Foundations of Chemistry最新文献

Scientific metaphysics asserts that the findings of our best and most mature science can reveal metaphysical principles. In this paper, the findings of contemporary chemical investigation, specifically the chemical transformation of molecules, serves as a starting point for metaphysical reflection and allows us to identify metaphysical principles that ground characteristic features of chemical change. The causal nature of chemical change is described in terms of molecules that possess powers-based dispositional properties, with quantitative features fixed by governing laws of nature. Finally, the proposal is made that both laws of nature and metaphysical principles are primitive, fundamental principles of reality.

The question of whether chemical structure is reducible to Everettian Quantum Mechanics (EQM) should be of interest to philosophers of chemistry and philosophers of physics alike. Among the three realist interpretations of quantum mechanics, EQM resolves the measurement problem by claiming that measurements (now interpreted as instances of decoherence) have indeterminate outcomes absolutely speaking, but determinate outcomes relative to emergent worlds—Maudlin (Topoi, 14:7-15, 1995). Philosophers who wish to be sensitive to the practice of quantum chemistry e.g. Scerri (The changing views of a philosopher of chemistry on the question of reduction, 2016) should be interested in EQM because Franklin and Seifert (J. Philos. Sci, 2020) claim that resolving the measurement problem also resolves the reducibility of chemical structure, and EQM is the interpretation which involves no mathematical structure beyond that used by practicing scientists. Philosophers interested in the quantum interpretation debate should be interested in the reducibility of chemistry because chemical structure is precisely the kind of determinate three-dimensional fact which EQM should be able to ground if it is to be empirically coherent—see Allori (Quantum Rep, 5:80-101, 2023). The prospects for reduction of chemical structure are poor if it cannot succeed in EQM; the prospects for EQM as a guide to ontology are poor if it cannot reduce chemical structure. Unfortunately for proponents of chemical reduction and EQM, there are three serious barriers to the reduction of chemistry to EQM. The first concern is that quantum treatments of chemical structure rely on the Born-Oppenheimer approximation, which holds nuclear locations fixed while minimizing the energy of the electronic configuration—Hendry (Philosophical Perspectives in Quantum Chemistry, 147-172, 2022), but this approximation is not licensed by EQM. The Born-Oppenheimer approximation relies on nuclei and molecular orbitals being simultaneously present, but in the three-dimensional ontology following from the Everett interpretation these only emerge at different energy scales and are not simultaneously present—Miller (Found. Chem, 25:405-417, 2023). The second concern is that the emergent worlds of EQM are supposed to be decoherent at the macro-scale—Wilson (The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism 2020), but the recent development of superchemistry suggests that chemical reactions can occur in coherent states—Zhang et al. (Nat. Phys, 1-5, 2023). The third concern is that emergent worlds are only pragmatic pseudo-processes—Wallace (The Emergent Multiverse: Quantum Theory According to the Everett Interpretation, 2012b), but this means EQM trades realist physics for mere instrumentalism about chemistry. Absent a commitment to chemical realism, reduction is an empty promise. The prospects for reduction of chemical structure to EQM are therefore poor.

The concept of a “chemical speciation”, as defined by in the year 2000, is grounded in an empiricist semantics. It is a static concept, as it is associated with the ontological category of the chemical state of the distribution of chemical species in a system and is further restricted to chemical species of a single element as it excludes chemical species with more complex chemical systemic subunits, such as molecular species, crystals, or nanoparticles. In this work, we propose a new definition of “chemical speciation” based on a semantics of meaning, applying Mario Bunge’s philosophical system. Chemical speciation is the distribution of chemical systemic subunits amongst defined chemical species in a system. Additionally, we propose two dynamic concepts associated with chemical speciation: chemical species transformation and chemical species evolution. These concepts aim to account for the chemical changes that explain both the diversity of chemical species sharing common systemic subunits and the historical emergence of new modes of chemical speciation. These modes, in turn, explain the appearance of new systemic chemical subunits and novel substantial properties. Our definitions have the advantage of being consistent with general theories of the evolution of matter, such Assembly Theory. Additionally, at the chemical level, this approach encompasses broader systemic chemical subunits beyond elemental particles, allowing for the chemical speciation of families of molecules, crystals, nanoparticles, etc. Finally, our proposal offers the advantage of overcoming the issue of arbitrariness in choosing the reference systemic chemical subunit by linking this choice to the concepts of substantial property, and function.

Prelog’s model was one of the first empirical models to explain the stereoselectivity of the Grignard reactions of 2-oxocarboxylic acid esters bearing a chiral alcohol. Prelog constructed his model based on some assumptions regarding the conformation of chiral 2-oxocarboxylic acid esters to explain the relationship in configuration between the chiral alcohol starting materials and the 2-hydroxycarboxylic acid products. Construction of the model involves four steps: (1) mentally analyzing the reactants to identify the basic stereochemical structures, (2) assuming the conformations of the chiral alcohol moiety as the main reasons for stereoselectivity, (3) modeling the transition states to explain the relationship in configuration between the chiral alcohols and 2-hydroxycarboxylic acids, and (4) validating the evidence to revise the model. The process of constructing this historically pivotal model may have implications for science education, especially for developing theories from extensive data. The four steps from the Prelog’s model were compared with the models for boiling points of hydrocarbons and solubility of amino acids.

Molecular structure is one of the dispositional attributes of the molecule and counted as an example of affordances. This attribute has been systematically exploited through the development of theories and practice of organic chemistry. (Ochiai 2023, pp. 141–149) The question to be addressed in this study is whether we can legitimately claim that this type of attribute is real. To answer the question, we first clarify what is worthy of the word ‘reality’ in scientific arguments. Whitehead claims that a physical substance like electron is a bundle of spatial-temporal experience. (Mesle 2008, p. 36) The contention is that we cognize the causal relationships of the physical world through the experience of events. What we cognize as real is not unchanging matter but various kinds of events we experience. Based on this recognition we examine the nature of affordances. Affordances are the context-relative dispositional attributes of {agent-world} complexes. (Harré 2014, pp. 77–91; Harré and Llored 2018, pp. 167–186) The affordance of a knife becomes actualized through our experience of cutting. In this way affordances are concerned with work or the function of something useful. They are materialized as tools. This suggests that affordances are real, and so is molecular structure. Molecular structure is characterized by a certain function which molecules show in organic synthesis. Other dispositional attributes of molecules that become actualized in the context of organic chemistry are also examined. We refer to the physical significance of wavefunctions as well, which we discussed in the previous study. (Ochiai 2023, pp. 359–367) Creating function, we expand a world we cognize as real. This view of the world we name ‘functional realism.’ Our conceptual scheme is supported by Quine’s holism.

In philosophy, the empirical success of a science is often explained by the fact that it has managed to discover some law(s) of nature. This line of thought has not been thoroughly explored with respect to chemistry. The aim of this paper is to fill this gap by showing how we could think about laws in chemistry. Specifically, it briefly presents how laws of nature are understood in philosophy of science. It then discusses two case studies from chemistry—the periodic table and chemical reactions—and explains how general ideas about law-hood can be applied to these cases. Lastly, it presents research questions and philosophical problems that arise by considering chemistry from the perspective of laws. This analysis illustrates that there is value in thinking about laws in chemistry.

The article contrasts the way that laws are regarded by some philosophers of science with the way that they are regarded by scientists and science educators. After a brief review of the Humean and necessitarian views of scienfic laws, I highlight difference between scientists who regard laws as being merely descriptive and philosophers who generally regard them as being explanatory and, in some cases, as being necessary. I also discuss the views of two prominent philosophers of science who deny any role for scienfic laws. I conclude that science educators should be wary of adopng the necessitarian view of scienfic laws.

Language is an important part of the human culture. It serves for the expression and communication of thoughts. In is article, the problem of chemical jargon as a tool for communication between scientists is discussed.