Ze_Mole

I still think it is like as the relationship between current and magnetic field, there is a relationship but they are not the same thing. The definition of chiral is that it is not able to be superimposed on its mirror image, not that it interacts with other chiral things. If energy has no mirror image how can it be superimposed or not on it?

I see your point, I just looked up the definition of chiral. There is defiantly a relationship between polarity and chirality, but I still think that although being related they are different. I just don't think energy can have geometry, and from looking up the term, I think chirality is only related to geometry, polarity is just used to tell them apart.

Quite right, I stand corrected. Pays to read what you write

To be chiral you have to have symmetry. Because light is energy it doesn't have symmetry.

I would caution against the term "cation" when talking about a metallic bond. They are not charged because they accept and donate electrons at the same time. I think the term metal core is more descriptive.