Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: Niels Bohr between physics and chemistry
Replies: 4   Last Post: Aug 6, 2013 4:45 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Tom Potter

Posts: 497
Registered: 8/9/06
Re: Niels Bohr between physics and chemistry
Posted: Aug 6, 2013 4:45 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote in message
> On 8/5/13 6:34 AM, Tom Potter wrote:
>> As can be seen, the Physics Today article was just another effort by
>> the Khazar Gang to claim credit for the works of others.

> Your response to the article belies your limited education, Potter.
> Don't forget the role of the Pauli exclusion principle in the periodic
> table and all of chemistry.

It appears that my pal Sam Wormley
is fumbling around trying to distance himself
from his post glorifying Bohr.

"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote in message
> Niels Bohr between physics and chemistry
>> http://www.physicstoday.org/resource/1/phtoad/v66/i5/p36_s1?bypassSSO=1
>> Bohr's atomic theory was addressed as much to chemical problems as to
>> physical ones. But the great scientist's intent to establish a new
>> framework for atomic and molecular chemistry was less successful, and
>> was unacknowledged by most chemists.

>> Published in a series of three papers in the summer and fall of 1913,
>> Niels Bohr's seminal atomic theory1 revolutionized physicists'
>> conception of matter; to this day it is presented in high school and
>> undergraduate-level textbooks. However, the theory is usually
>> understood to pertain merely to one-electron atoms, with which it
>> scored its most spectacular successes. From a historical point of
>> view, that is a gross misconception, for Bohr originally thought of
>> his brainchild as a much more ambitious theory that would lead to a
>> new understanding of the constitution of all matter, whether the
>> physicist's atoms or the chemist's molecules. After all, the very
>> title of his publication, "On the constitution of atoms and
>> molecules," indicates that it was addressed as much to chemists as to
>> his colleagues in physics. Whereas Bohr focused on the hydrogen atom
>> in the first part of his work, he devoted the second part mostly to
>> more complex atoms and the third to the structure of molecules. In
>> that 1913 trilogy, considerations and results of a chemical nature
>> played a significant role often overlooked today. Moreover, his
>> theory had important chemical consequences, in particular regarding
>> the periodic arrangement of the elements.

Tom Potter wrote:

Dmitri Mendeleev is generally credited with devising the Periodic Table in

"In 1863 there were 56 known elements with a new element being discovered at
a rate of approximately one per year.

Other scientists had previously identified periodicity of elements. John
Newlands described a Law of Octaves, noting their periodicity according to
relative atomic weight in 1864, publishing it in 1865. His proposal
identified the potential for new elements such as germanium. The concept was
criticized and his innovation was not recognized by the Society of Chemists
until 1887. Another person to prose a periodic table was Lothar Meyer, who
published a paper in 1864 describing 28 elements classified by their
valence, but with no prediction of new elements. Meyer, who is often
credited with the discovery of the periodic system, opposed and criticized
the Periodic Law."

"In 1913, Moseley observed and measured the X-ray spectra of various
chemical elements.
Moseley's law in X-ray spectra justified many concepts in chemistry
by sorting the chemical elements of the periodic table
of the elements in a quite logical order based on their physics."

Niels Bohr's published in a series of three papers in the summer and fall of

The fact of the matter is that
the Periodic Table is arranged
based on protons in nuclei,
and not on electron orbits.

It is sad that many science web site authors
are ignorant
or have a race/religion/nationality bias.


"The periodic table is a tabular arrangement of the chemical elements,
organized on the basis of their atomic numbers.."


"In chemistry and physics,
the atomic number (also known as the proton number)
is the number of protons found in the nucleus of an atom.."

As can be seen,
the Physics Today article
was just another effort by the Khazar Gang
to claim credit for the works of others.

And as can be seen,
my pal Sammy has been
sporadically canceling his own posts.

THIMK before you post Sammy.


Tom Potter


Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.