series of simpler functions. Since even such calculus is very complicated, it could
be further simplified by introducing some parameters used from the experience, i.e.
some measured numerical values. Thus, the empirical experience turns out to be a
component of calculation—science becomes semiempirical. Finally, calculations
lose its universality and become more useful if they are accommodated to particular
classes of problems. In this way, the universal questions about the structure of
matter were (at least partially) lost from the main stream in science. Rather, the
investigations are, with their practically oriented methods, predominantly oriented
to the concrete objects. In philosophy of science appears new directions such as
empirical constructivism within which Bas van Fraassen [15–17] argues that
science is acceptable if it should explain particular phenomena, not the universal
principles. Paradigmatic change that has appeared in Copenhagen school, which has
introduced the idea about the “dual nature” of matter, i.e., the inseparable coupling
between the observer and observed, has been transformed to the empirical constructivism, which, in unskilled hands can become allegation for superficiality. In
this way, cosmological questions about the macro- and microcosm are in science
and education replaced by actual everyday life. Is the new science merely a discipline subordinated to the need for simple things, something “higher” because of
something “lower”? Though, if we look on the science as on the organized scepticism rather than to a tool for getting a sort of final solutions, there is a hope that
these tendencies could led to new paradigm.
12.1 Conclusions
The Lewis’ formulation of chemical bond as an electron pair is the basis for modern
practical structural theory and in the same time the explanation of the meaning of
chemical formula. However, the extension of this concept to the study of chemical
reaction has two important consequences. First is the development of the theory of
reaction mechanisms, and the second is the introduction in science the general
concept about the superposition of representations. This new paradigm has
appeared in parallel with the formulation of quantum mechanics in physics.
It is also demonstrated how the uncertainty principle that appeared originally in
quantum mechanics could be used as general epistemic model in chemistry,
chemical education, and in practical life.
References
1. Lewis GN (1916) The atom and the molecule. J Am Chem Soc 38:762
2. Nernst W (1913) Richard Abbeg, Berichte d. D. Chem.Geselschaft, Jahrg. 46:40
3. Bohr N (1913) Philos Mag 26:857
4. Heitler WH, London FW (1927) Wechselwirkung neutraler Atome und homöopolare
Bindung nach der Quantenmechanik. Zeitschrift für Physik 44:455
136
12 Limits of Structural Theory
be further simplified by introducing some parameters used from the experience, i.e.
some measured numerical values. Thus, the empirical experience turns out to be a
component of calculation—science becomes semiempirical. Finally, calculations
lose its universality and become more useful if they are accommodated to particular
classes of problems. In this way, the universal questions about the structure of
matter were (at least partially) lost from the main stream in science. Rather, the
investigations are, with their practically oriented methods, predominantly oriented
to the concrete objects. In philosophy of science appears new directions such as
empirical constructivism within which Bas van Fraassen [15–17] argues that
science is acceptable if it should explain particular phenomena, not the universal
principles. Paradigmatic change that has appeared in Copenhagen school, which has
introduced the idea about the “dual nature” of matter, i.e., the inseparable coupling
between the observer and observed, has been transformed to the empirical constructivism, which, in unskilled hands can become allegation for superficiality. In
this way, cosmological questions about the macro- and microcosm are in science
and education replaced by actual everyday life. Is the new science merely a discipline subordinated to the need for simple things, something “higher” because of
something “lower”? Though, if we look on the science as on the organized scepticism rather than to a tool for getting a sort of final solutions, there is a hope that
these tendencies could led to new paradigm.
12.1 Conclusions
The Lewis’ formulation of chemical bond as an electron pair is the basis for modern
practical structural theory and in the same time the explanation of the meaning of
chemical formula. However, the extension of this concept to the study of chemical
reaction has two important consequences. First is the development of the theory of
reaction mechanisms, and the second is the introduction in science the general
concept about the superposition of representations. This new paradigm has
appeared in parallel with the formulation of quantum mechanics in physics.
It is also demonstrated how the uncertainty principle that appeared originally in
quantum mechanics could be used as general epistemic model in chemistry,
chemical education, and in practical life.
References
1. Lewis GN (1916) The atom and the molecule. J Am Chem Soc 38:762
2. Nernst W (1913) Richard Abbeg, Berichte d. D. Chem.Geselschaft, Jahrg. 46:40
3. Bohr N (1913) Philos Mag 26:857
4. Heitler WH, London FW (1927) Wechselwirkung neutraler Atome und homöopolare
Bindung nach der Quantenmechanik. Zeitschrift für Physik 44:455
136
12 Limits of Structural Theory