Foundations of Chemistry最新文献

In this brief article I respond to Seifert’s recent views on the periodic law and the periodic table in connection with the views of philosophers regarding laws of nature. I argue that the author makes some factual as well as conceptual errors which are in conflict with some generally held views regarding the periodic law and the periodic table.

Why do chemists think that the bond is real in spite of objections raised from the quantum mechanical studies of molecules? (Parr and Yang in Density-functional theory of atoms and molecules Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1994) Focusing on the cognitive aspect of investigative practices in chemistry, we reveal the meaning of the chemical bond for chemists and why they take it as real. Our argument is based on the historical studies of the bond and an understanding of the epistemological technique of transdiction as well. The latter is a way of reasoning developed since the days of Newton. The rationalist reconstruction of forces of nature is an illustration of transdiction as a tool of building theories. In the history of chemistry, a comparison between the notions of a directed valence proposed by van’t Hoff and an asymmetrical molecule by Le Bel shows transdiction has some methodological differences in application. In relation to transdiction we argue the meaning of the word ‘hypotheses non fingo,’ which serves as a key to understanding cognitive grounds for reality in experimental sciences. Our approach adopted in this study is characterized by functional realism we advocate in the context of organic chemistry. (Ochiai in Found Chem 26: 399–411, 2024) This approach reveals that the bond is a kind of function of the molecule that becomes actualized on occasions of solving problems in organic chemistry. Provided that reality is the epistemological concept, bonds are real for chemists in terms of function expected from chemical substances. It should be noted that the confusion between chemical ‘bond’ and quantum mechanical ‘bonding’ causes a lot of problems in understanding the concept of bond. The bond is a coded representation and not a visualization of quantum mechanical facts. Such is also the case with molecular structure, which is a functional map, as it were, to show what part of the molecule is susceptible to chemical transformations. (Ochiai in Hyle Int J Philos Chem 19: 139–160, 2013) It should be distinguished from the images of molecules obtained by using Scanning Tunneling Microscopy, for instance. This analysis shows that chemistry cannot be reduced to so-called more fundamental sciences like quantum mechanics, for the latter is not concerned with the functional aspects of chemical substances.

Scerri (2024) has argued that the metaphysical question of what natural lawhood consists in is irrelevant to science and science education. This paper identifies how Scerri’s arguments fail and suggests that contrary to Scerri, there is no gulf between the philosophers’ and scientists’ conceptions of lawhood. The distinctions drawn by philosophers would be useful in science education.

The chemical understanding of ‘nature’ is a naturalistic one where ‘nature’—understood as the chemical dynamics that guide material change—coincides with chemical reality and possibility. A naturalistic chemist considers all chemical substances equally ‘natural’, and more importantly also all possible substances. I characterize the first point as the ‘monistic’ and the second as the ‘potentialistic’ understanding of ‘nature’ in chemistry. I argue that this notion of ‘nature’ is ecologically vacuous and lies at the heart of the ecological havoc that modern chemistry is causing. Not only because of these ecological concerns but also because of the increasing digitization of chemistry is the chemical self-image as a ‘synthesis science’ at a crossroads. In the digital age, I claim, chemistry is increasingly becoming a ‘simulation science’. I evaluate these developments from an ecological perspective. In a recourse of ecological visions of chemistry, I outline possibilities of synergies between an ecological and a digital transformation of chemistry.

In this study, we present a didactic analysis of the impact of epistemological obstacles -identified by various studies over the past 30 years- may have on the learning of biochemical models of cellular respiration. Epistemological obstacles refer to general reasoning patterns that shape people’s conceptions on different topics, such as teleology, essentialism, and linear causal reasoning, among others. Our analysis aims to characterize these epistemological obstacles as they underlie the conceptions that emerge in the teaching and learning of cellular respiration within the context of biochemistry education. This topic has been relatively unexplored from this perspective in biochemistry education research, particularly at the interface of biology and chemistry, where various alternative conceptions have been identified. Similarly, the specific process of cellular respiration -central to cellular metabolism and energy production in living organisms- has received limited attention from this viewpoint. Furthermore, in this article, we propose strategies to address these epistemological obstacles in educational settings, with a specific focus on cellular respiration. We argue that surveying and characterizing these epistemological obstacles in biochemistry education can support the development of teaching strategies that effectively address them in science classes, fostering metacognitive vigilance and conceptual understanding.

The relationship between science and literature has been partially explored by the philosophy of chemistry, but without investigations into a modern representation of chemistry and the work of the chemist. In this article, we aim to investigate how Levi humanizes science in his science fiction, employing a theoretical framework that combines philosophical and historical perspectives on science and chemistry. By analyzing the short story “Best Is Water”, we also demonstrate how Levi prompts reflections on the nature of modern chemistry and the work of the technical chemist. The analysis of the story was organized into four themes identified based on narrative conflicts and philosophical references: more viscous water; the work of the technical chemist; nature outside the laboratory; and the limits of knowledge about water. The analysis considered categories related to the chemist’s worldview, and some philosophical as well as historical aspects from science and chemistry. In “Best Is Water”, we identified that Levi: humanizes science and philosophical topics; problematizes the technical job of a chemist and the use of prototypes; expresses a conception of reality that is stratified and in movement, confronting neopositivist science and empirical realism; shows the importance of the chemist’s sensibility in raw reality. This analysis contributes to the philosophy of chemistry by deepening the relationship between chemistry, literature and philosophy, and exploring philosophical aspects of the representation of the chemist and his work in the laboratory.

A fundamental problem confronting the paradigm of philosophical liberalism concerns efforts to theorize the relationship between sameness and difference. The specific challenge in question is to account for difference without thinking difference within the structural logic of sameness and identity. This essay introduces the notion of social enantiomorphism and recruits concepts from the philosophy of chemistry to propose an alternative approach to theorizing the relationship between sameness and difference. Inspired by the philosophy of chemistry and chemical practices, this essay utilizes the idea of chirality (i.e., handedness) to explore the extent to which sameness and difference can be considered not as radical opposites but as complementary relations. The concept of chirality entails critical involvement with the chemical notions of isomers, enantiomers, etc. These chemical notions facilitate thinking about historical processes and other socio-cultural phenomena as mirror-images that are non-superimposable. A few historical examples will be discussed to illustrate the idea of social enantiomorphism.

This paper performs a historical study of the attempts made by Thomson and Bohr to explain the Periodic Table in terms of the electronic configurations of chemical elements. Specifically, Thomson’s early theoretical ideas about the electronic arrangements of atoms are initially outlined. This system gave way to the first quantum constrains introduced by Bohr in 1913. It is discussed how Bohr eventually revised this initial work on this topic ten years later. Then, it is presented a concise historical account of the progressive incorporation of quantum numbers in the different theories of the electronic structure of elements. In this regard, the contributions made by Sommerfeld, Stoner and Pauli are examined. Finally, the Madelung rule is analyzed, focusing on both how it has normally been used to teach students the atomic electronic configurations and its limitations. These shortcomings are usually not considered in chemistry textbooks. It is reported how this neglect generates several incorrect teaching assumptions.

Although the two-letter symbol pH is extremely common in chemistry and elsewhere, its origin and early dissemination has only received scant attention among chemists and historians of science. Introduced as a convenient symbol for ‘hydrogen ion exponent’ by the Danish biochemist S.P.L. Sørensen in 1909, after a decade or two pH won broad acceptance in the fields of physiology, biochemistry, medical research, and industrial chemistry in particular. Apart from detailing how pH and related concepts were initially received, this paper examines the language and nomenclature associated with the pH scale until about 1930. What is today written as pH was in the past symbolized in a variety of other ways. Although Sørensen never became a Nobel laureate, he was nominated many times and the evaluations of the Nobel committees throw further light on how his innovation was conceived by contemporary chemists and physiologists. The paper also discusses, if in less detail, how the original definition ({text{pH}} = - {text{log}}left[ {{text{H}}^{ + } } right]) was revised in the early 1920s into the currently accepted form involving hydrogen ion activities rather than concentrations. The paper is essentially but not strictly limited to the period from about 1905 to the mid-1930s.