What is an element? What is the periodic table? And what does quantum mechanics contribute to the question?
Foundations of Chemistry 14 (1):69-81 (2012)
| Abstract | This article considers two important traditions concerning the chemical elements. The first is the meaning of the term “element” including the distinctions between element as basic substance, as simple substance and as combined simple substance. In addition to briefly tracing the historical development of these distinctions, I make comments on the recent attempts to clarify the fundamental notion of element as basic substance for which I believe the term “element” is best reserved. This discussion has focused on the writings of Fritz Paneth which are here analyzed from a new perspective. The other tradition concerns the reduction of chemistry to quantum mechanics and an understanding of chemical elements through their microscopic components such as protons, neutrons and electrons. I claim that the use of electronic configurations has still not yet settled the question of the placement of several elements and discuss an alternative criterion based on maximizing triads of elements. I also point out another possible limitation to the reductive approach, namely the failure, up to now, to obtain a derivation of the Madelung rule. Mention is made of some recent similarity studies which could be used to clarify the nature of ‘elements’. Although it has been suggested that the notion of element as basic substance should be considered in terms of fundamental particles like protons and electrons, I resist this move and conclude that the quantum mechanical tradition has not had much impact on the question of what is an element which remains an essentially philosophical issue | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,705 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesEric Scerri (2006). On the Continuity of Reference of the Elements: A Response to Hendry. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 37 (2):308-321.
Eric R. Scerri (1997). Has the Periodic Table Been Successfully Axiomatized? Erkenntnis 47 (2):229-243.
Eric Scerri (2003). Response to Vollmer's Review of Minds and Molecules. Philosophy of Science 70 (2):391-398.
Mark R. Leach (2013). Concerning Electronegativity as a Basic Elemental Property and Why the Periodic Table is Usually Represented in its Medium Form. Foundations of Chemistry 15 (1):13-29.
Joseph E. Earley (2009). How Chemistry Shifts Horizons: Element, Substance, and the Essential. Foundations of Chemistry 11 (2).
Eric Scerri (2010). Explaining the Periodic Table, and the Role of Chemical Triads. Foundations of Chemistry 12 (1):69-83.
Octavio Novaro (2008). On the Rightful Place for He Within the Periodic Table. Foundations of Chemistry 10 (1).
Robert C. Bishop (2005). Patching Physics and Chemistry Together. Philosophy of Science 72 (5):710-722.
Robert Bishop (2005). Patching Physics and Chemistry Together. Philosophy of Science 72 (5):710-722.
V. N. Ostrovsky (2005). On Recent Discussion Concerning Quantum Justification of the Periodic Table of the Elements. Foundations of Chemistry 7 (3).
Robin Findlay Hendry (2005). Lavoisier and Mendeleev on the Elements. Foundations of Chemistry 7 (1):31-48.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2011-10-17Total downloads16 ( #74,758 of 549,198 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,397 of 549,198 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
