1. Report this comment

    Radoslav Bozov said:

    Dear Eric,

    As far as I remeber, we had an interesting collision of arguments on ACS "The most cool element" posting in regard of reasonability for the development of quanutm chemistry. Perhaps you are not a russian school guy, but Stanford school has a good vision of quanutm numbers. It would be appropriate that when you talk about periodicity, the first prediction of space about period was as follows: as atomic number increase within a period, teh attraction between protons and neutrons would increase, thus atoms having more compressed electron functional density as atomic weight increases. My argument was that quanutm chemistry was an outcome of valance bond theory that studied mainly carbon compounds and the geometry of molecules as defined further by atomic orbital hybridization theory which actually bridges quanutm chemistry to carbon states – sp3,sp2 and sp. You cannot talk of quantum chemistry wihtout signifying carbon’s centrality as a fundamental hub in the development of the model encapsulating uncertainty principle. Any general chemis realizes that nuclear decay rate increases as mass of elements increases. However, no physical theory unifies QCD QED. Do you have a chappter in your book describing such interference?   Moreover, may you explain the high toxicity of technetium relative to quantum chemistry, lets say?

  2. Report this comment

    Eric Scerri said:

    Thank you for your comment Radoslav but I’m afraid I do not recall any previous exchange.  There is nothing central about carbon in the explanation of the periodic table.  Claiming this amounts to the most egregious piece of anthropic reasoning that I have seen.  Contrary to what you write, I have talked about the periodic table at great length without invoking the centrality of carbon. 


  3. Report this comment

    Jessica Morrison said:

    “…and had to deal with some new areas which I had not developed fully enough in the earlier book. One of these areas is the exploration of elements beyond uranium or element number 92, all of which are of a synthetic nature.”

    You’ve hooked me. Looking forward to picking this one up. Cheers!

  4. Report this comment

    Alexander Makeyev said:

    Dear D-r Eric!
    You are relying only on the canonical Periodic Table where all periods are ending on the elements of noble gases?
    I ask you to consider the possibility to use in your analysis of the periodic table of Julius Lothar Meyer from 1864 and 1870. Where are all the periods are right ending in the element of alkaline earth metals. I sent you today to your email the one of the newest versions of the periodic table of elements of vacuum and atomic levels of matter. Where are all the periods of the atomic levels of matter are the right ending on the element of alkaline earth metals.
    I assume that the expansion of the periodic table in the vacuum levels of matter would solve many fundamental problems of modern science.

Comments are closed.