From: Sengen Sun (sengensun$##$yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Sep 12 2006 - 21:46:18 EDT
It is very hard to control my emotion when I read the
paper by Shahbazian & Zahedi (Foundations of
Chemistry, 2006, 8, 37-52).
I would call for a "global convention" to resolve the
most outstanding problem - mis-use of orbitals in too
many places in the chemical literature. What else
could justify a "global convention" to clarify
chemical language?
One thing clear to me is that they want to assign a
"descriptive language", in which "mis-use (=wrong)" is
right and "right" is ignored or denied! In my opinion,
their paper contains many empty political slogans.
On papge 43, "A more recent view stemming from the
first attempts to describe molecules using QT tends to
use orbitals as basic conceptual tools to describe
chemical events. This tendency may best be appreciated
in Hoffman's paper on quantitative thinking (Hoffmann,
1998). According to his view (which is popular among
chemists), chemical understanding may be achieved by
constructing simple orbital models".
This is a political propaganda to cover up the
historical facts and the reality of the most
controversial issue.
1. Some prominent scientists disagree with Hoffmann as
indicated in the paper by Hoffmann (1998, Theochem:
424: 1-6).
2. Dewar used "hypnotic effect" to described W-H rules
despite the fact that no one denies the usefulness of
the W-H rules. What does "the understaning" mean to
Dewar?
3. Bader never recognizes a meaning of the Hilbert
space:
http://www.scientific-computing.com/scwmayjun03profile_richardbader.html
This web pape contains a word "nonsense". I'd like to
ask Shahbazian & Zahedi, what is your plan to resolve
the conflict between the "nonsense" and Hoffmann's
"understanding" in a possible "global convention"?
4. For more than 5 years, there has been a strong
voice in the Internet to disagree with Hoffmann. Some
ordinary scientists said that they liked the free
speech forum during the hot discussions involving the
"strong voice". For example,
http://www.ccl.net/cgi-bin/ccl/message-new?2005+12+12+004
http://www.ccl.net/cgi-bin/ccl/message-new?2006+03+23+001.
Finally, I hereby declare my resignation as a member
from ISPC. I started the membership by paying the
membership fee ~5 years ago. I realized more and more
in my opinion that philosophy of THEORETICAL CHEMISTRY
is inappropriately practised by ISPC using vague
languages without a logical sense but political.
I must, however, thank ISPC for the open internet
forum on philosophy of chemistry. I will still be
interested in the internet discussions and am
interested in seeing how "wrong" is made right without
correcting the "wrong", and how "right" is ignored or
denied forever. I will not be tired!
Sengen
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
ORGLIST - Organic Chemistry Mailing List
Website / Archive / FAQ: http://www.orglist.net
To post a message (TO EVERYBODY) send to everybody$##$orglist.net
To unsubscribe, send to everybody-request$##$orglist.net the message: unsubscribe your_orglist_password your_address
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Feb 13 2007 - 14:17:01 EST