I Best models to describe molecules

  • Thread starter lucas_
  • Start date
386
19
Molecules don't really look like this with clearly defined objects and outlines. Remember that in the double slit experiments, we can't even model what happens between measurements, like how the electron behave between emitter and detector.

246519


So what is the best model to describe them? How can molecules interact using without the concept of wave function or hamiltonians? How do you visualize models physically?

Are there more exotic ways that they can interact? What's the latest in Atomic and Condensed Matter study about this all?
 

Vanadium 50

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
22,972
5,239
Really, you're going to have to put in a bit more effort in your questions. What you have written is either overly broad like "What's the latest in Atomic and Condensed Matter study about this all? " or just plumb wrong "How can molecules interact using without the concept of wave function or hamiltonians? "
 
386
19
Let me rephrase my questions.

Random walk or Brownian motions are supposed to be what characterize molecules (how they bond and stuff). Is there some process that can override the random walk to initiate global coherence of some kind? If we treat molecules as nuts and bolts, this won't happen. But they are quantum system. So the quantumness may still be there and have features not found in nut and bolts macroscopic system? What are the features not commonly seen?
 
386
19
Let me rephrase my questions.

Random walk or Brownian motions are supposed to be what characterize molecules (how they bond and stuff). Is there some process that can override the random walk to initiate global coherence of some kind? If we treat molecules as nuts and bolts, this won't happen. But they are quantum system. So the quantumness may still be there and have features not found in nut and bolts macroscopic system? What are the features not commonly seen?
This is published in the Journal of Condense Matter Physics which I was reading


Unsolved mysteries of water in its liquid and glassy phases

"Abstract. Although H2O has been the focus of a considerable amount of research since the
beginning of the century, its peculiar physical properties are still not well understood. First we discuss some of the anomalies of this ‘complex fluid’. Then we describe a qualitative interpretation in terms of percolation concepts. Finally, we discuss recent experiments and simulations relating to the liquid–liquid phase transition hypothesis that, in addition to the known critical point in water, there exists a ‘second’ critical point at low temperatures. In particular, we discuss very recent measurements at Tsukuba of the compression-induced melting and decompression-induced melting lines of high-pressure forms of ice..."
 
386
19
This is published in the Journal of Condense Matter Physics which I was reading


Unsolved mysteries of water in its liquid and glassy phases

"Abstract. Although H2O has been the focus of a considerable amount of research since the
beginning of the century, its peculiar physical properties are still not well understood. First we discuss some of the anomalies of this ‘complex fluid’. Then we describe a qualitative interpretation in terms of percolation concepts. Finally, we discuss recent experiments and simulations relating to the liquid–liquid phase transition hypothesis that, in addition to the known critical point in water, there exists a ‘second’ critical point at low temperatures. In particular, we discuss very recent measurements at Tsukuba of the compression-induced melting and decompression-induced melting lines of high-pressure forms of ice..."
The solution to the above seems related to the so called QED coherence in matter:

This is a peer review paper published in the American Journal of Modern Physics

<remainder of post deleted by moderator>
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TeethWhitener

Science Advisor
Gold Member
1,362
748
The American Journal of Modern Physics is published by a predatory publisher. Wikipedia lists a number of criticisms, as does Peter Woit’s blog.
 

Vanadium 50

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
22,972
5,239

Vanadium 50

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
22,972
5,239
If you will rely on mainstream physics. It can only explain half of the data.
PF is for discussion of mainstream physics.
 

Henryk

Gold Member
234
88
How can molecules interact using without the concept of wave function or hamiltonians?
Well, you can't. There is not way to understand chemical bonding without quantum mechanics. Period. Ok, maybe ionic type of bonds can be somehow explained by purely electrostatic interaction (but why would an electron jump from sodium atom to chlorine?)
How do you visualize models physically?
Actually, the picture of a water molecules made of three circles: one circle is an oxygen, two are hydrogen is a pretty good one. If you want to be more precise, you can make a picture of the electron wave function probability density. I found one on the web site

https://www.nicepng.com/ourpic/u2e6y3r5e6y3t4u2_water-electron-density-water-molecule-electron-density/. Yes, more precise but your simple three circle picture is just as good to give an idea of the structure of the molecule.
water molecule.png
 

Want to reply to this thread?

"Best models to describe molecules" You must log in or register to reply here.

Related Threads for: Best models to describe molecules

  • Posted
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
23K
  • Posted
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • Posted
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving
Top