Clark, List: > On Dec 6, 2016, at 3:55 PM, Clark Goble <[email protected]> wrote: > > Theoretical chemists are physicists. <grin>
As you probably expect, my views of “theoretical chemists” are radically different. <grin> >From roughly 1913 (Rutherford/Moseley papers on the structure of atoms) until >roughly 1970, your assertion is reasonable in that the physics community >provided the rational for chemical reasoning. The simplest theories of >chemistry were confirmed, the perplexity of chemical reasoning was not >addressed by physical theory, principally because electric field theory is >mathematically intractable for anything except the simplest molecules. >From the 1970s onward (really, Watson and Crick, 1953), theoretical chemistry >has looked upward to the nature of man and consciousness, or better stated, >biologists have been the theoreticians of chemistry. The outcome of such >chemical theories have been the mapping of Human Genome and the Obama >administration’s “Precision medicine” as well as many many new therapies. Of course, quantum chemistry remains an active field, but it is now well-aged and in routine usage in both academic and industrial chemistry and biology. Cheers jerry
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
