What is the reason for the Emergence of properties?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the emergence of properties in molecules, specifically focusing on water as a compound formed from hydrogen and oxygen atoms. Participants explore whether the properties of water are entirely new or if they were inherent in the constituent atoms. The conversation touches on concepts of molecular bonding, reactivity, and emergent properties, with implications for both chemistry and philosophy.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the properties of water are a result of the molecular formation rather than the individual atoms, citing examples of other compounds with distinct properties.
  • Others question how one could experimentally differentiate between properties being new or already present in the constituent atoms, suggesting that this could be a philosophical inquiry rather than a purely scientific one.
  • A participant mentions the concept of emergent properties, using the analogy of observing patterns in a structure from different perspectives.
  • There is a discussion about the relationship between atomic properties and bulk properties, with some suggesting that while there may be correlations, exceptions exist that complicate the relationship.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of defining terms like "emergent" and "property" to clarify the discussion, indicating that the question may not have a definitive scientific answer.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the properties of compounds like water are emergent or if they stem from the properties of individual atoms. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing perspectives on the nature of these properties and the implications for scientific inquiry versus philosophical interpretation.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the question of emergent properties may not strictly pertain to physics or nature, suggesting a philosophical dimension to the inquiry. There are also references to the complexity of defining terms and the potential for varying interpretations based on those definitions.

  • #31
ZapperZ said:
I know that you are talking about just 3 atoms forming a molecule here, but maybe this is a good jumping point for you to discover another new aspect of our world that Phil Anderson touted many years ago: More Is Different.

I had put this aside to read & finally had a chance to do so. Much of it is over my head (I don't have the background necessary), but those parts of it I do understand seem well-argued and appealing. I had not heard of broken symmetry before. I also like Anderson's demonstrations that reductionism being true in one direction doesn't mean it's true in the other - i.e. that with a knowledge of fundamental laws and behaviors alone, we could derive all more complex systems.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
14K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
906
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
14K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K