Is Carbon 60 the Most Optimal Molecule for 3D Space?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Spin_Network
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Molecule
Spin_Network
Messages
373
Reaction score
0
Is Carbon 60 :http://www.popmath.org.uk/sculpture/pages/jmv/example2.html

the optimum volume for area of 3-D space?


There are a vast number of geometric configurations of Uniform Polyhedra:
http://www.mathconsult.ch/showroom/unipoly/list-graph.html

But in Natural Selective, or Smolin's Cosmic Natural Selection to be precise, is there no choice?

Can we create a more optimum molecule?...is there a molecule that could exist in 2-Dimensional space!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
1. Optimum is either a minimum or a maximum. Which do you mean, and why is this important ? Either way, the C-60 shape is not an optimal polyhedron.

2. An infinitely long, linear chain (open loop "n-infinitene" or closed "cylcoinfinitene") molecule will be "more optimal" in 2D.
 
Gokul43201 said:
1. Optimum is either a minimum or a maximum. Which do you mean, and why is this important ? Either way, the C-60 shape is not an optimal polyhedron.

2. An infinitely long, linear chain (open loop "n-infinitene" or closed "cylcoinfinitene") molecule will be "more optimal" in 2D.

I guess my wording of 'optimum' is totally incorrect :blushing: ..and it is Optimal that I was meant to have written :eek:

Thanks for the subtle hint, and I will be adding at a later date.
 
From the BCS theory of superconductivity is well known that the superfluid density smoothly decreases with increasing temperature. Annihilated superfluid carriers become normal and lose their momenta on lattice atoms. So if we induce a persistent supercurrent in a ring below Tc and after that slowly increase the temperature, we must observe a decrease in the actual supercurrent, because the density of electron pairs and total supercurrent momentum decrease. However, this supercurrent...
Hi. I have got question as in title. How can idea of instantaneous dipole moment for atoms like, for example hydrogen be consistent with idea of orbitals? At my level of knowledge London dispersion forces are derived taking into account Bohr model of atom. But we know today that this model is not correct. If it would be correct I understand that at each time electron is at some point at radius at some angle and there is dipole moment at this time from nucleus to electron at orbit. But how...

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Back
Top