nuclide through radioactive decay.
The ratio of neutrons to protons increases slightly with increasing proton number.
Thus, in heavy elements, there is on average more than one neutron per proton.
However, this does not change the fact that the number of isotopes of an element is
limited. In some elements (such as fluorine), only a single isotope occurs naturally.
The number of elements, on the other hand, is not fundamentally limited.
The number of protons can initially be any natural number. Starting from
1 (hydrogen) to 2 (helium), 3 (lithium), and so on, until one eventually reaches
92 (uranium). Then it stops for now. No more elements are found in nature. All
110 5 New Materials in the 23rd and 24th Century

heavier elements can only be artificially produced.2 The artificial production of

these elements, called transuranium elements, is not only quite complex. There
is another problem: they are unstable. They are radioactive and decay into lighter
elements. Normally, they do this by emitting alpha radiation. Although there are
radioactive isotopes of almost every element, up to and including element 82
(lead), there is almost always at least one stable isotope. All elements that con-
tain more protons than lead are radioactive with all their isotopes.3 The higher one
goes in the atomic number, the more unstable the elements become. This is why
no transuranium elements are found on Earth. Perhaps there were heavier elements
than uranium on Earth during the formation of the solar system. However, these
have long since decayed radioactively. Therefore, transuranium elements must
be artificially produced. In the case of the next heavier elements, this can still be
done in a conventional nuclear reactor. If uranium is bombarded with neutrons, not
only can nuclear fission occur, but heavier elements can also be formed. For exam-
ple, elements 93 (neptunium) and 94 (plutonium) are produced in nuclear reac-
tors. If the correct plutonium isotopes are hit by neutrons, they first transform into
the next heavier plutonium isotope and then through beta decay into an isotope of
element 95 (americium). If plutonium nuclei are hit by alpha particles, element
96 (curium) can be formed. One might already suspect that the process becomes
increasingly difficult.
At some point, the production of elements as a byproduct in a nuclear reactor
comes to an end. For even heavier elements, one must eventually resort to parti-
cle accelerators. Simply put, these are (very large) devices that shoot individual
nuclides at each other so that they collide at very high speeds. High speed means
a lot of energy. This way, new, even heavier elements can be created. It becomes
apparent that the process becomes increasingly complex. Additionally, one does
not obtain many atoms of the new element when the atomic nuclei have to be shot
at each other individually.
In addition to the significant effort required for production, the new elements
are becoming increasingly unstable. Even if they can be produced, it does not take
long before they decay again. While the most stable uranium isotope (element 92)
still has a half-life of several billion years, for element 95 (americium) it is only
a few hundred years. For element 100 (fermium), it is barely a hundred days. For
element 105 (dubnium), even the most stable isotope has a half-life of only about

2 Strictly speaking, this is not entirely correct. The elements with numbers 93 (neptunium) and
94 (plutonium) do indeed occur naturally on Earth in tiny traces. However, the quantities are so
small that these two elements are generally considered artificial elements.
3 In older literature, bismuth, element number 83, is also still considered a stable element. This

can be explained by the fact that the most stable bismuth isotope is indeed radioactive, but its
half-life is significantly longer than the current age of the universe. Therefore, the statement that
there is a stable and thus non-radioactive bismuth isotope is formally incorrect but practically
correct.
5.1 How many Elements are there Actually? 111

half a minute. For element 110 (darmstadtium4) the most stable isotope seems to
have an average lifespan of a whole minute. For element 115 (moscovium), one
should expect the decay of the atomic nucleus within less than a second.
In principle, the number of elements is not limited. Mathematically, the num-
ber of protons can be increased arbitrarily. The elements just become increasingly
unstable. The new elements that appear in Star Trek are usually used as materials
to make special devices. However, this becomes somewhat difficult if half of the
element has already decayed radioactively within seconds or even fractions of a
second. Is there perhaps still a chance to find more stable new elements?
From the shell model of the atomic nucleus (analogous to the shell model of the
atom, which plays a significant role in chemistry), it can be predicted that certain
combinations of proton and neutron numbers result in particularly stable atomic
nuclei. In the case of particularly stable transuranium elements, this is referred to
as “islands of stability.” The corresponding nuclides should be particularly stable.
For the element with atomic number 114, such an island of stability is predicted.
And indeed: flerovium, the name of the element, has proven to be particularly sta-
ble. Its most stable isotope has a half-life of at least 5 seconds. Compared to its
direct neighbors in the periodic table, which at best have a lifespan of a few hun-
dred milliseconds, this is quite a lot. This flerovium isotope has 171 neutrons in
addition to its 114 protons. For the flerovium isotope with 184 neutrons, which
has not yet been produced, significantly higher stabilities are predicted. However,
it seems very unlikely that a technically usable material can be obtained from a
flerovium isotope. Even if the half-life were a few days or even years, it would still
be far too little for practical use as a material.
But let’s just assume that there are more elements that are truly stable. After all,
there is no real upper limit to the number of protons in an element. If it is possible
to find more stable elements, then one could certainly do great things with them.
What exactly can be done with them can only be said to a limited extent now, as
we do not yet know the chemical properties of these new elements. Incidentally,
we do not even know the chemical properties of most of the transuranium ele-
ments we already synthesised very well. This is ultimately not really surprising,
because how can you conduct chemical reactions with something of which you
have only produced a few individual atoms? And these atoms then exist for only
a few minutes, seconds, or even just milliseconds. Certain predictions about their
chemical properties can be derived from their position in the periodic table of ele-
ments. Elements that stand below each other there have similar properties. Thus, it
can be assumed for element 118 (oganesson) that it is probably not very reactive,
as it belongs to the eighth main group. The elements above it are all noble gases.

4 Yes. The element with atomic number 110 is indeed called darmstadtium and is named after
the Hessian city of Darmstadt. The German Helmholtz Center for Heavy Ion Research (formerly
Gesellschaft für Schwerionenforschung) is located there, where a number of other elements were
first produced in addition to darmstadtium. From this location, element 108 also received the
name hassium (Latinized for Hesse).
112 5 New Materials in the 23rd and 24th Century

Unfortunately, more than such speculations about the chemical properties are not
available.
If new, stable elements are possible, then they can also be produced. An
advanced civilization would have to build enormous particle accelerators for this
purpose. The real challenge would probably not be the fundamental production.
The real difficulty would be to realize such a process in a way that allows sig-
nificant quantities to be produced. This is probably the reason why we never hear
about facilities in Star Trek where new elements are produced. Instead, there are
always mining facilities where such elements are extracted from foreign celestial
bodies. Or—which also happens frequently—the scanners discover a new element
somewhere. In both cases, the new elements naturally occur. Can additional chem-
ical elements naturally occur somewhere in space?
To answer this question, we first need to look at how naturally occurring ele-
ments actually come into being. Let’s start at the very bottom. With the element
that has a single proton and no neutron in the atomic nucleus: hydrogen. Well,
hydrogen is the only element where the atomic nucleus does not have to form as
such. It is simply a proton. Naturally, the proton also had to come into being some-
how. However, this is a completely different process by its nature. The question
leads back to the creation of the universe and is quite exciting in itself. The for-
mation of elementary particles such as protons, however, has nothing to do with
chemistry. Chemically speaking, we only need to ask how protons become hydro-
gen. This can be explained by the fact that protons are positively charged and elec-
trons are negatively charged. Therefore, they attract each other. A single proton
sooner or later captures a single electron. Together they form a hydrogen atom.
When the hydrogen atom encounters another hydrogen atom, they form a chemi-
cal bond. A hydrogen molecule is formed. This is hydrogen as we know it. This
is how the path from a single atomic nucleus to a “real” chemical element works
for all elements. The remaining question is then only how the atomic nuclei of the
other elements come into being.
In the case of helium, this is quite well known. The nuclear fusion inside the
sun constantly converts large amounts of hydrogen into helium. Therefore, helium
is the second most common element in the universe after hydrogen.5 But why does
nuclear fusion not continue in many stars? Why do helium nuclei in the sun not
continue to fuse with each other (or with hydrogen nuclei)? Why does the process
stop at helium and not continue to lithium, beryllium, and so on?
This is because helium is very stable. This applies not only to its (non-existent)
chemical reactivity. It also applies to its nuclear chemical properties. Helium does
not undergo radioactive decay and it almost as reluctantly fuses with other atomic
nuclei to form heavier nuclides.

5 The helium with which we fill balloons on Earth, however, does not come from the sun but
from natural gas. During radioactive decay inside the Earth (specifically: alpha decay), a helium
nucleus is emitted by the decaying atomic nucleus. The helium nucleus captures two electrons
and accumulates (provided it does not escape into the atmosphere and eventually into space) as
helium in natural gas.
5.1 How many Elements are there Actually? 113

The formation of helium through nuclear fusion in the sun works so well
because it is energetically at a significantly lower energy level than hydrogen.
Therefore, a lot of energy is released during the fusion of hydrogen to helium.
This initially applies to the fusion of almost all light elements. However, helium
is an exception. If helium is further fused to lithium or beryllium, no energy is
released. If one were to further fuse lithium or beryllium nuclei, energy would be
released again. The process initially stops at helium, which has a very low energy
level. Energy would have to be put into its fusion. Only carbon (element number
6) then has a lower energy level than helium. However, one can only reach this
through several fusion steps from helium. Therefore, nuclear fusion hardly pro-
gresses beyond helium. Stars primarily produce helium.
However, this does not mean that it cannot continue at all. At a certain point
in their development, stars begin to fuse helium into heavier elements. Once the
path to carbon has been taken, energy is ultimately released again during fusion.
Further elements can be formed. At least up to a certain point. At a proton num-
ber of 26, we reach the most stable element: iron. This metal is not only mechani-
cally very stable. It is also extremely stable in nuclear chemical terms. If one were
to fuse iron atoms into heavier atoms, energy would have to be supplied again.
Therefore, elements with proton numbers less than 26 tend to undergo nuclear
fusion. Elements with proton numbers greater than 26 tend to undergo nuclear
fission. Energetically speaking, atomic nuclei try to approximate iron. Therefore,
elements with larger atomic numbers do not actually form through nuclear fusion.
Well, at least not in the first place! Because somewhere the 66 elements must come
from, which occur in nature and have more protons in the atomic nucleus than iron.
If heavier elements are bombarded with neutrons, they can transform into
heavier elements through subsequent beta decays. In a beta decay, a neutron in
the atomic nucleus transforms into a proton. It emits an electron (called a beta
particle) and an antineutrino. This way, heavier elements can slowly form. Even
beyond the 26-limit of iron. This happens to a small extent in stars. However,
really large amounts of heavy elements do not usually form this way. And very
much heavier elements than iron also do not result from this process. Really large
amounts (and really heavy elements) can form in supernovae. The unknown, sta-
ble elements that the starfleet’s spaceships repeatedly encounter in space could
have formed in a super-supernova. No, that is not a typo. It is indeed meant to
say “super” twice. What one is to imagine under such a double supernova, I do
not know myself. But it is clear that it would need something significantly more
intense than a supernova as we know it to form new stable elements.
The fact that no stable transuranic elements have been found in nature to date
shows that a simple supernova cannot form them. It may well be capable of form-
ing transuranic elements. However, since their half-lives are significantly shorter
than the age of the solar system, they have already decayed to the point where
their remnants are below the detection limit. If the known processes for forming
heavy elements really produced stable transuranic elements, they would still be
present. Since they are not, it obviously requires something significantly stronger
114 5 New Materials in the 23rd and 24th Century

than a supernova. Whatever that may be: It has not occurred in our part of the gal-
axy so far.

Excursus

Biological Origin of Elements

In the year 2371, the USS Voyager arrives at a planet with a ring system. In
this ring system, they find a new element. The proton number of this element,
at 247, is already impressive enough. Even more impressive is how this ele-
ment is formed. The German title of the 9th episode of the 1st VOY season
does not refer to it, but it fits quite well: “Das Unvorstellbare” (i.e. “The
Unimaginable” or “Unthinkable”).
As it turns out, this element is formed during the decomposition of the
corpses of the Vhnori. Their dead are placed on asteroids that form the plan-
et’s ring system. This is a truly remarkable process. Decomposition is a process
in which small organisms like bacteria chemically transform a dead body. In a
chemical reaction, the elements themselves do not change. If the body consisted
of X atoms of carbon, Y atoms of oxygen, Z atoms of hydrogen (and so on) at
the time of death, the decomposition products still consist of X atoms of carbon,
Y atoms of oxygen, Z atoms of hydrogen (and so on). The elements are found
in completely different chemical compounds after decomposition. Tendentially,
smaller molecules are formed during decomposition than were originally pre-
sent in the living organism. The elements may also be distributed differently in
space (some, for example, transition into the gas phase). However, the overall
composition, at least in terms of the elements, remains unchanged.
The question indeed arises as to how the decomposition of the Vhnori is
supposed to form a new element. Do bacteria with built-in particle accelerators
live on the asteroid? That would certainly be a fascinating biological discov-
ery. It seems more likely, however, that it is not a biological decomposition at
all. Theoretically, it is conceivable that there is radiation on the aforementioned
asteroids that triggers an element transformation. We would then not be deal-
ing with biological decomposition, but with (previously unknown) radiation-
induced chemical decomposition.
Three questions still remain: First, which (probably very heavy) element is
present in the body of the Vhnori and can serve as the starting point for the for-
mation of element 247? Second, if such radiation exists on the asteroid, why did
the Voyager’s scanners not detect it? And third, why did the away team survive
this radiation? The intensity of the (e.g. neutron) radiation should be lethal. ◄

5.2 Materials That Do Not Consist of Chemical Elements

All substances are composed of elements. Sometimes it is only one element.

Most of the time, it is several. The individual atoms are held together by chemical
bonds. Intermolecular interactions exist between the individual molecules, which,
5.2 Materials That Do Not Consist of Chemical Elements 115

for example, prevent a liquid from evaporating or plastic from melting. All these
bonds are formed through electrical attraction. Specifically, it is the attractions
between the positively charged atomic nuclei and the negatively charged electrons.
The electrons distribute themselves in such a way that a bond is formed. This
applies both to the bonds between atoms in a molecule or metallic solids and to
the interactions between different molecules.
These chemical bonds can be very strong. Just think of a diamond. Through the
covalent bond between carbon atoms, it becomes the hardest known material. But
could there be even more stable materials?
Even the strongest chemical bond between atoms has only a certain strength.
With diamonds, the potential for strength through chemical bonds is largely
exhausted. Admittedly, this is already quite a lot. Chemical bonds can indeed be
very strong. Nevertheless, a maximum achievable strength is reached, simply put,
when the strength of all chemical bonds in a cross-section is added up.6 Since
atoms are very small, there are very many bonds between atoms in a cross-section.
This is how the remarkable strengths of materials like diamond or carbon fibers
come about. However, the known chemical bonds cannot offer much more. The
strength of materials, regardless of which elements they consist of, cannot become
infinitely large.
But there must be more. Is there not some material whose strength is even
higher than what today’s known chemical bonds allow? The heroes from Star Trek
occasionally encounter a substance so stable that even the most modern weapons
of the 23rd and 24th centuries cannot damage it: Neutronium.
Even Captain Kirk encountered it in the 6th episode of the 2nd TOS season,
“The Doomsday Machine”. The hull of the unmanned weapon system known as
the Doomsday Machine is made of Neutronium. This makes it completely immune
to any attack. Since it is a planet killer (and the system also carries out its purpose
quite indiscriminately), this proves to be a serious problem. Finally, the Doomsday
Machine can only be stopped by flying a spaceship the size of the Enterprise
into its opening. Fortunately, the USS Constellation is available for this suicide
mission.
Over a hundred years later, Kira and Garak have an encounter with Neutronium
in the final episode of the series, the 26th episode of the 7th DS9 season, “What
You Leave Behind, Part II”. To end the war with the Dominion, they need to break
into the central command on Cardassia Prime. Since they do not have a key, they
want to try using a bomb to open the door. However, it turns out that the door
in question is made of Neutronium, and a bomb would not even cause a dent.
Therefore, they need another plan.

6 This is indeed very simplified. One must consider that there are different criteria for strength.
It can make a significant difference whether one pulls on a material, compresses it, or twists it.
The idea of the sum of all bonds over a cross-section would only be an approximation of tensile
strength. It does not say much (at least directly) about other strength parameters.
116 5 New Materials in the 23rd and 24th Century

In the course of Star Trek’s history, there are a whole series of encounters with
neutronium or neutronium alloys. But what exactly is neutronium? A look at the
periodic table of elements reveals no element by that name.
Chemical elements are characterized by the interplay of protons in the atomic
nucleus and electrons in the atomic shell. This is what determines the chemical
properties. The neutrons are rather incidental. Let us imagine an atomic nucleus
whose number of protons is zero. If the number of neutrons is now greater than
zero (otherwise there would be nothing at all), then one would have an atomic
nucleus that contained no protons. The corresponding atom would therefore also
have no electrons. Since neutrons have no electric charge, they cannot bind elec-
trons. This has two consequences: On the one hand, chemical bonds as we know
them are impossible. Without electrons to mediate the attraction between posi-
tively charged atomic nuclei, none of the known types of chemical bonds work.7
On the other hand, the distances between the atomic nuclei could become very
small. Normally, atomic nuclei do not come arbitrarily close. This is simply
because the positively charged protons in the atomic nuclei repel each other. If the
atomic nucleus consisted only of a neutron, then this repulsion would not exist.
The “atomic nuclei” could aggregate into an incredibly dense material. This mate-
rial is called neutronium.
The idea of such a substance and the naming as neutronium is almost a cen-
tury old. The German chemist Andreas Antropoff, who was born in Estonia, took
the periodic table (developed by Meyer and Mendeleev) in the 1920s and did
something similar to what we did in the last section. In the search for new pos-
sible elements, we mentally extended the periodic table upwards (in terms of
atomic number; as they are usually printed it is downwards). In doing so, we con-
sidered what happens when the atomic number (the number of protons) increases
further and further. Antropoff considered what happens when the atomic number
is reduced below 1 (hydrogen). In 1925, he submitted an article to the journal
Angewandte Chemie, which was published the following year under the title “Eine
neue Form des periodischen Systems der Elemente” (“A New Form of the Periodic
System of Elements”). In it, he proposed a modified arrangement of the elements
in the periodic table. This did not catch on. However, it had a peculiarity: there
was still a space left to the left of hydrogen. This circumstance led him to speculate
about a hypothetical element with atomic number 0. For the atom, he proposed the
term neutron. For the corresponding element, he suggested the name neutronium.
To this day, it has not been possible to prove such an element. It is now gener-
ally accepted that neutrons exist. Both as a component of atomic nuclei and as

7 In the 2nd episode of the 1st season of PIC, “Maps and Legends,” an android responds to the
question of what is brown and sticky with, among other things: “Boson-enriched nanopolymer.”
How to enrich a substance, whether a nanopolymer or something else, with bosons is still com-
pletely unclear by today’s standards. However, bosons are those elementary particles that medi-
ate forces between fermions (which include electrons, protons, and neutrons). A completely new
type of bond could therefore be present in boson-enriched nanopolymers. How to imagine this is
left open. But it would at least explain why it is so sticky.
5.2 Materials That Do Not Consist of Chemical Elements 117

individual elementary particles, their existence is undisputed. In atomic nuclei, we

actually have the situation that several neutrons—as in hypothetical neutronium—
are connected. However, protons are always present as well. Much has been spec-
ulated about neutrons that connect without a proton being involved. Such a thing
has not been proven to this day. Theoretical calculations also suggest that it would
be unstable. The strength of the bond between the individual neutrons would prob-
ably even be negative. But what kind of bond should hold neutronium together
at all? After all, there are no electrostatic attractions between differently charged
particles in it.
In nature, there are fundamentally four types of interactions. Interaction can
mean both that things attract each other and that they repel each other. It can also
involve a combination of different forces. In such cases, attractive forces pre-
dominate at a greater distance and repulsive forces at a smaller distance. This is
the principle of a bond. Bonds are designed to hold particles together (this is the
attractive force that predominates as long as the particles do not come too close).
At the same time, bonds ensure that the particles do not completely collapse into
each other (these are the repulsive forces that predominate when the particles
come too close). In chemistry, forces are always mediated by electrical interac-
tion. From everyday life, we know a second interaction: gravity. This holds solar
systems together as gravity and prevents us from simply jumping into space. In
addition, there are two other fundamental interactions. The strong and the weak
interaction. The strong interaction holds atomic nuclei together. The electri-
cal interaction between the positively charged protons would otherwise immedi-
ately tear the atomic nucleus apart. The weak interaction, in turn, is responsible
for atomic nuclei experiencing radioactive decay. The strength of all these forces
decreases with increasing distance. Electrical interaction and gravity decrease with
the square of the distance. This means that at twice the distance, only a quarter
of the force acts. This initially sounds as if these two interactions would not be
effective over very large distances. As we can see from gravity, which holds solar
systems and even galaxies together, this is not necessarily the case. In the case of
the strong and weak interaction, the force decreases even more significantly with
increasing distance. This means that the strong interaction usually hardly extends
beyond the atomic nucleus. For chemistry, it is therefore usually not particularly
interesting. Except in the case of an “element” like neutronium.
In neutronium, the distances between the “atoms” are not, as usual, on the order
of a few picometers. They are only a few femtometers.8 One can imagine a piece
of neutronium in a certain way as a single gigantic atomic nucleus. The strong

8 While even the smallest atom, hydrogen, has a diameter of a “gigantic” 50 picometers (a pico is
a 1 with eleven zeros before the decimal point), its nucleus, consisting of a single proton, is only
about 1.5 femtometers in size (a femto is a 1 with 14 zeros before the decimal point). The hydro-
gen atom is thus more than 30,000 times larger than its nucleus—if one expresses the difference
in distances. In terms of volume, it is even more than 30 trillion times larger than the proton
inside it.
118 5 New Materials in the 23rd and 24th Century

interaction could theoretically hold neutronium together accordingly. A material

held together by this short-range but unimaginably strong force should be fabu-
lously stable, at least in terms of its mechanical strength.9
The mere fact that many neutrons are brought together does not necessarily
mean that the strong interaction really holds them together. Let’s think again about
the heavy elements from the last section. The more nucleons present in an atomic
nucleus, the more unstable it becomes. It is therefore at least more than question-
able whether a material like neutronium can exist and whether it really has the fab-
ulous mechanical properties we see in Star Trek. However, there is another effect
that could make neutronium very strong—even if the strong interaction does not:
gravity.
Neutronium would have an unimaginable density. The order of magnitude of
the density of this material would be about ten to a hundred trillion times what
we otherwise know. “Heavy as lead” is no longer an appropriate metaphor. There
is simply no comprehensible comparison for it. Due to the enormous density, you
have an incredible amount of mass in a comparatively small volume. An object
like a door or even a gigantic spaceship, like the planet killer, made of neutronium
would have the mass of a smaller celestial body (in the case of the planet killer,
the mass would even correspond to a fairly large celestial body). Now, asteroids
or small planets are known not to have an enormously large gravitational pull. But
that is because they are again too large. Their mass is manageable compared to
large celestial bodies. However, their diameter is still several kilometers (or even
hundreds of kilometers). We remember that the strength of gravity decreases with
the square of the distance. If the mass of a small planet is concentrated to the size
of the entrance door of the Cardassian Central Command, then the distance is very
small. An enormous gravitational field would emanate from every part of the neu-
tronium door. The strength of the attraction in gravity depends again on the mass
of the attracted object. Since the other parts of the door are also made of neutro-
nium, they would also have a huge mass. Accordingly, they would attract each
other very strongly. The neutronium door would simply be held together by its
own gravity. However, it could happen that it deforms into a sphere due to its own
gravity. This would be the same effect that brings planets and stars into a spherical
shape. The architect would therefore have to take special care of this.
Although we do not yet know whether a chemical element neutronium can
really exist, and we do not really know exactly what its properties would be and
what kind of bonding would cause them, we can already address two practical

9 What an alloy of neutronium with another element would look like remains completely unclear.
The strong interaction may connect a large number of neutrons to form neutronium. An alloy is
a combination of several metallic elements. The type of bond is the so-called metallic bond, in
which the electrons are distributed over the entire metallic body (hence the good electrical con-
ductivity of metals). Alloys (like all metals) are held together by the electrical attraction between
these negative electrons and the positive atomic nuclei, thus obtaining their strength. How the
metallic bond is supposed to work in conjunction with the electrically neutral neutrons remains
unclear.
5.2 Materials That Do Not Consist of Chemical Elements 119

problems. The first is again gravity. This force may hold neutronium together. But
gravity does not only act between the individual neutrons. It also acts between
the neutrons and their surroundings. If you build a door with the mass of a small
planet, then the question arises not only of which door opener should open this
megaton-heavy door. There is also the problem that everything else is attracted in
the same way. The mass of a small planet at a few meters distance would create
such an attraction that anyone who comes near the neutronium door would be so
strongly attracted that they would simply stick to it and barely get away again.
The second problem is the production of neutronium. Neutrons can be formed
from protons in two ways: by emitting a positron or by capturing an electron. An
advanced civilization might be able to bring this about deliberately. Compacting
the neutrons into neutronium would then be even more demanding. After all, neu-
trons have no charge. Neutron radiation is therefore poorly steerable. And even if
they have managed to get this problem under control, there remains the question
of where to get the raw material from. After all, we are talking about entire aster-
oids that would have to be processed even for smaller objects made of neutronium.
The artificial production of neutronium would therefore hardly be practical. So,
it would have to be found and mined somewhere in nature. Just as all chemically
used elements are found in nature and not artificially produced. Such a natural
source of neutronium could indeed exist.
At the end of the life of very massive stars, black holes are formed. They even
have a higher density than neutronium (if one still wants to speak of density in the
case of black holes). Smaller stars like our sun eventually become white dwarfs.
Chemically speaking, white dwarfs consist mainly of carbon and oxygen. If the
star has a bit more mass than our sun but is too small for a black hole, then some-
thing else can form at the end of its life: a neutron star.
After the nuclear fusion in the star has come to an end, no more energy is
released. As a result, the radiation pressure, which has so far opposed gravity,
decreases. The star collapses under its own weight. Consequently, everything
inside is enormously compressed. In the process, the temperature rises sharply
again. Finally, the protons inside begin to capture the electrons. In doing so, they
transform into neutrons (and emit a neutrino).10 A celestial body is formed that
essentially consists of neutrons. Hence the name neutron star.
In a way, such a neutron star thus consists of neutronium, and one would only
have to establish a mining colony there. If it weren’t for two problems again. One

10 The capture of electrons by neutrons was speculated about as early as the beginning of the 20th
century. Antropoff also dealt with this question. In a 1924 article titled “Zur Umwandlung von
Quecksilber in Gold” (“On the Transformation of Mercury into Gold”), he discusses this possi-
bility. In the end, he concluded that this would not be possible in most cases because certain iso-
topes would have to occur in nature, and argon in the air would have to be transformed into these
chlorine isotopes by electrons during lightning strikes. In this article, he ultimately concludes that
the production of gold from mercury would be the only transformation of a chemical element in
this way that could not be ruled out at that time. Today we know that even the production of gold
in this way is not feasible. That would not be chemistry, but alchemy.
120 5 New Materials in the 23rd and 24th Century

is (once again) gravity. Landing on a neutron star might still be possible. Working
there without being crushed by one’s own body weight would be virtually impos-
sible. Subsequently, taking off against gravity with a cargo hold full of neutronium
would be utterly unthinkable.
The second problem is the rotation of the neutron star. Here, the inclined reader
might object that planets also rotate and one can still land on them. That is correct
to some extent. However, a planet like Earth rotates only once a day on its axis.
For a neutron star, it is several hundred times. Per second. The speed at the surface
near the equator is several tens of thousands of kilometers per second. Therefore,
a landing would only be feasible near the poles. However, since the centrifugal
force, which counteracts gravity somewhat, is absent there, the problems with
gravity would become significantly more pressing.
Neutronium may indeed possess a grandiose strength. However, there are so
many problems that one understands why this miracle material is ultimately used
very rarely even in the future of Star Trek.

Excursus

Gold-Pressed Latinum
After this discussion of materials that are not based on chemical elements, we
want to return to the chemical elements once more. Especially to one of the ele-
ments that we only know from Star Trek. It is supposed to be an element that
the Ferengi value above all: Latinum.
For the Ferengi, profit is everything, and latinum is their currency. In their
lives, they are guided by the Rules of Acquisition. This is a collection of max-
ims that the Ferengi uphold with almost religious fervor. In the 16th episode of
the 4th DS9 season, “Bar Association,” we learn that Rule of Acquisition 263
states: “Never allow doubt to tarnish your lust for latinum.” And from the 20th
episode of the 5th DS9 season, “Ferengi Love Songs,” we know: “Latinum lasts
longer than lust” (Rule of Acquisition 229).
Compared to worthless gold, latinum is particularly coveted. Reason enough
to take a closer look at this element. Latinum is quite obviously an element.
How do we know this? I can’t think of an episode where it is explicitly stated
that it is an element. Ultimately, however, it can only be one. Latinum serves
as currency because it is not replicable. Any chemical compound, on the other
hand, would be replicable. A compound can be made from other compounds or
from the underlying elements. In particular, stable compounds are usually easy
to produce. Latinum is obviously very stable. Apart from the fact that it would
otherwise be unsuitable as a basis for currency, we learn in the 26th episode of
the 2nd DS9 season, “The Jem’Hadar,”: “Nature decays, but latinum lasts for-
ever” (Rule of Acquisition 102).
This property can ultimately only be possessed by latinum if it is an ele-
ment. A compound would hardly be so stable and not replicable. That it is
an element can also be deduced from the name. The ending -um indicates a
5.2 Materials That Do Not Consist of Chemical Elements 121

metallic element. Most chemical elements are metals. This is especially true for
the heavier elements. Since we do not know latinum to this day, it must be a
very heavy element. Its atomic nucleus would have to contain at least 119 pro-
tons according to current knowledge11. This high number of protons makes the
stability somewhat questionable again. On the other hand, it fits with a state-
ment from the 16th episode of the 1st VOY season, “Learning Curve.” In it,
the Bolian Chell complains that his backpack is so heavy as if it were full of
latinum bars. The fact that the atomic nucleus contains many protons (and thus
also neutrons) does not necessarily mean that the density of an element is high.
It first means that the weight of the individual atoms is high. However, if the
substance is not a gas, one can usually assume that heavy atoms lead to high
density.
A unique feature of Latinum is its state of aggregation. It is liquid. Almost
all metals are solid at room temperature. There is only one exception: mercury.
Like Latinum, it shines silvery and melts already at −38.8°C. Unfortunately,
mercury is quite toxic. For this reason alone, mercury is not really suitable as a
means of payment. Latinum, on the other hand, seems to be largely non-toxic.
At least for Lurians. In the 12th episode of the 6th DS9 season, “Who Mourns
for Morn?”, the Lurian Morn stores pure, liquid Latinum in one of his stom-
achs. This does not exactly speak for dangerous toxicity.
The fact that it is liquid, on the other hand, is quite impractical for handling.
For this reason, the Ferengi press Latinum into worthless gold. Accordingly, it
is mostly referred to as “gold-pressed Latinum.” How this pressing is done is
unfortunately never explained. It is probably not a process under high pressure,
but simply refers to the fact that Latinum is bound to gold. One can indeed
assume a kind of chemical compound. In principle, it would be conceivable that
liquid Latinum is contained in a chamber inside a gold bar. However, a rela-
tively soft material like gold does not seem to be really suitable for this. The
risk of leakage would be too great. Moreover, gold would only cause unnec-
essary weight that one would have to carry around. If it were just a kind of
capsule, then one would most likely have chosen another material. Even if gold
might be worthless and therefore cheap to obtain in the future, other materials
would simply be more sensible for this.
A compound of Latinum and gold seems much more plausible. Latinum can
be integrated into the lattice structure of gold. One does not even have to really
press. Melting is basically enough. If you mix liquid gold and liquid Latinum
and let it solidify again, you get an alloy. As long as the Latinum content is not
too high, the resulting alloy would be solid at room temperature (as long as

11 Thefact that it must have at least 119 protons is derived from the fact that the heaviest (at the
time of writing this book) known element, oganesson, has 118 protons. Realistically, it must be
even more. The (not yet produced) element 119 would be an alkali metal and thus very reactive.
However, latinum appears to be rather inert in Star Trek.
122 5 New Materials in the 23rd and 24th Century

there is not eutectic). It would consist of gold and Latinum atoms, all of which
have a fixed position in a crystal lattice.12
The incorporation of one element into the crystal lattice of another element
can occur in various ways. On the one hand, the foreign atoms can be located in
the interstices between the host atoms. Light elements, with small atoms, some-
times embed themselves in the atomic lattices of heavier elements in this way.
On the other hand, the foreign atoms can take the positions of host atoms. In
this case, Latinum atoms would be found in some positions where gold atoms
would otherwise be. Since Latinum is an unknown and therefore logically
heavy element, the latter variant seems much more plausible. The Latinum
atoms are likely simply too large for the interstices between the gold atoms.
Since the Latinum content in gold-pressed Latinum seems to be very low,
the bars would largely look like gold bars. This raises the question of authentic-
ity testing. It seems hardly conceivable that the Ferengi would rely solely on an
embossed seal from a trusted issuing authority. After all, Rule of Acquisition
239, as we learn in the 25th episode of the 4th DS9 season, “Quark’s Bar”,
states: “Never be afraid to mislabel a product.” The Ferengi must therefore have
some way to check whether the worthless gold really contains Latinum. How
they do this, we do not learn. However, it does not necessarily have to be par-
ticularly difficult.
When another element is introduced into the atomic lattice of a metal, the
electronic structure changes. These changes are often very slight. However,
they can sometimes be quite significant. Just think of the doping of semicon-
ductors. This is, in a way, the chemical basis of electronics. When tiny amounts
of phosphorus or aluminum are added to silicon, its electrical conductivity
increases significantly.13 A foreign atom in one hundred thousand host atoms
can already have a considerable effect. Although we actually know nothing
about the electronic structure of Latinum, it can be assumed that it has a sig-
nificant effect on some easily testable property of gold. Otherwise, authenticity
testing would be very difficult. This would be very unlikely. After all, Ferengi
businessmen certainly do not let themselves be easily deceived. ◄

12 The term crystal should not be confusing in this context. Crystals are not only the sparkling,
angular things known from mineralogy. A crystal is generally referred to when the individual
atoms have fixed positions that are arranged according to a strict order principle.
13 However, one should not add both elements at the same time. Phosphorus causes a so-called

n-doping in silicon. In this process, additional electrons introduced by the phosphorus contribute
to conductivity. Aluminum leads to p-doping. In this case, the absence of an electron increases
conductivity. Instead of an electron, the electron hole (called a hole) is transported during current
conduction. If both elements are added to silicon, the two effects cancel each other out. The addi-
tional electron from the phosphorus fills the gap caused by the aluminum.
5.3 The Mixing Ratio of Matter and Antimatter 123

5.3 The Mixing Ratio of Matter and Antimatter

For the energy supply of Starfleet ships, antimatter seems to play a major role.
Every elementary particle has an antiparticle. There is an antiproton for the pro-
ton, an antineutron for the neutron, an antielectron (better known as a positron) for
the electron, a corresponding antineutrino for each neutrino, and so on. A special
case is the photon, the “light particle.” It is its own antiparticle. The universe con-
sists practically only of matter. Antimatter is almost non-existent in the universe.
This is quite fortunate because when matter and antimatter meet, they immediately
annihilate each other and convert into energy; from our current perspective, a very
dangerous circumstance. On the other hand, it could serve as a tremendous energy
source, which would certainly be advantageous for interstellar spacecraft.
Now someone might argue that antimatter is more a question of physics and not
chemistry. That is not entirely wrong. Nevertheless, it is worth looking at the topic
through the eyes of chemistry. Some things that appear clear from a physical per-
spective become relative.
In the 19th episode of the 1st TNG season, “Coming of Age”, we gain insight
into an entrance exam for Starfleet Academy. One of the questions posed to the
applicants there deals with the correct mixing ratio between matter and antimatter
in a spaceship’s propulsion system. Parameters such as the type of ship, the dis-
tance of the journey, and the size of the tanks are given. The answer is ultimately:
one to one. Because the amount of matter that is converted by antimatter is exactly
equal to the amount of antimatter. The task with its detailed specifications was a
trick question. It must always come down to this mixing ratio. It does not matter
what type of ship it is, how far the journey goes, or how full the tanks are. Physics
gives a clear answer here. Chemistry, on the other hand, says: It is not necessarily
that simple.
To understand the problem, it is worth considering the chemical basics of com-
bustion a bit. The combustion of hydrocarbons still forms the backbone of energy
technology today. Just as antimatter reactions might in a few centuries. Let’s take
the combustion of natural or biogas as a simple example. Their main component
is methane, and we will just assume that our fuel consists only of methane. The
combustion then proceeds according to the following chemical reaction equation:
CH4 + 2 O2 → CO2 + 2 H2 O
Each methane molecule is converted with two oxygen molecules into one carbon
dioxide molecule and two water molecules. This numerical ratio is called the stoi-
chiometry of the reaction. The stoichiometric mixing ratio between methane and
oxygen is therefore one to two. It always requires exactly twice as much oxygen as
methane. In practice, fuels are rarely burned in pure oxygen but rather in air. This
is cheaper and more practical. Dry air consists of about 21% oxygen. In reality, air
is rarely truly dry. There is always some water vapor present. However, this water
content is not constant but subject to certain fluctuations. Especially at high tem-
peratures, it can become quite high. As a result, the proportions of the other gases
124 5 New Materials in the 23rd and 24th Century

in the air are lower. For the sake of simplicity, we will now just assume that the
air consists of 20% oxygen. On the one hand, this accounts for the fact that there
is water vapor in real air. On the other hand, it makes the calculation significantly
easier (20% oxygen content corresponds to exactly one-fifth of the total air vol-
ume). If you need two liters of oxygen per liter of methane14, then you need two
times five, that is, ten liters of air. This ratio is thus the stoichiometric mixing ratio.
It corresponds somewhat to our one-to-one mixing ratio of matter and antimatter.
However, technical combustion processes are almost never realized with a stoi-
chiometric mixing ratio. Instead, a significant excess of air is usually used. This
is called lean combustion. The air excess is described by the air number Lambda.
This indicates the ratio of the actual amount of air to the stoichiometrically
required amount of air. If you mix air and fuel exactly in the stoichiometrically
correct ratio, then Lambda is equal to one. If you burn a lean mixture, i.e., with an
excess of air, then Lambda is greater than one. With a rich mixture, which would
correspond to a lack of air, Lambda would be less than one. But why is a lean mix-
ture almost always used in practice? What is the reason for the excess air?
When burning a hydrocarbon, it is converted with oxygen into carbon dioxide
and water. At least in the case of complete combustion. In reality, the reaction does
not proceed completely. Therefore, the product is not simply a mixture of carbon
dioxide and water (plus nitrogen, which is present in large quantities in the air but
does not participate in the reaction). The product mixture also contains residues of
the unconverted fuel and oxygen that did not oxidize these residues. Even those
parts of the fuel that were oxidized are not necessarily fully oxidized. In complete
oxidation, each carbon atom takes up two oxygen atoms. Carbon dioxide (CO2)
is formed. In partial oxidation, the carbon atom takes up only one oxygen atom.
Carbon monoxide (CO) is formed.
Such an incomplete combustion is undesirable. On the one hand, the energy
content of the fuel is not fully utilized. On the other hand, carbon monoxide and
methane are significantly stronger greenhouse gases than carbon dioxide. Thirdly,
carbon monoxide is toxic. Therefore, it is important to achieve as complete a com-
bustion as possible. One way to do this is with an excess of air. If the air ratio
Lambda is increased above the value of one, then more than one oxygen molecule
is available for each carbon atom of the fuel. This reduces the probability that the
carbon atom will not be oxidized or only partially oxidized. This achieves a more
complete combustion. By using the excess air, it simultaneously happens that the
oxygen is not completely converted. Basically, however, this is more or less irrel-
evant. The air was simply taken from the environment and is returned to it. As
much as the release of carbon dioxide into the air may be a problem, the intake

14 Strictlyspeaking, stoichiometry gives us the molar ratios, i.e., the ratio of the number of mol-
ecules of the individual substances. However, if we consider the substances as ideal gases, which
is a reasonable assumption here, then it holds that at the same temperature and pressure, equal
volumes contain the same number of molecules. Therefore, we can easily replace the molar ratio
with the volume ratio.
5.3 The Mixing Ratio of Matter and Antimatter 125

and release of air is irrelevant. The only disadvantage of a high excess of air is that
the additional oxygen (and with it the accompanying nitrogen) must be heated.
This may slightly reduce the energy utilization. However, this is a small price to
pay to avoid incomplete combustion.
Now back to the mixing ratio of matter and antimatter. To speak in terms of
combustion, antimatter represents the fuel. Matter corresponds to the oxidizer, i.e.,
the oxygen. If a larger amount of antimatter is allowed to meet matter, then it is
important to avoid the analogue of incomplete combustion. The mutual annihila-
tion of matter and antimatter, unlike combustion, does not proceed as a chemi-
cal reaction. Chemical reactions take time. This is one of the reasons that lead to
incomplete combustion. In the reaction of matter and antimatter, this limitation
does not exist. However, another effect should be considered. A lot of energy is
released during the annihilation. This applies to combustion and even more so to
matter-antimatter annihilation. This causes the mixture to push apart. In extreme
cases, it leads to an explosion. If it is possible to control the whole thing, then
not everything will necessarily blow up immediately, but the released energy still
contributes to increasing the distances between the particles. This makes their
encounter less likely. In the case of combustion, this contributes to incomplete
combustion. In the case of the matter-antimatter reaction, it means that not all anti-
matter particles are neutralized by matter particles. Even if it is possible to com-
press the beams of matter and antimatter with some force fields so that they do not
expand, not every antimatter particle will necessarily collide with a matter particle.
Therefore, some of the antimatter will not be neutralized.
The fact that a kind of “exhaust gas” is created, in which unreacted matter is
present, is initially not very problematic. The fact that an exhaust gas with unre-
acted antimatter is created, on the other hand, can develop into a serious problem.
Physically, it may be absolutely correct that the ratio of matter to antimatter must
be one to one. Technically, however, it is not quite so simple. To solve the corre-
sponding problems, it could be an option to orient oneself to chemistry and use an
excess of matter in the antimatter energy systems, analogous to the excess air in
combustion. Otherwise, there is a risk that unreacted antimatter will remain. This
will subsequently annihilate with matter. However, this will not happen inside the
reaction chamber, where it is supposed to happen. Instead, uncontrolled annihi-
lations (with corresponding energy releases) outside the reactor are to be feared.
Then it does not matter whether it is a Galaxy-class ship, how far the journey is
supposed to go, and how big or full the tank is—the ship would probably not sur-
vive the uncontrolled energy release anyway. So, if the candidates for Starfleet
Academy indicate a certain excess of matter in the exam, the corrector should
actually accept it (at least as long as a good justification is provided, which admit-
tedly would be a challenge due to the time pressure).
Particularly Impressive Chemicals
6

6.1 Corbomite or Kirk’s Favorite Chemical Bluff

When Captain Kirk finds himself in a hopeless strategic situation, he often tries to
change the game. When he no longer has a reasonable next chess move, he resorts
to poker. In other words: he bluffs. He uses this trick twice and claims that the
Enterprise has a chemical substance called Corbomite on board.
What is Corbomite supposed to be? The term is obviously meant to be a chemi-
cal trivial name. In addition to using trivial names, chemical substances can be
named systematically. These systematic names have the advantage that one
knows the chemical structure of the substance as soon as one hears or reads the
name, even if one does not actually know the substance yet. Let’s take the sub-
stance 2-Isopropyl-5-methylcyclohexanol (Fig. 6.1) as an example. The name
means that the molecule is based on a cyclohexane molecule. These are six car-
bon atoms (the Greek word component “hex” means six) that form a chain. This
chain is, in turn, closed into a ring (hence “cyclo”). Attached to this cyclohexane
molecule is a hydroxyl group. The ending “ol” tells us this. Additionally, there are
two other functional groups on the ring: an isopropyl group and a methyl group.
Their exact position in the molecule is indicated by the numbers. Counting begins
at the hydroxyl group. The position on the cyclohexane ring where this is attached
is given the number 1. From there, one counts the individual positions on the ring
clockwise. Since the isopropyl group is at the next position, it is given the number
2. There is nothing at the next two positions, so the methyl group gets the number
5. At the last position, number 6, where one is again in direct proximity to the
hydroxyl group on the ring, there is also no other functional group. Therefore, this
number, like 3 and 4, is not assigned.
This methodology of systematic names is very helpful. Chemists do not have to
remember quite as many names, and there is immediately a name for every newly
discovered substance. However, names like 2-Isopropyl-5-methylcyclohexanol

127
128 6 Particularly Impressive Chemicals

Fig. 6.1  Structural formula of 2-Isopropyl-5-methylcyclohexanol (Menthol); at the endpoints of

each line, unless another type of atom is indicated, there is a carbon atom plus as many hydrogen
atoms as needed for the carbon atom to be connected to exactly four atoms; the numbers in the
ring are included as a guide to explain the counting principle for the position designation

are not really practical. Therefore, many commonly used substances have
short names. These are called trivial names. In the case of 2-Isopropyl-5-
methylcyclohexanol, the substance can be much more easily referred to by simply
saying menthol. If one does not know what menthol is, one cannot deduce any-
thing about its chemical nature from the trivial name. On the other hand, one only
has to remember a much shorter name. Additionally, writing and talking about
chemical substances is significantly simplified.1
Captain Kirk does not provide a systematic name for Corbomite but only uses
the trivial name. For good reason: he does not know it himself, as Corbomite does
not exist at all. He just made up the substance. The whole thing is a bluff, and
he is indeed betting quite high with it. The claims he makes about the imaginary
Corbomite are very bold.
Already in the first season of the original series, he uses his invention to
escape from a hopeless situation. In the 3rd episode of the 1st TOS season, “The
Corbomite Maneuver”, the Enterprise unknowingly enters the territory of the so-
called First Federation. The said First Federation is not very pleased about this

1 Anyone who finds the systematic name of menthol already long (or not long enough) should
take a look at the systematic name of Penicillin F: (2S,5R,6R)-6-[[(E)-hex-3-enoyl]amino]-
3,3-dimethyl-7-oxo-4-thia-1-azabicyclo[3.2.0]heptane-2-carboxylic acid. It becomes clear why
trivial names are so important in chemistry. And this is just the tip of the iceberg. Systematic
names can become arbitrarily complicated, especially in biochemistry.
6.1 Corbomite or Kirk’s Favorite Chemical Bluff 129

and now threatens to destroy the Starfleet ship. To prepare for death, the crew is
given ten minutes. As time progresses and all other options are exhausted, James
Kirk resorts to bluffing. He claims that the Enterprise carries a substance called
Corbomite. This Corbomite would release the same amount of energy if the
Enterprise were destroyed, thus also destroying the attacking ship. Balok, the
commander of the First Federation’s ship, apparently takes the bait. He is at least
uncertain enough to refrain from destroying the Enterprise for the time being.
Eventually, Kirk manages to resolve the conflict peacefully and even establish dip-
lomatic contacts with an exchange program. The key to this was initially his bluff
with the Corbomite.
Of course, Balok did not know whether Captain Kirk was telling the truth or
just trying to deceive him. But could he have known?
The question arises as to what would happen if Corbomite actually existed. If
it released as much energy as was used to destroy the Enterprise, one still won-
ders why that should destroy the Fesarius (Balok’s ship) as well. How should
Corbomite reflect the energy back to the Fesarius in a targeted manner? The
energy would more likely disperse evenly in all directions in the form of an explo-
sion. And even if the energy completely hit the attacking ship, the Fesarius is
many times larger than the Enterprise. The chances should not be so bad that it can
withstand much more. If Balok had thought a bit more about the physics behind
Kirk’s claim, he might have realized that it was an empty threat. However, this
book is not about physics but about chemistry. Could a bit more basic chemical
understanding also have led Balok to see through the bluff?
Apparently, Balok is not familiar with the Born-Haber cycle (or whatever this
fundamental natural law of chemistry might be called in his culture). This princi-
ple is normally used to determine the energy turnover of individual reaction steps.
We don’t need to consider it that complicated here. For us, only one essential
basic assumption is important: From a chemical reaction, you get exactly as much
energy out as you would put into its reverse.
Let’s imagine this with a simple example illustrated in Fig. 6.2. Let’s take a
simple alkane like hexane. Hexane burns very well. In doing so, it reacts with
oxygen and forms carbon dioxide and water. As is generally known, fire is hot. In
other words: Energy is released in the form of heat during combustion. The reac-
tion is exothermic. The amount of energy released in the reaction depends on the
specific reaction. If you burn 1 mol of hexane (which corresponds to about 86 g),
an amount of energy of 4.2 megajoules is released (which is a bit more than one
kilowatt-hour). As products of the reaction, 6 mol of carbon dioxide and 7 mol of
water are formed.
Hexane and oxygen can be obtained again from carbon dioxide and water. This
is not quite simple. Chemically, you have to go through many steps. Plants do
something similar. In photosynthesis, they convert carbon dioxide and water into
sugar and oxygen (which again happens in many individual steps). To be able to
do this, they have to supply energy to the reaction. In the case of photosynthesis,
this happens in the form of light. A glucose molecule essentially differs from a
hexane molecule in that it contains six oxygen atoms. In photosynthesis, not all
130 6 Particularly Impressive Chemicals

Hexane + 8.5 O2
Energy he content

BUR
S
HESI
4.2 megajoules

NIN
SYNT

G
4.2 megajoules

Fig. 6.2  Energy turnover in the synthesis of hexane from carbon dioxide and water and the sub-
sequent combustion; the energy turnover of the forward and reverse reactions is the same (only
the sign differs)

the oxygen is removed from the carbon dioxide. To get from glucose to hexane,
you need quite a bit more energy. If you sum up the total amount of energy that
you need to put in net to convert 6 mol of carbon dioxide and 7 mol of water into
1 mol of hexane and 8.5 mol of oxygen, you get 4.2 megajoules. Exactly the same
amount of energy that was released during combustion.
It does not matter at all which path you take to get back to hexane. You could
go through glucose and then convert it into hexane. Alternatively, you could split
the water by electrolysis into hydrogen and oxygen. You could then further react
the hydrogen with the carbon dioxide in a reaction known as Fischer-Tropsch to
hexane. Additionally, a lot of water would be produced, which you could feed
back into the electrolysis. Another variant could be that you do not split the water
by electrolysis but thermally. In this process, water is decomposed by the supply
of heat at very high temperatures. Ultimately, it does not matter how you do it;
only one thing is crucial for us: The same amount of energy that is released in
combustion must be supplied to the synthesis. This does not mean that no heat
could be released in any of the synthesis steps. The Fischer-Tropsch reaction, for
example, is quite exothermic. So, heat is released. The heat that has to be put into
the thermal water splitting, for example, compensates for this again. The net heat
supply is the same. This independence of energy turnover from the reaction path is
known as Hess’s law. In the end, in our hexane cycle, it is always 4.2 megajoules
of heat that must be supplied net during synthesis. And it is 4.2 megajoules that
are released during combustion.
A substance like the imaginary Corbomite would certainly not simply burn.
At least not with elemental oxygen. That would be far too slow to destroy an
6.1 Corbomite or Kirk’s Favorite Chemical Bluff 131

attacking ship. For explosives to react explosively, the oxygen is directly contained
in the explosive. In the case of TNT (trinitrotoluene), it is the three nitro groups
that provide oxygen directly for the reaction. In the case of classic gunpowder,
which Captain Kirk mixes together in the fight against the Gorn in the 19th epi-
sode of the 1st TOS season, “Arena”, it is the saltpeter. Chemically, saltpeter is
ultimately nothing more than a nitrate salt. Both the nitro group in an organic mol-
ecule and the nitrate ion in an inorganic salt are a compound of oxygen and nitro-
gen. This is quite unstable. If it decomposes, it provides oxygen. If this happens
inside the fuel, no oxygen has to be laboriously transported from the outside. The
reaction can therefore proceed abruptly and cause an explosion. It would have to
be similar with Corbomite. Because if the reaction proceeded slowly, the energy
released could hardly destroy the attacking ship.
What exactly Corbomite is supposed to be chemically and what reaction it is
supposed to perform remains open. Presumably, even Captain Kirk has no idea.
The real weak point in Kirk’s bluff, however, is the matter of the energy balance.
For every megajoule put into the synthesis, you get a megajoule out in the reverse
reaction. That fits perfectly with Kirk’s claim that Corbomite would release
exactly the same amount of energy that was expended to destroy the Enterprise. Or
does it?
It would work if Corbomite were formed during the enemy’s attack. For this,
the entire energy of the attack would have to be absorbed and Corbomite formed
with it. Alternatively, Corbomite could also be decomposed by the energy of the
attack. It all depends on which reaction absorbs energy and which releases energy.
The formation of Corbomite or its decomposition? The energy-absorbing (endo-
thermic) reaction must occur first. Secondly, the reaction must run backward to
release the energy. Let’s just assume that Corbomite decomposes when absorbing
energy and reforms when releasing it. Conversely, the argument would ultimately
work the same way.
First of all, there is an upper limit to the amount of energy that Corbomite
could absorb. Decomposition requires a certain amount of energy. This is essen-
tially the reaction enthalpy, i.e. the difference in energy level between Corbomite
and its decomposition products. Additionally, some energy might be needed to
bring the Corbomite to reaction temperature. Heating also costs energy. The more
energy supplied, the more Corbomite can be decomposed. Simply put, double the
amount of energy means double the amount of Corbomite. The maximum absorb-
able amount of energy is thus determined by the amount of Corbomite. Kirk’s
claim that Corbomite would absorb and release all the energy of the enemy’s
attack is therefore on shaky ground. It may be true, but only up to a certain point,
which is determined by the amount of stored Corbomite. For the 23rd century,
however, this seems very questionable. Just consider that in the future, antimat-
ter weapons like photon torpedoes are used by starships. The amounts of energy
released are enormous. Therefore, a huge amount of Corbomite would be needed.
Although Kirk makes it sound as if the Corbomite device is a small gadget hidden
132 6 Particularly Impressive Chemicals

somewhere on the ship, in reality, half the spaceship would have to be made of
Corbomite.2
At this point, someone might argue that the reaction of Corbomite does not
necessarily have to occur in two steps. Corbomite could simply decompose into
some other substances—without returning to its original state. Just as TNT, for
example, decomposes into nitrogen, hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and carbon. In
fact, that would be much more plausible. However, it would not fit Captain Kirk’s
claim. An explosive either explodes or it does not. A partial explosion does not
work very well. This is exactly where the crucial difference lies.
A classic explosive could undoubtedly be ignited by enemy fire. To that extent,
it would fit Captain Kirk’s claim. However, once the decomposition of an explo-
sive has begun, there is no stopping it. To trigger the explosion, energy must be
supplied from the outside. This ignition spark sets off a chain reaction. Chemical
reactions occur and release energy. A lot of energy! This energy ignites the
remaining parts of the explosive. The strength of an explosion depends only on the
amount of explosive. The size of the ignition spark does not matter. If the amount
of energy supplied is too small, there is no ignition. Once the amount of energy
supplied is large enough, ignition occurs. However, a larger ignition spark does not
lead to a stronger explosion.3
If Corbomite is supposed to release as much energy as was used in the destruc-
tion of the spaceship, then it cannot simply be an exothermic reaction. Such a
reaction would not simply stop when the amount of energy supplied is reached.
Corbomite would therefore actually have to absorb the energy through an endo-
thermic reaction first. This reaction would then have to run backward in a second
step. In doing so, the previously absorbed amount of energy would be released
again. Otherwise, the effect of Corbomite as outlined by Captain Kirk cannot be
explained.
However, if Corbomite can decompose so easily and suddenly, then the ques-
tion arises as to why it should immediately reform from its decomposition prod-
ucts afterward? It is quite possible for reactions to run forward and backward. This
is actually more the rule than the exception in chemistry. The direction in which a
reaction runs, however, depends on the prevailing conditions. In practice, these are
usually the temperature and pressure. If conditions prevail that lead to the decom-
position of Corbomite, then the reverse reaction should not occur immediately
afterward. If the reverse reaction were to occur with a significant delay, then the
threat of the Corbomite device would be rather weak. The attacker could move
away in time.

2 The amount of Corbomite could be significantly smaller if it were a nuclear reaction. Then,
much more energy could be provided with significantly less material. Apart from the fact that
Kirk’s formulation sounds more like a classic chemical reaction, the considerations made would
ultimately apply in the same way.
3 Another question that arises is how Corbomite can distinguish between an attack and, for exam-
ple, an ion storm? If the Enterprise really had a substance like Corbomite on board (or even con-
sisted largely of it), it would constantly be in danger of accidentally destroying itself.
6.2 The Molecule of Molecules 133

If Kirk had simply claimed that Corbomite would cause a massive explo-
sion upon the destruction of the ship, that would have been much more plausi-
ble. However, this bluff did not seem threatening enough to him. Therefore, he
apparently wanted to up the ante to really unsettle Balok. He was lucky that Balok
apparently did not pay much attention in chemistry class. But as it turns out, Balok
almost wanted to be deceived. As it turns out in the end, he is quite a friendly fel-
low and not really bent on destruction.
After this incident, James T. Kirk seems to have thought more thoroughly
about the Corbomite matter. In doing so, he apparently noticed his mistakes.
Nevertheless, the basic idea seems to have appealed to him, at least as a way out in
otherwise hopeless situations.
Only one year later, he resorts to it again. In the 11th episode of the 2nd TOS
season, “The Deadly Years”, he has only slightly revised his bluff. Due to a pre-
viously unknown disease, the crew of the Enterprise ages rapidly. As a result,
Commodore Stocker takes command of the Enterprise. Although he may outrank
Captain Kirk, he does not come close to the true captain in terms of competence.
His inexperience in commanding starships eventually leads him to take the short-
est route: through the Neutral Zone. This is known to be a bad idea. The Romulans
are there in no time. The Romulans are, of course, not at all pleased. The outcome
is predictable: they want to destroy the Enterprise.
Fortunately, Captain Kirk (now recovered) returns to the bridge just in time to
save the day. And he resorts to his old trick. Only now it is a bit more sophisti-
cated. He orders a message to be sent to Starfleet Command. Encrypted, but with
a code that he knows the Romulans have long since cracked. In this message, he
claims that he is forced to destroy the Enterprise and the Romulan attackers. And
he will do so using the new Corbomite device. He still obviously has no idea what
substance would cause such an explosion and what reaction would provide the
corresponding energy. However, the Romulans apparently do not maintain diplo-
matic relations with the First Federation and thus hear about Corbomite for the
first time. If they had just sat down and calculated how much energy a chemical
substance can release at most, they could have realized that there is no danger
to them at the distances between starships in space. But they are hearing about
Corbomite for the first time and have to decide quickly. They prefer not to take the
risk and withdraw.
Whether James Kirk (or another Starfleet captain) has resorted to the
Corbomite trick more often (or will do so in the future) is not known. However, it
is likely that it remained at these two instances. One should not rely too often on
the opponent not paying attention in chemistry class.

6.2 The Molecule of Molecules

Even the Borg know something like longing. For their collective consciousness,
there is one thing that represents absolute perfection to them. And perfection is
everything to the Borg. That is why they not only conquer foreign civilizations.
134 6 Particularly Impressive Chemicals

They even force them into their collective in such a way that their minds become
part of their shared consciousness. All just to learn everything from them. They
have only one motivation: they want to become even better. They want to get even
closer to absolute perfection. There is one thing that expresses all that they strive
for, why they conquer and assimilate. The manifestation of absolute perfection at
the highest complexity. This greatest thing that the Borg can imagine is nothing
other than a molecule. The Omega molecule.
In the 21st episode of the 4th VOY season, “The Omega Directive”, Star Trek
fans learn what even most Starfleet officers do not know. Over a hundred years
ago, the Federation researched a molecule that was supposed to represent an inex-
haustible energy source. There was only one problem: the molecule was unsta-
ble. It decayed and released an incredible amount of energy in the process. The
amount of energy was not only so great that the involved scientists lost their lives.
In an entire sector of space, the subspace was destroyed as a result. Even a century
later, no starship can still fly there with warp drive. This dangerous knowledge was
subjected to the strictest secrecy. Starfleet officers only learn about it upon their
promotion to captain. The associated, top-secret regulation bears the name of this
molecule: The Omega Directive. Named after the last letter of the Greek alphabet.
What kind of chemical is this Omega molecule? How can a single molecule
contain as much energy as a warp core? And how can it destroy the subspace of an
entire sector or even quadrant?
Let’s start with the question of what the Omega molecule actually is. We don’t
learn much. However, Captain Janeway does show a picture of it once. Admittedly,
a somewhat blurry picture. From the perspective of the episode’s creators, this
blurry depiction is quite understandable. After all, they themselves do not know
exactly what an Omega molecule is supposed to look like. In this case, a not
entirely sharp image is quite helpful. From a chemical perspective, blurry images
of molecules are not only annoying. After all, we would like to know exactly what
this super-molecule looks like. It is also very unusual for the image of a molecule
to be blurry. Molecules are not photographed but drawn. We had already seen in
one of the previous chapters why it is not so easy to take a photograph of a mol-
ecule where the individual atoms can be clearly recognized. For this reason, depic-
tions of molecules are always drawings. Essentially, even very simple drawings.
Molecules are represented as simple line drawings. The lines do not denote the
atoms but the bonds between them. At the end of each line, unless otherwise speci-
fied, one must imagine a carbon atom. To maintain clarity, hydrogen atoms and
their bonds are usually omitted. All other atoms are represented by the correspond-
ing element symbol. For example, Cl for chlorine, N for nitrogen, or S for sul-
fur. The image from the Starfleet database that Kathryn Janeway shows her senior
officers, on the other hand, is a somewhat blurry image of a spherical structure, in
the center of which something else seems to be located.
Spherical molecules are indeed known. And they seem to have fascinated peo-
ple even in more recent times. In 1996, there was the Nobel Prize in Chemistry
for their discovery. Less than two years later, the mentioned Voyager episode
“The Omega Directive” was filmed. The fact that there was even a Nobel Prize
6.2 The Molecule of Molecules 135

for the discovery of these spherical molecules suggests that they had a similar sig-
nificance for earthly science in the late 20th century as the Omega molecule did
for the Borg. However, they were not named Omega molecules but were called
fullerenes.4
Fullerenes are a modification of carbon. Carbon is known to occur in various
forms. This applies not only to the many chemical compounds it forms with other
substances. Even elemental carbon exists in different forms, called modifications.
The two most important and well-known are diamond and graphite. Both materi-
als consist solely of carbon. One of them is crystal clear and incredibly hard. The
other is black and quite soft. The difference lies solely in the chemical bonding. In
diamond, each carbon atom is bonded to four other carbon atoms. The four bonds
are oriented in such a way that they each assume the maximum angle between
each other. This results in a structure known as a tetrahedron. One bond points
upwards. One points forward and slightly downwards. One points, slightly back-
ward, to the left and slightly downwards. And one points, slightly backward, to the
right and slightly downwards. Depending on how you look at it, any of the four
bonds can be any of the described bonds. The other bonds are then still arranged in
the same way. This perfect structure with precisely oriented bonds makes diamond
so hard.
In graphite, on the other hand, each carbon atom is bonded to only three other
carbon atoms. Lying in a plane, this results in an angle of exactly 120 degrees
between the bonds. Looking down on the plane, you have a pattern of intercon-
nected, regular hexagons in front of you. Each of these planes is also very sta-
ble. But this only applies to the cohesion within a plane. There is no direct bond
between the planes. However, this does not mean that the individual planes in
graphite are not connected at all. Simply put, one of the four bonds of carbon is
still left. Three of them, very similar to the four bonds in diamond, are to neigh-
boring carbon atoms. The fourth, however, is not directly oriented to a single other
atom. The electrons that should represent the fourth bond act between the individ-
ual planes. Because the electrons are not fixed in a so-called σ-bond between two
atoms, they can move relatively freely. These electrons form a so-called π-system.
This is the reason for the good electrical conductivity of graphite. These electrons
also cause a certain cohesion between the individual layers of the carbon planes.
Therefore, the individual planes of graphite do not simply fall apart.
If individual carbon layers are isolated from graphite, you get another carbon
modification called graphene. Starting from graphene, further modifications can be
derived conceptually. Let’s imagine a layer of graphene and roll it up. We do not
roll it up like a carpet. So, we do not form a spiral. Instead, we reconnect it to form
a tube. This modification is called carbon nanotubes. Carbon nanotubes were dis-
covered shortly after fullerenes and quickly attracted great interest. Among other

4 The fullerenes are not named after one of their discoverers but after an architect: Richard
Buckminster Fuller. In his architecture, geodesic domes played a significant role, which look a
bit like giant fullerene molecules.
136 6 Particularly Impressive Chemicals

things, they were proposed as storage material for hydrogen. Hydrogen molecules
were supposed to adsorb on the large surface of the carbon nanotubes. This pro-
cess is called adsorption (with a “d”, not with a “b”). After a promising initial pub-
lication on this at the end of the 1990s, various research groups took up the topic.
They then published measurement results with even higher storage capacities. In
the following years, however, the measured hydrogen storage capacities that were
published became smaller and smaller. Around 2010, it was clear that the realistic
storage capacities were very small. The high values from the older publications
were apparently based on measurement errors. Carbon nanotubes are probably not
suitable as hydrogen storage.5
If you do not simply roll up a graphene layer but instead curve it upwards in all
directions, you get a sphere. The result is then a fullerene. Technically, fullerenes
cannot be produced in this way. The carbon atoms in graphene are exclusively
arranged in regular hexagons. These hexagons are planar. This means that only a
plane can be formed with them. To achieve a curvature, pentagons are also needed.
If you “unroll” a fullerene mentally, you get a network of carbon atoms consisting
of regular pentagons and hexagons. Fullerenes come in different sizes. For exam-
ple, they can consist of 60, 70, 76, 80, 82, or even up to 94 carbon atoms. One of
the most well-known representatives is probably the fullerene made up of 60 car-
bon atoms. These are arranged in regular pentagons and hexagons in such a way
that the molecule resembles a soccer ball.

A few more details

The Omega molecule in the depiction from the Starfleet database consists not
only of a sphere. Additionally, there seems to be something in its center. This
is reminiscent of a curious special form of fullerenes, known as an endohedral
complex. Atoms of other elements can be enclosed inside a fullerene sphere.
These are not bound to the inner surface of the sphere by classical chemi-
cal bonds. They are simply held in place because the foreign atom is trapped
inside. In this way, a kind of “compound” of the noble gases helium or neon
can be created, for example.
In this case, a helium or neon atom is trapped inside a fullerene. Since it
is not a conventional chemical compound, a somewhat improvised notation is
used. The corresponding endohedral complexes are written as He@C60 or Ne@
C60. The endohedral complexes probably do not have any real practical use.
However, this chemical gimmick does have a certain scientific coolness. ◄

We see that spherical molecules are indeed possible. So, the Omega molecule is
not an unrealistic matter at first. The fascination of the Borg with it is also not
entirely far-fetched. On 20th-century Earth, there was a similar fascination, as a

5 See: Chang Liu, Yong Chen, Cheng-Zhang Wu, Shi-Tao Xu, Hui-Ming Cheng, “Hydrogen stor-

age in carbon nanotubes revisited”, Carbon, 2010, 48, 2, 452–455.

6.2 The Molecule of Molecules 137

recent Nobel Prize shows. However, we do not know much more about the Omega
molecule. We learn that a mineral called boronite is needed for its production.
Boronite should not be confused with bornite. Bornite is a fairly common min-
eral on Earth from the sulfide group. This means that it is a salt whose anion is
a doubly negatively charged sulfur atom. However, bornite does not only have a
single cation but also contains a bit of iron in addition to copper. This bornite is
obviously not related to boronite. The three elements contained in it are all noth-
ing special. If iron, copper, or sulfur are present in the Omega molecule at all, they
could just as well be obtained from many other sources.
Ultimately, we know even less about boronite than we do about the Omega
molecule. We only know that it is needed as a raw material for Omega molecules.
What does this tell us about boronite?
There could be two possible explanations for the role of boronite in Omega syn-
thesis. Explanation one would be that the Omega molecule contains an element
(still unknown to us today). Boronite would then simply be an ore from which this
element is extracted. Explanation two would be that boronite contains precursors
of the Omega synthesis. In principle, any chemical compound can be synthesized
from the underlying elements. This synthesis would be very complex in most cases.
Therefore, chemical syntheses often start with precursors. This means that com-
pounds are used that can serve as building blocks for the larger and more complex
target molecule. In nature, precursors for many chemical syntheses can be found.
Some of these substances can be isolated from petroleum (which is another reason
why it is not wise to burn large quantities of petroleum). Many complex intermedi-
ates can also be found in biology. If you do not have to start with the elements in
a chemical synthesis but already possess essential structural elements of the target
molecule, the synthesis is simply much easier. You save the first part of the process.
This would mean that boronite consists of molecules that are essentially frag-
ments of an Omega molecule. You would save the effort of producing the fragment
obtained from boronite. Instead, you could proceed directly to the actual synthesis
of the Omega molecule. Unlike the case where boronite contains a necessary ele-
ment, boronite would not be essential for the production of Omega molecules. You
would just have to synthesize the corresponding intermediate yourself. However,
it could very well be that the effort for the overall synthesis without this precursor
would be so great that it becomes completely impractical.
So much for what we can say about the production of Omega molecules and
their structure. However, the focus of the episode is not on their production but on
their effect. Here, similar questions arise as with corbomite, which we discussed in
the last section.
Omega molecules apparently contain an unimaginable amount of energy. No
exact value is given for the energy content. We only learn that a single molecule
contains as much energy as a warp core. Although we do not know how much
energy is in such a warp core, it is obviously a lot. The decay of a single molecule
seems to far overshadow the explosion of an atomic bomb. After all, the amount of
energy can even destroy subspace. Can a single molecule contain so much energy?
And if so, what would be the consequences?
138 6 Particularly Impressive Chemicals

Let’s first look at the consequences. Here, what we learn in the episode is quite
plausible. We hear that the molecule is very unstable and decays quickly. This fits
with a very high-energy molecule. The stability of a chemical compound depends
greatly on its energy level. The more energetic a substance is, the more unstable it
is. Simply put, all substances strive for a minimum of energy.6
Let’s imagine a simple example. Think of an oxyhydrogen mixture: a gas mix-
ture of two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen. If we compare the energy content
of the mixture with water, the product of their reaction, we find that the energy
content of hydrogen and oxygen is significantly higher than that of water. This is
noticeable by the large amount of heat released during the reaction. The oxyhy-
drogen mixture is quite chemically unstable. It can be ignited by a small spark.
In doing so, it transforms into water and releases a lot of energy. Conversely, the
product is very stable. Water does not simply decompose back into oxygen and
hydrogen. While this is possible, a lot of energy must be supplied. The water mol-
ecule does not decompose on its own. Therefore, the reactants (hydrogen and oxy-
gen) are significantly more unstable than the product (water). The difference is the
different energy levels.7 The same is true for the Omega molecule. This molecule
contains a lot of energy and is correspondingly unstable. The Federation’s and the
Borg’s problems in stabilizing the Omega molecules are therefore quite plausible.
It looks a bit different with the amount of energy. One wonders how a single
molecule can contain so much energy. The most energy is usually released dur-
ing total oxidation. This is nothing other than combustion. The amount of energy
released during the combustion of a molecule depends on a number of factors.
The essential point, however, is the number of oxidizable atoms in the molecule.
For example, the combustion of an alkane with two carbon atoms (ethane, C2 H6)
releases an amount of energy of 1560 kilojoules per mole. If you burn an alkane
with four carbon atoms (butane, C4 H10), it is already 2877 kilojoules. With ten
carbon atoms (decane, C10H22), almost 7000 kilojoules per mole are released. The
series could be continued indefinitely. The more atoms an alkane molecule has, the
more energy is released during its combustion. The Omega molecule is obviously

6 The stable state at a certain temperature and pressure is reached when an energy quantity,
known as Gibbs energy G (or free enthalpy), assumes the smallest possible value. This state is
referred to as equilibrium. This is important, for example, when one wants to calculate the equi-
librium constant. The equilibrium constant describes the composition a system has at reaction
equilibrium. The equilibrium constant can be determined from the difference in Gibbs energies
of products and reactants.
7 As seen in the example of the oxyhydrogen mixture, a high energy level does not necessarily
mean that a substance decomposes spontaneously. As in the case of oxyhydrogen, it first needs
a trigger like the ignition spark. Such states are referred to as metastable. They inherently pos-
sess a very high energy level, and the transformation into the products would increase stability.
However, the transformation chemically proceeds through intermediates that lie at an even higher
energy level than the initial reactants. Thus, the high-energy oxyhydrogen is initially seemingly
stable. However, if energy is supplied in a suited way, the intermediates can be formed in suffi-
cient quantities. The reaction then becomes unstoppable and proceeds explosively.
6.2 The Molecule of Molecules 139

a very large molecule. You can’t really see much on the display. However, it seems
to be significantly larger than a fullerene. But even if it contained thousands or
even tens of thousands of atoms, the amount of energy would hardly be enough to
destroy subspace. Even if the Omega molecule contained about 60 trillion carbon
atoms (that would be one mole and weigh 12 g), their combustion would release
only about 393 kilojoules of energy. This would lift 1000 kg almost forty meters
high on Earth. That is quite a lot. However, the energy content of a warp core is
something else entirely.
The decay of the Omega molecule does not seem to be combustion. Most other
chemical reactions, however, deliver less rather than more energy than combus-
tion. The mere decay of an unstable molecule can release some energy. However,
this amount of energy is manageable. Even if the molecule is very unstable, not an
unlimited amount of energy is released. Chemical compounds simply do not con-
tain enough energy for that. And what if one assumed that the decay of the Omega
molecule is not a chemical reaction?
First of all, this explanation would not be really plausible. After all, the char-
acter as a molecule is repeatedly emphasized. Its chemistry must therefore play
a central role. If it were a nuclear process, it would not be triggered by a chem-
ical process (even though processes in atomic nuclei are dealt with in so-called
nuclear chemistry). From boronite, some unknown element could theoretically be
obtained, which is extremely energy-rich. Its decay or non-decay would, on the
one hand, not be influenced by the molecule it is in. On the other hand, radioac-
tive decays release a lot of energy. However, none of this would be comparable to
the energy content of a warp core and could destroy subspace. Even if the special
arrangement of atoms in the Omega molecule were such that the right elements
were brought together so that the atomic nuclei would undergo a kind of nuclear
fusion (however that would work): The amount of energy would still be manage-
able. Even with a very large molecule, relatively few nuclei would fuse. In today’s
hydrogen bombs, significantly more atomic nuclei fuse. And yet hydrogen bombs
are not enough to destroy subspace.
The hypothetical upper limit for the amount of energy that could be released
during the decay of Omega molecules is ultimately determined by Einstein’s
General Theory of Relativity. The equation E = m · c2 tells us, as is well known,
that in the conversion of matter into energy, mass is decisive. Since the speed of
light c is very high and its square even more so, a lot of energy is released even
with very little mass. But even if we are dealing with a complete annihilation of
matter, exactly as much energy is released as in the conversion of half the mass
of antimatter with matter (half, because the mass of the antimatter is added to the
mass of the matter). Even if Omega molecules may be quite large, the destruction
of a solar system is of a different magnitude, and antimatter explosions are also
known in Star Trek. They are dangerous, but not comparable to what we experi-
ence with the Omega molecule.
The last question related to the Omega molecule is similar to what we had with
the Corbomite. What actually happens to the energy when the Omega molecules
are destroyed?
140 6 Particularly Impressive Chemicals

The plan (ultimately carried out) is to destroy them with some devices from the
24th century and thus render them harmless. But the energy must go somewhere.
The principle of energy conservation applies even in the Delta Quadrant. And for
all molecules. It is conceivable that the Omega molecules could be decomposed
in a controlled manner. This would slow down the decay accordingly. The energy
would not be released abruptly. This would make sense, as it would prevent or at
least limit the destruction that would otherwise occur. The energy would have to
be dissipated under controlled conditions. However, the destruction of the Omega
molecules on board the Voyager takes place within a few seconds. The speed of
energy release cannot be particularly low. Where all this energy is supposed
to flow in such a short time and how such power is to be controlled is another
question that remains to be answered over the centuries until the time of Captain
Janeway. Today’s science and technology cannot yet provide an explanation for
this.
Bibliography

Episodes of Star Trek, sorted by series (within the series sorted chronologically).
Citation style: Title; scriptwriter; director; season, episode number, first aired, (referencing chap-
ter in this book).

TOS:

„The Cage“; Gene Roddenbery; Robert Butler; 1. pilot from the year 1964 (The Bussard
Collector or Collecting from the Vacuum)
„The Corbomite Maneuver“; Jerry Sohl; Joseph Sargent; S 1, E 3, 1966 (Corbomite or Kirk’s
Favorite Chemical Bluff)
„The Man Trap“; George Clayton Johnson; Marc Daniels; S 1, E 5, 1966 (The Salt Vampire of
M-113; Why Does a Dead Shapeshifter Revert to Its Natural Form?)
„Arena“; Gene L. Coon (Story: Fredric Brown); Joseph Pevney; S 1, E 19, 1967 (Corbomite or
Kirk’s Favorite Chemical Bluff)
„The Devil in the Dark“; Gene L. Coon; Joseph Pevney; S 1, E 26, 1967 (Horta or Life from
Silicon)
„Metamorphosis“; Gene L. Coon; Ralph Senensky; S 2, E 2, 1967 (Life without a Body)
„The Doomsday Machine“; Norman Spinrad; Marc Daniels; S 2, E 6, 1967 (Materials That Do
Not Consist of Chemical Elements)
„The Deadly Years“; David P. Harmon; Joseph Pevney; S 2, E 11, 1967 (Corbomite or Kirk’s
Favorite Chemical Bluff)
„Obsession“; Art Wallace; Ralph Senensky; S 2, E 18, 1967 (Life without a Body; The Salt
Vampire of M-113)
„By any other name“; D.C. Fontana, Jerome Bixby (Story: Jerome Bixby); Marc Daniels; S 2, E
21, 1968 (A Thirsty Virus)
„The Omega Glory“; Gene Roddenberry; Vincent McEveety; S 2, E 25, 1968 (A Thirsty Virus)
„Day of the Dove“; Jerome Bixby; Marvin J. Chomsky; S 3, E 11, 1968 (Life without a Body)
„The Savage Curtain“; Gene Roddenberry, Arthur Heinemann (Story: Gene Roddenberry);
Herschel Daugherty, S 3, E 22, 1969 (Very Hot Extraterrestrials)

141
142 Bibliography

TNG:

„Home Soil“; Robert Sabaroff (Story: Karl Guers, Ralph Sanchez, Robert Sabaroff); Corey
Allen; S 1, E 18, 1988 (Horta or Life from Silicon)
„Coming of Age“; Sandy Fries; Mike Vejar; S 1, E 19, 1988 (The Mixing Ratio of Matter and
Antimatter)
„Where Silence Has Lease“; Jack B. Sowards; Winrich Kolbe; S 2, E 2, 1988 (Life without a
Body)
„The Dauphin“; Scott Rubenstein, Leonard Mlodinow; Rob Bowman; S 2, E 10, 1989 (Simply
Being Someone Else)
„Night Terrors“; Pamela Douglas, Jeri Taylor (Story: Shari Goodhartz); Les Landau; S 4, E 17,
1991 (One Moon Circles)
„Ship in a Bottle“; René Echevarria; Alexander Singer; S 6, E 12, 1993 (Tiny Atoms—Part 2)

DS9:

„Emissary“; Rick Berman, Michael Piller (Story: Michael Piller); David Carson; S 1, E 1, 1993
(Simply Being Someone Else)
„Past Prologue“; Katharyn Powers; Winrich Kolbe; S 1, E 3, 1993 (Simply Being Someone Else)
„Melora“; Michael Piller, James Crocker, Steven Baum, Evan Carlos Somers (Story: Evan Carlos
Somers); Winrich Kolbe; S 2, E 6, 1993 (Breathing Hydrogen)
„The Jem'Hadar“; Ira Steven Behr; Kim Friedman; S 2, E 26, 1994 (Materials That Do Not
Consist of Chemical Elements)
„Homefront“; Ira Steven Behr, Robert Hewitt Wolfe; David Livingston; S 4, E 11, 1995 (Why
Does a Dead Shapeshifter Revert to Its Natural Form?)
„The Muse“; René Echevarria (Story: René Echevarria, Majel Barrett-Roddenberry); David
Livingston; S 4, E 21, 1996 (Life without a Body)
„Bar Association“; Barbara J. Lee, Jenifer A. Lee (Story: Ira Steven Behr, Robert Hewitt Wolfe);
LeVar Burton; S 4, E 16, 1996 (Materials That Do Not Consist of Chemical Elements)
„Body Parts“; Hans Beimler (Story: Robert J. Bolivar, Louis P. DeSantis); Avery Brooks; S 4, E
25, 1996 (Materials That Do Not Consist of Chemical Elements)
„Ferengi Love Songs“; Ira Steven Behr, Hans Beimler; René Auberjonois; S 5, E 20, 1997
(Materials That Do Not Consist of Chemical Elements)
„Who Mourns for Morn?“; Mark Gehred-O'Connell; Victor Lobl; S 6, E 12, 1998 (Materials That
Do Not Consist of Chemical Elements)
„One Little Ship“; Bradley Thompson, David Weddle; Allan Kroeker; S 6, E 14, 1998 (Tiny
Atoms)
„What You Leave Behind“; Ira Steven Behr, Hans Beimler; Allan Kroeker; S 7, E 27, 1999
(Materials That Do Not Consist of Chemical Elements)

VOY:

„The Cloud“; Michael Piller, Tom Szollosi (Story: Brannon Braga); David Livingston; S 1, E 6,
1995 (Life without a Body)
„Emanations“; Brannon Braga; David Livingston; S 1, E 9, 1995 (How many Elements are there
Actually?)
„Learning Curve“; Ronald Wilkerson, Jean Louise Matthias; David Livingston; S 1, E 16, 1995
(Materials That Do Not Consist of Chemical Elements)
Bibliography 143

„Threshold“; Brannon Braga (Story: Michael DeLuca); Alexander Singer; S 2, E 15, 1997
(Crossing the Threshold)
„The Gift“; Joe Menosky (Story: Kenneth Biller, Jack Klein, Karen Klein, Scott Nimerfro, James
Thornton); Anson Williams; S 4, E 2, 1997 (When Atoms Burn)
„Scientific Method“; Lisa Klink (Story: Sherry Klein, Harry Doc Kloor); David Livingston; S 4,
E 7, 1997 (Tiny Atoms—Part 2)
„The Omega Directive“; Lisa Klink (Story: Jimmy Diggs, Steve J. Kay); Victor Lobl; S 4, E 21,
1998 (The Molecule of Molecules)
„Demon“; Kenneth Biller (Story: André Bormanis); Anson Williams; S 4, E 24, 1998 (Simply
Being Someone Else)
„Bride of Chaotica!“; Bryan Fuller, Michael Taylor (Story: Bryan Fuller); Allan Kroeker; S 5, E
12, 1999 (Life without a Body)

ENT:

„Rogue Planet“; Rick Berman, Chris Black, Brannon Braga (Story: Chris Black); Allan Kroeker;
S 1, E 18, 2002 (Simply Being Someone Else)
„Regeneration“; Phyllis Strong, Mike Sussman; David Livingston; S 2, E 23, 2003 (The Bussard
Collector or Collecting from the Vacuum)
„Observer Effect“; Judith Reeves-Stevens, Garfield Reeves-Stevens; Mike Vejar; S 4, E 11, 2005
(Life without a Body)

DSC:

„Choose your pain“; Kemp Powers (Story: Gretchen J. Berg, Aaron Harberts, Kemp Powers);
Lee Rose; S 1, E 5, 2017 (A Thirsty Virus and Simply Being Someone Else)
„Saints of Imperfection“; Kirsten Beyer; David Barrett; S 2, E 5, 2019 (Explosions in Space)

PIC:

„Maps and Legends“; Michael Chabon, Akiva Goldsman; Hanelle M. Culpepper; S 1, E 2, 2020
(Materials That Do Not Consist of Chemical Elements)

Movies:

„Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country“; Nicholas Meyer, Denny Martin Flinn (Story: Leonard
Nimoy, Lawrence Konner, Mark Rosenthal); Nicholas Meyer; 1991 (The Bussard Collector
or Collecting from the Vacuum and Simply Being Someone Else)
„Star Trek: Insurrection“; Michael Piller (Story: Rick Berman, Michael Piller); Jonathan Frakes;
1998 (Explosions in Space)