U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Nature
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 04-07-2017, 09:35 PM
 
19 posts, read 15,473 times
Reputation: 20

Advertisements

Quantum-mechanical analysis of the MO method and VB method from the position of PQS.
http://vixra.org/pdf/1704.0068v1.pdf

Abstract: The MO method and the VB method are analyzed using the principle of quantum superposition (PQS) and the method of describing a quantum system consisting of several parts. It is shown that the main assumption of the molecular orbitals method (namely, that the molecular orbital can be represented like a linear combination of overlapping atomic orbitals) enters into an insurmountable contradiction with the principle of quantum superposition. It is also shown that the description of a quantum system consisting of several parts (adopted in quantum mechanics) actually prohibits ascribe in VB method to members of equation corresponding canonical structures.

CONCLUSION. Using the quantum superposition principle, the MO method and the VB method were analyzed and it is shown that they are in contradiction with quantum mechanics. Also, using the quantum-mechanical description of a system consisting of several parts, it is shown that the attribution of canonical structures to the members of the equation is incorrect. Therefore, both the MO method and the VB method did not describe molecules with chemical bonds but actually, a lot of atoms (of which the described molecules consisted). That is, in the quantum chemical calculations, the chemical bond was "lost". Therefore, in order to "introduce" a chemical bond into calculations and avoid conflict with quantum mechanics, it is suggested to postulate the existence of MO as a new fundamental quality that describes a specific chemical bond and is not derived from simpler structural elements.

Quantum-mechanical analysis of the MO method and VB method
from the position of PQS.
http://vixra.org/pdf/1704.0068v1.pdf









1. Structure of the benzene molecule on the basis of the three-electron bond.
http://vixra.org/pdf/1606.0152v1.pdf

2. Experimental confirmation of the existence of the three-electron bond and theoretical basis ot its existence.
http://vixra.org/pdf/1606.0151v2.pdf

3. A short analysis of chemical bonds.
http://vixra.org/pdf/1606.0149v2.pdf

4. Supplement to the theoretical justification of existence of the three-electron bond.
http://vixra.org/pdf/1606.0150v2.pdf

5. Theory of three-electrone bond in the four works with brief comments.
http://vixra.org/pdf/1607.0022v2.pdf

6. REVIEW. Benzene on the basis of the three-electron bond (full version, 93 p.).
http://vixra.org/pdf/1612.0018v5.pdf

7. Quantum-mechanical aspects of the L. Pauling's resonance theory.
http://vixra.org/pdf/1702.0333v2.pdf

8. Quantum-mechanical analysis of the MO method and VB method from the position of PQS.
http://vixra.org/pdf/1704.0068v1.pdf




Bezverkhniy Volodymyr (viXra): viXra.org e-Print archive, Bezverkhniy Volodymyr Dmytrovych

Bezverkhniy Volodymyr (Amazon): https://www.amazon.com/Volodymyr-Bez..._cont_ebooks_1

Bezverkhniy Volodymyr (Archive.org):
https://archive.org/details/@threeelectronbond

Bezverkhniy Volodymyr (Scribd):
https://www.scribd.com/user/28927702...niy-Volodymyr#

What think?

 
Old 04-08-2017, 07:33 AM
 
7,601 posts, read 4,246,244 times
Reputation: 20264
What do I think? That if you had any real science you would be publishing in a proper journal and not throwing things out on CD.
 
Old 04-08-2017, 10:11 AM
 
19 posts, read 15,473 times
Reputation: 20
When there is nothing to say about the work, there begins talks about the place of publication...
 
Old 04-08-2017, 12:27 PM
 
Location: Groznia
205 posts, read 149,165 times
Reputation: 221
Super cool concept but is that your original hypothesis and proof through empirical experimentation or a documented fact in quantum mechanics that you researched and validated? Because as we all know quantum physics and mechanics went through a paradigmatic shift in scientific ideas and methods with Einstein's predominance over the field and his particular attention to the finest details. Chemists have a history of being in conflict (academic contentiousness) with quantum physicists because of the ideas that you have written here in this article, in short, a hypothetical example "last decade before Einstien and the shift in scientific focus from the molecular to the atomic or from the atomic to light photons, we (chemists) were making accurate calculations at the molecular level that served their purpose greatly for the field and industry of Chemistry; now our scientific "superiors" are demanding that we make calculations at a level that is entirely new, more complex and time-consuming, in conflict with the methodologies that we currently use and will require an entirely new protocol for making atomic calculations for chemical reactions."

If that is your original hypothesis, discovery and/or original work I will very much look forward to reading your final draft...very interesting...I really enjoyed this post...
 
Old 04-08-2017, 01:38 PM
 
19 posts, read 15,473 times
Reputation: 20
In the work "STRUCTURE OF THE BENZENE MOLECULE ON THE BASIS OF THE THREE-ELECTRON BOND" the fundamental is the statement that the three-electron bond can be considered as a fermion (in the more general case, that any complex object with half-integral spin is a fermion (imitates a fermion), and every complex object with a whole spin is a boson (simulates Boson)).

In physics, this statement in the general case (for compound fermions and bosons) was explained by Pauli using quantum field theory and the theory of relativity.
This is stated in the book:
R. Feynman, R. Leighton, M. Sands "Feynman lectures on physics".
Volume 8, Quantum Mechanics (1).
Chapter 2, Identical particles.
Paragraph 1, Bose-particles and Fermi-particles.
Page 34 (Russian translation, 1966).

Since the three-electron coupling is a fermion (Pauli has proved), then following the logic of chemistry explains the structure of benzene, aromaticity, the structure of organic and inorganic compounds. Organic chemistry and chemistry as a whole are self-sufficient sciences and their logic is flawless and perfect. Therefore, it was a mistake to "reduce" chemistry to physics.

In the transition from the isolated atoms to the molecule there is a qualitative jump and we get a virtually new form of matter (chemical), which is no longer reduced to a simple mechanics of the motions of electrons and atomic nuclei (that is, to physics). But the laws of physics and quantum mechanics are unshakable, they can not be violated. Therefore, at the moment, the chemical bond is an "act of divine creation," which, alas, is not reducible to physics. There is no doubt that from the physical point of view it will be possible to describe, in time, and this will lead science (physics and chemistry) to a whole new level. But now the reason for the formation of a chemical bond can only be explained from the chemical point of view (in fact, by chemical expediency). If we consider the issue from the point of view of physics (4 fundamental interactions, motions of electrons and nuclei), then alas, the question is open...

P.S. I think Einstein is right ("God does not play dice")...

Last edited by chemist777; 04-08-2017 at 02:00 PM..
 
Old 04-08-2017, 02:42 PM
 
Location: Groznia
205 posts, read 149,165 times
Reputation: 221
Nice...I am an engineer and my dad is the Chemist (you sound just like him actually). I only went through Chemistry 111 and 112 but electron spin calculations were a regular part of research, lab calculations, and examinations. And this is beautiful because this is almost exactly what I was thinking...

"In the transition from the isolated atoms to the molecule there is a qualitative jump and we get a virtually new form of matter (chemical), which is no longer reduced to a simple mechanics of the motions of electrons and atomic nuclei (that is, to physics). But the laws of physics and quantum mechanics are unshakable, they can not be violated. Therefore, at the moment, the chemical bond is an "act of divine creation," which, alas, is not reducible to physics. There is no doubt that from the physical point of view it will be possible to describe, in time, and this will lead science (physics and chemistry) to a whole new level. But now the reason for the formation of a chemical bond can only be explained from the chemical point of view (in fact, by chemical expediency." Very well said...

Damn, I miss Chemistry...

A quote from an engineer..."It takes oodles and oodles of economics (stability) to look past the known laws of rationality and explore the deep workings of the universe..."


Guardar

Last edited by Countess Capital; 04-08-2017 at 02:50 PM..
 
Old 04-08-2017, 04:38 PM
 
19 posts, read 15,473 times
Reputation: 20
Super that your father is chemist. Cool! Chemistry is a nice science I'm a little familiar with engineering, worked also in the industry and created schemes for some machinery, motors for certain processes.


"A quote from an engineer..."It takes oodles and oodles of economics (stability) to look past the known laws of rationality and explore the deep workings of the universe...""
100 % agree.

Last edited by chemist777; 04-08-2017 at 05:48 PM..
 
Old 04-09-2017, 10:27 AM
 
Location: Groznia
205 posts, read 149,165 times
Reputation: 221
Chemist...can use some of your reference material ?
 
Old 04-09-2017, 11:03 AM
 
19 posts, read 15,473 times
Reputation: 20
All works about three-electron bond is at viXra (viXra.org e-Print archive, Bezverkhniy Volodymyr Dmytrovych).
There it is indicated references.
 
Old 04-09-2017, 08:49 PM
 
1,770 posts, read 1,290,462 times
Reputation: 1694
Preface: This is an incredibly convoluted paper and I can't seem to follow your train of thought. It may be due to the fact it was translated.

Let me see if I understand this right. You are trying to use a "contradiction" between quantum superposition and valence bond theory/molecular orbital theory to prove that quantum superposition is wrong? That is what I take from the "God does not play dice" comment. That is totally ass-backwards. If their is a contradiction, it would be proving that VB and MO are wrong, not the other way around, as they are built on quantum mechanics in the first place.

"In chemistry, valence bond (VB) theory is one of two basic theories, along with molecular orbital (MO) theory, that were developed to use the methods of quantum mechanics to explain chemical bonding."
-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valence_bond_theory

I'm not really sure where this contradiction you are claiming is, for one, you say "But then it is obvious that both the MO method and the VB method contradict the principle of quantum superposition. Since the real molecule in the VB method will be described by a discrete set of canonical structures, which does not correspond to the existence of a single real molecule." This gives me the sense that you don't understand how a measurement of a quantum mechanical system collapses the wave function, but again, I'm not sure if I am understanding you correctly.

Another thing, you say "This means that the wave function ψ12 (q1, q2) of the system can be represented as the multiplication of the wave functions ψ1 (q1) and ψ2 (q2) of its parts:". You cannot combine wavefunctions like that unless the particles are distinguishable.

In the case of identical fermions, the wavefunction is

https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/me...2b538e3b283694

In the case of identical bosons, the wavefunction is

https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/me...ed33505b17accb

The wavefunction for identical bosons looks exactly like the one for the MO and VB theories.

If chemistry doesn't reduce to physics, then what on Earth is going on?

VB, MO and quantum superposition are all concepts close to a century old. If what you are saying is correct, how did all these years go by without someone noticing such a glaring problem?

Last edited by Iaskwhy; 04-09-2017 at 09:13 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Nature
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top