Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T15:30:06.271Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Has Chemistry Been at Least Approximately Reduced to Quantum Mechanics?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2022

Eric R. Scerri
Eric R. Scerri*
Affiliation:
London School of Economics
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In order to discuss the question of the reduction of chemistry it will be necessary to begin with a brief review of what philosophers mean by reduction in science. I follow most authors on this subject by starting with the writings of Nagel (Nagel 1961). As is well known, Nagel stipulates that two formal conditions, namely connectability and derivability should be fulfilled in order to say that reduction of theory T2 to theory T1 has occurred. In addition he stipulates a non formal condition, that the primary or reducing science should be supported by experimental evidence.

Furthermore Nagel considers that reductions occur in two main varieties which he calls homogeneous and heterogeneous respectively. In homogeneous reduction the terms used by the reducing theory are also common to the theory to be reduced. For example Galileo's science of freely falling bodies was conceived of as separate from the mechanics of celestial bodies.

Type
Part IV. Philosophy of Chemistry
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1994 , Issue 1: Volume One: Contributed Papers 1994 , 1994 , pp. 160 - 170
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 by the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bender, C.F., Davidson, E.R. (1966), Journal of Physical Chemistry 70: 2675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bender, C.F., Davidson, E.R. (1970), Journal of the American Chemical Society, 92: 4984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bender, C.F., Davidson, E.R. (1971), Journal of Chemical Physics 55: 4798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolton, E.E., DeLeeuw, B.J., Fowler, J.E., Grev.R.S., Schaefer, H.F. (1992), Journal of Chemical Physics 97: 5586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, E.R. (1984), Faraday Symposia 19: 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dirac, P.A.M. (1929), Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, A123, 714.Google Scholar
Feyerabend, P. (1962), “Explanation, Reduction and Empiricism”, in Feigl, H.M., Maxwell, G. eds., Minnesota Studies in Philosophy of Science, Vol III, Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Goddard, W.A. (1985), Science 227: 917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grev, R.S., Schaefer, H.F. (1985), Journal of Chemistry 82, 4126.Google Scholar
Kafafi, Z.H. Hague, R.H., Fredin, L., Margrave, J.L. (1983), Journal of Chemical Physics 87: 797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemeney, J.G., Oppenheim, P. (1956), “On Reduction”, Philosophical Studies, VII, 6–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, T.S. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago: Chicago Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Langmuir, I. (1921), “Chemical and Metallurgical Engineering”, 24, 553 as quoted by W.B.Jensen, (1984) Journal ofChemical Education 61: 191–200.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, D.R., Bender, C.F., Schaefer, H.F. (1972), Theoretica Chimica Ada 25: 352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagel, E. (1961), The Structure of Science, New York: Harcourt.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parr, R.G., Yang, W. (1989), Density Functional Theory for Atoms and Molecules, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pauling, L., Wilson, E.B. (1935), Introduction to Quantum Mechanics, with Applications to Chemistry, New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Popper, K.R. (1957) “The Aim of Science”, Ratio 1: 24–35.Google Scholar
Presilla-Marquez, J.D., Graham, W.R. (1991), Journal of Chemical Physics 95: 5612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Primas, H. (1983), Chemistry, Quantum Mechanics and Reductionism, Berlin: Springer Verlag, 2nd ed.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, H. (1965), “How Not to Talk About Meaning”, in Boston Studies in Philosophy of Science, vol II, eds., Cohen, R.S., Wartofsky, M., New York, Humanities Press, pp. 206–207.Google Scholar
Ramsey, J.L. (1990), Philosophy of Association Proceedings 1: 485–499.Google Scholar
Scerri, E.R. (1993), “Correspondence and Reduction in Chemistry”, in Correspondence, Invariance and Heuristics, Essays in Honour of Heinz Post, eds., French, S., Kamminga, H., Boston Studies in Philosophy of Science, volume 148, Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Schaefer, H.F. (1986), Science 231:1100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veltner, W, McLeod, D. (1964), Journal of Chemical Physics 41: 235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinhold, F. (1972), Advances in Quantum Chemistry 6: 299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, S. (1984), Electron Correlation in Molecules, Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar