Mikhailo Lomonosoff formulated Physical Chemistry as Independent Disciplene in 18th Century. Is his claim strong today ?
Historically it could be considered as independent because no one had real explanations. Today with modern QM physical chemistry seems to be a specialized part of physics, better of natural sciences. So no reason to define limits.
Dear Alex:
I never would say Prof. Mikhail Lomonosov was wrong.
He considered Physical Chemistry as an Independent Discipline.
But, let's go to Semantics: Independent of what? of Physics? I wonder how anyone, even Prof. Lomonosov, could develop Theories or explained problems of Physical Chemistry without Physics, for example , to mention only ONE, without Quantum Mechanics.
Nevertheless, Physics, including Optics is an Independent Science but if anybody wonders if Physics depends on Mathematics, we would arrive to the extreme to declare Mathematics as the ONLY existing Science and that is not correct. either TRUE.
Historically it could be considered as independent because no one had real explanations. Today with modern QM physical chemistry seems to be a specialized part of physics, better of natural sciences. So no reason to define limits.
In my opinion Physical chemistry is the junction science that relates all branches of chemistry to each other.
Mr. Hatem, I permit myself to add, at the end of your comment using Physics.
I think there is only one disciline namely
physics and uts language is mathematics
the rest is sematics
nothing more
and scientific dialects
jerzy
One of my professors used to say more ore less as a joke that "Chemistry is actually a part of physics."
If we accept it than physical chemistry can only be a part of physics too.
But seriously, does it really matter?
Dear Alex,
In my opinion the physical and the mother of all sciences and mathematics the language she speaks.
With a final theory everything has a clear and precise explanation.
For example why not the existence in nature of elements number 61 and 43 or because the starting elements are radioactive bismuth.
Or because the distribution of the atomic orbitals of the elements that generates its chemical identity.
All this has a clear and precise explanation of the starting physical construction and the fabric of space.
I'm sure that in a near future all sciences will speak the same language and mathematics of physics starting!
I know Chemistry is a Science but if we, take Chemistry to "the end of the end":
Are chemical reactions ONLY an exchange of electrons in-between the outer shells of the atoms and that is simply Physics?
Dear Fermin, you are just creating enemies. But your are right, only changing and combining electrons. Very physical. ;-))
Dear Hanoo, I disagree: I am not creating enemies. That is the crude reality.
Who could say Physics is not a Science? It is not my fault or error, it is the nature and the law that govern the Universe.
Please, ask Albert Einstein or Stephen Hawkings, not me. At least Hawkings is alive. Follow him, not me. These are simply my opinions.
Among Scientists there are not enemies, that is valid for Politicians or Warriors !
We, all Scientists are in the same side. Respectfully I say, if you think I am creating enemies, it is your opinion. NOBODY in RG or ANY Scientist is my enemy. My crticis are my allies. We Scientists, defend the truth and the scientific facts, we do not fight.
By the way, may I know what your background is?
Thanks in advance, if you want we could be friends,
I have 100 friends for each enemy.
Have a good weekend !
Dear Fermin, I´m convinced, don´t overlook my smiley. My background is, I studied physics, chemistry, math and later on I tried to understand biology.
PS: I never thought that another scientist is an enemy because of his special profession.
Nice weekend and regards!
Thanks, Hanno, even I did not see your smiley, my computer does not show that. No I sent you a smiley !!! it was interesting.
Curiously, I have thought on this when I entered the Chemical Faculty at the Lomonosov Moscow State University, where I started my PhD studies in the late 1980s... Well, I do not know whether I have come to the right answer... Only Lomonosov himself would know it... But my "feeling" is that he introduced the term "physical chemistry" (when giving a course called by him as "Курс истинной физической химии" (in English: Course in True Physical Chemistry), because Chemistry at that time was probably too empiric and quantification was clearly more associated with physics... The word "True" is what makes me feel that this should have been his reason....
Dera Abdallah, that´s it. You meet exactly my opinion. Work and research together!
ladies and gentlemen.
And very interesting to see the loves and discord that raises a simple question!
But I invite colleagues to think that the sciences are divided only by the limits of human ability to manage all information in a single human.
The contrary exist a unique science and not a series of divisions that every day increases.
And increasingly lost the vision of the whole that is the universe.
Happened to look to an electron and a tiny entity in the universe!
And certainly not a single electron will be able to describe the enormity of the interaction that exists in the cosmos!
The separate parts can not explain it all!
It can only be seen together and not broken into a scientific dissection!
Once all the sciences should be studied and respected, but they should never forget that all of physical interactions have their origin in the operation.
If this fact is lost to science itself is lost because you will not know where it came from and do not know where to go!
In my opinion, it is exactly as Jerzy Achimowicz said.
Everything is physics, but we understand it and model the world around us by the use of mathematics.
We generally categorise things as a specific discipline when we need to make some conventions about what happens outside the boundaries of our model.
So right now, we can view a hierarchy of sciences like this:
1. Elementary particles and high energy physics. This is usually between fundamental fields and mechanisms, up to formation of nucleons and other similar structures.
2. Nuclear physics. In nuclear physics, your models start from nucleons and go up to nuclei. At this level, one is (usually) no longer concerned with what's going on inside elementary particles and how they're formed.
3. Atomic physics. Here, models usually start with the nuclei and their interaction with the electrons. In atomic physics you don't need to be too concerned with the things that happen inside the nucleus, or elementary particles.
4. Solid state physics and condensed matter. Generally, at this point you deal with structures made from more atoms.
5. Chemistry usually starts from atomic physics and covers a very wide range of topics and models, up to polymer physics/chemistry and other systems of macromolecules, going to the boundary with biology at the level of proteins, membranes and other complex objects.
6. Biology starts from chemistry and ends with medicine (human or vet.). This is also extremely complex and has even more subdivisions than chemistry. Also, biology includes a rather large system called environment.
Of course, all these have lots of applications like optics, plasma and lasers, reactors&accelerators, astrophysics, astronomy, engineering (of many kinds - all the range from semiconductors to aeronautics), genetics, food and pharmaceuticals, geology, and many others.
All these things require mathematics, and since their ever increasing complexity, it is difficult to jump steps in the list that I have presented. For example, I can't imagine doing applications of atomic physics only with the models and language of elementary particles. People doing protein folding can confirm how difficult it is to start from atomic physics, or chemistry and calculate the results of their simulations. They do it because there's no other choice, but it's hard, complex and takes a lot of time and resources.
Obviously, there are other ways to categorize all these and the interdisciplinary sciences and applications, but I think that this list is clear enough about the general perspective on this matter.
So physical chemistry is physics and becomes more and more physics the more we understand chemistry and the more detailed our models are. At the time it started, physics was not as powerful as it is today, so we approached many things through the observed and studied laws of chemistry. Even at that time it was clear that physical chemistry was more fundamental than "regular" chemistry (regular at that time) and it's roots run deeper into physics. Now that physics has caught up, it's OK to say that it's physics at a higher level (deeper means towards elementary particles and higher means towards condensed matter or chemistry).
The classification of science is artificial, there is no such classification exist in nature. It was devised merely for the convenience in studies.
Basically, to understand any natural incident or phenomenon, We can't rely just on a single branch of science. We need almost all of them to describe properly. Thus, no discipline in science is independent of others.
But, taking convenience into consideration, Yes, Physical Chemistry is another proper discipline in science.
It is supposed that the hard core of Physical Chemistry is the quantum interpretation of the orbits of electrons around the atoms and molecules, so probably is a subset of Physics at that field.
Mani Lal Singh posted in my Inbox:
For sack of academic interest,these have been classified as physical chemistry. Scientific knowledge does not limit to these boundaries. The core is element.
regards,
-Mani
@Alexander, I think that Lomonosov's definition of physical chemistry is still valid! He was the first who used the term PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY!It is an independent interdisciplinary science according to my daughter who is finishing her M.Sci thesis in Physical Chemistry!
I have not read this answers in details
but doing science is just another profession
lets enyoit it
ok
jerzy
Yes, I agree with you that science is a whole discipline the other classifications is just for ease of studies and limitations as placed by men. So as Jerzy said lets just enjoy science.
Osmotic Phenomena is neither effect of Physics, nor of Chemistry. Osmosis is not associated with chemical reactions, so, it is outside of mainstream Chemistry. On the other hand Osmosis is possible in chemical solutions,only, which are not the subject of Physics..
But first ever Nobel Prize in Chemistry, 1901, was granted to van Hoff, the Physical Chemist, for his work on Osmosis. I will name Inrvin Langmuir and Boris Derjaguin, who advanced our understanding of Osmosis, both being Physical Chemists.
I attach the file with the paper on Osmosis, the problem was solved within Physical Chemistry.
In now days the Physics studies a very large number of phenomena, including those which earlier were considered to refer to Chemistry and latter to Physical Chemistry. For example, physics predicts new atoms, new chemical reactions. It is not possible to indicate strong frontiers between the Physical Chemistry and Physics, although the Physical Chemistry studies more specific phenomena. Therefore, today one can consider that the Physical Chemistry is a part of Physics. Physics is larger.
Dear all,
Yes, it is true that due to physics there is a lot of advancement's in Medical Sciences.
I hope very soon, we can see the nano-nuclear medicines for the chemotherapy or cure of censor causes.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Chemistry