Foundations of Chemistry最新文献

In 1869, two distinguished scientists, Dimitri Mendeleev and Lothar Meyer, discovered a certain periodicity among the chemical characteristics of the then known elements. Both developed first versions of the periodic table, independently. In the wake of the 150th anniversary, UNESCO proclaimed 2019 the “International Year of the Periodic Table of Chemical Elements”. Two lucid and detailed studies on the periodic table—accompanied by smaller studies on the occasion of the anniversary—have been published, recently, one of them analysing the scientific history, contributing to the (philosophical) theory of science (Eric Scerri), the other analysing the structures, patterns, and irregularities of the table (Geoff Rayner-Canham). Both studies are profound and vivid examples how scientific progress works. They illustrate that even in hard sciences—mirroring Merton’s concept of middle range theory—the required degree of exactness can remain on an intermediate level, as imperfection allows interpretations which could not (yet) be reached by pure mathematics and logic. Both of these brilliant studies provide valuable material, especially for a social science, to better understand how scientific ideas develop, how the power of visualization helps shape ideas, and how contingency is absorbed by the scientific process.

Recent publications by several leading philosophers of chemistry have focused on the definition, scope, utility, and nomenclature of issues dealing with acidity and basicity. In this paper, molecular orbital theory is used to explain all acid–base reactions, concluding that the interaction of the highest occupied molecular orbital (HOMO) of one substrate, “the base,” with the lowest unoccupied molecular orbital (LUMO) of a second substrate, “the acid,” determines the reactivity of such systems. This paradigm provides an understanding of all acid–base reactions as well as other reactions which, on the surface, may not seem like acid–base reactions but which have fundamental underpinnings of that kind of chemistry. Rather than being unable to determine a unified understanding of acidity and basicity as suggested in the philosophy of chemistry literature, we propose that acidity and basicity fit securely in a classification of many other reactions that, using classical chemistry knowledge, pre-quantum chemistry, would not be possible. We strongly support the use of all scientific knowledge and experience in the development of the ideas in the philosophy science. We further suggest increased interactions between philosophers of science and scientists, so that all scholars benefit from the values, knowledge, and perspectives of other disciplines.

According to process ontology in the philosophy of biology, the living world is better understood as processes rather than as substantial individuals. Within this perspective, an organism does not consist of a hierarchy of structures like a machine, but rather a dynamic hierarchy of processes, dynamically maintained and stabilized at different time scales. With this respect, two processual approaches on enzymes by Stein (Hyle Int J Philos Chem 10(4):5–22, 2004, Process Stud 34:62–80, 2005, Found Chem 8:3–29, 2006) and by Guttinger (Everything Flows: Towards a Processual Philosophy of Biology, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2018) allows to think of macromolecules as relational and processual entities. In this work, I propose to extend their arguments to another case study within the biochemical domain, which is the case of ligand receptors and receptor-mediated biosignaling. The aim of this work is to analyze the case of G Protein-Coupled Receptors and biosignaling under the consideration of a processual ontology. I will defend that the processual ontology framework is adequate for the biochemical domain and that it allows accounting for the current biochemical knowledge related to the case study.

It is a fundamental cornerstone of thermodynamics that entropy ((S_{U,V})) increases in spontaneous processes in isolated systems (often called closed or thermally closed systems when the transfer of energy as work is considered to be negligible) and achieves a maximum when the system reaches equilibrium. But with a different sign convention entropy could just as well be said to decrease to a minimum in spontaneous constant U, V processes. It would then change in the same direction as the thermodynamic potentials in spontaneous processes. This article discusses but does not advocate such a change.

Many philosophers attribute extraordinary importance to the idea of natural kinds seemingly intimating that the very possibility of certain kinds of activity are ontologically beholden to the existence of kinds. Specifically, regarding chemistry, Brian Ellis intimated that the success of any plausible metaphysical essentialism depends upon its “reliance on examples from chemistry.” Ellis’s view is representative of a tradition in analytic philosophy that has utilized chemical examples as paradigmatic natural kinds. In this regard, Kripke and Putnam emerge as the architects of an entrenched research program dedicated to the chemical tradition of natural kinds in analytic philosophy. The emergence of a critical body of literature by philosophers of chemistry and others has shattered the complacent reliance upon chemical examples as exemplary kinds. On the basis of this emerging critical literature, I will critically explore the way in which chemical practice and inquiry affects the natural kind debate. So, instead of the pretense that we simply carve nature at its joints, we need to become better grounded in the practice of science, and especially with regard to the debate about natural kinds in chemical practice. Consistent with this orientation, we need to make the practice turn, that is, eradicate the fantasy of logical reconstruction and become involved with the interpretative and historical challenges of understanding the nuances of practice. The point here is quite clear, metaphysical questions regarding natural kind should be imminent to scientific practice. Indeed, any legitimate metaphysics of natural kinds should be appropriately informed and grounded in practice and not operate on the basis of a priori sovereignty. I will insert this critical discussion within the analytical context of the notion of interpretive communities and make the case that philosophers should not assume that appeals to the purity of philosophy can substitute for the complexity and practical orientation of chemical practice.

Consider chemical elements as a system, we create an undirected chemical network with 99 elements and 1916 edges from Chemspider, a website that provide search engines to collect compounds. Using this network and the network that we used in our previous work with 97 elements and 2198 edges, we found that RootedPageRank, a link prediction tool in complex network, can be used to predict potential binary compounds, because the changing trend of PageRank probability of each element in these networks all follow the periodic law, despite of the difference of scale of these networks. The accuracy test indicates that at least 7 among top 10 predicted compoundss in one network can be verified using the compoundss in the other network or in other chemical database, proving that this method can be used to provide guidance in finding potential binary compounds, suggesting that we can study chemical properties from the view of complex network.

The second article of the “Naming game…” series provides detailed information on the discovery and naming of elements in the nineteenth century. Outlines of discoveries of 46 elements were presented, with particular emphasis on publications in which the name appeared for the first time. In the article the short historical information about every element naming is presented. The process of naming each chemical element was analyzed, with particular emphasis on the first publication with a given name.

We provide a detailed history of the concepts of atomic number and isotopy before the discovery of protons and neutrons that draws attention to the role of evolving interplays of multiple aims and criteria in chemical and physical research. Focusing on research by Frederick Soddy and Ernest Rutherford, we show that, in the context of differentiating disciplinary projects, the adoption of a complex and shifting concept of elemental identity and the ordering role of the periodic table led to a relatively coherent notion of atomic number. Subsequent attention to valency, still neglected in the secondary literature, and to nuclear charge led to a decoupling of the concepts of elemental identity and weight and allowed for a coherent concept of isotopy. This concept received motivation from empirical investigations on the decomposition series of radioelements and their unstable chemical identity. A new model of chemical order was the result of an ongoing collaboration between chemical and physical research projects with evolving aims and standards. After key concepts were considered resolved and their territories were clarified, chemistry and physics resumed autonomous projects, yet remained bound by newly accepted explanatory relations. It is an episode of scientific collaboration and partial integration without simple, wholesale gestalt switches or chemical revolutions.