Most fragrance molecules have a molecular weight (MW) of about 80 to about 300.
Alarm pheromones in insects are lower in weight (under 200) so they can disperse quickly and project distance, while sex attraction pheromones are typically higher in weight (over 200).
Arbitrarily using 200 as a likely over-under median MW, then ONE 2.5 mcg spray of pheromones dispenses:1.506 E+18 / 200 = 7.53 E+15
or 7.5 quadrillion molecules (US quadrillion, not British quadrillion).
That’s 7.5 million packages of molecules, with one billion molecules in each package.
Assuming that 80% of the molecules go to waste for one reason or another, and assuming more or less even dispersion, for the sake of argument, over six hours, then7.5 E+15 * (0.20 / 6) = 250,000,000,000,000
which means that each second one is dispersing250,000,000,000,000 / (60 minutes * 60 seconds) = 69,444,444,444.4 molecules
or roughly 70 billion little chemical messengers EVERY SECOND.
Notice that the average Androtics spray is 15mcg of pheros, or six times as much as the calculation above …
Is this analysis misguided or inaccurate? (It may be totally irrelevant )
A decent estimate for the weight of one cubic foot of air is 0.0807 pounds, or 2.2 E+25 atomic mass units. That’s an average molecular weight of roughly 28.94.
The molecular weight of Oxygen (O2) is 32, Nitrogen is 28 (78% of air) so that seems reasonable.
Another check: there are 7.6 E+23 molecules in a cubic foot of air at standard pressure and temperature (or any gas - thanks, Avogadro.)
So, in one second, that 70 billion molecules of pheromone (7.0 E+10) hypothesized above would produce a saturation of about 1 part in 9.2 trillion in the one cubic foot of air around your head.
Assuming a square root function for distance, a constant rate of diffusion travel of 1 foot per second in air, at social distances of 6 to 9 feet (μ=7.5) it takes just over 56 seconds to get to that 1 per 9.2 trillion concentration.
Just for fun, right now I’m guesstimating that about a half million phero molecules would reach the close vicinity of a person’s nose which is 7.5 feet away in about one minute.
So, theoretically, if the organ can pick up the 1 part in 9.2 trillion at any old time (after 56 seconds or so), and attraction is a sliding scale, we can pick up a range of decimated parts. I.E a woman in ovulation. Let’s say conservatively her sensory/reactionary rates to hormones triples, that means at the very least, a .3 in 9.2 trillion rate at a reactionary period as if it were 3 per 9.2 tril. Woof.
I’m wondering if it takes much more than a few or a few hundred pheromolecules to produce a neurological response. Higher quantities, it would seem to me, are more about determining the location or trail of the source.
I have this idea that the phero-message is like turning a light switch on or off – the relative / varying concentration level is about figuring where the light switch is, not where the light is. In other words, a very low dose of molecules activates the message, higher doses lets the person track it to you – and creates a long trail that more people can follow.
Of course, some pheromones could work on a “how strong a concentration” basis.
I would think that the amount doesn’t give you directional determination, it seems to me that the subconcious would simply point out to you that the person whom just walked up activated this, so it might be/probably is them. That would aid the ‘others getting benefits from pheromones’ thread somewhere on this forum, when you are standing in line. Sitting/classroom situations might be different.
You also have to think about the biochemistry of detecting such molecules, the molecule would have to fit inside an enzymatic receptor and bind to it, when the molecule is a very low concentration in a sample of air with potentially millions of other substances, plus on top of that there could be pollution, cigarette smoke, and teh dozens of other fragrances and perfumes and deoderants and bathroom gels and products that people use. The precise molecule must fit in, and then cause an actual biological response in some cell in the VNO or some other area where olfaction may take place and if a nerve transmits the information that these pheremones are near, an action potential must also be generated and be strong enouggh to affect the neurochemistry of the targeet person.
So to put it simple, its not so easy to pick up these scents, but seeing as alot of species already have this ability, I would bet that its possible humans still have this ability. My assumption is humans can indeed do this, and also detect WHERE the pheremone comes from by detecting the concentration gradient of these molecules to sense the source subconscously. Humans may indeed be like a dog that can sniff out explosives dozens of meters away from it even though there is barely a detectable trace of it, at least, evolutionarily, its possible females very survival and teh survival of their offspring depends on finding the absolute best males with high testosterone and thus there may have been a great amount of selective pressure to have this ability.
Have you ever heard of how male moths find a female moth? They have the pheromone receptors, but how do they know where to find the moth? When the sensors are activated they fly against the wind. As long as they are flying against the wind and are receiving hits they will find their mate.
)
Hot damn go A-'s