View Single Post
  #17  
Old June 7th 11, 08:25 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.math
Robert Higgins
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 31
Default puzzle; Benzene

On Jun 7, 11:10*am, john wrote:
On Jun 7, 6:16*am, PD wrote:

On Jun 7, 1:00*am, john wrote:


On Jun 6, 7:59*pm, (Michael Moroney)
wrote:


PD writes:
On Jun 6, 2:37=A0pm, john wrote:
When you are able to map the
pathways of the 30 individual electrons of Benzene
according to your 'model',
using AutoCad, or somesuch, please feel free
to squawk.
Actually, electrons in atoms don't have pathways per se, since
Newtonian trajectories are inconsistent with the Heisenberg
uncertainty principle. So drawing pathways, with Autocad or Maya or a
#2 Ticonderoga pencil, is not a representation of reality, John.


That's just the biggest reason why your model fails, John. *Each one of
those 30 electrons has an exact position and velocity (and thus momentum)
at any given point in time. *Quantum Mechanics states that this is
impossible.


So, you think because my model succeeds in
explaining Benzene, it has failed because
your model says it can't be done?


Drawing a path for electrons to go is not an "explanation", John. It
is not comparable to any *measurable* quantities.
What you've done is like coloring in a picture of an atom to claim
that protons are red and neutrons are blue. It explains nothing.


Well, the proponents of QM are like the
"""model""" itself: way too slippery to get a grip
on- twisting and turning away from any 'logical' explanation.

Proponents of QM actually eschew logic- braying out
their creed: "There IS no logic", they hee-haw. "Our
theory says so. No pathways, no pattern, no plan."

Unfortunately one look at Life is all it takes
for anyone with brains to see that they are wrong.

john


Forget QM for a second - your model isn't even up to the Lewis dot
theory, first employed in 1916 (to which is usually added the concept
of resonance, developed by Pauling in the 1930's).

Because your ring has certain "symmetry" (D6h for the crystal
structure), we know immediately (without QM at all) that there must be
"degeneracy" - two or more states that have exactly the same energy.
It is possible to make reasonable guesses about the order of states in
energy. Your model does none of that at all - it is just a picture.
Chemists have 1,000's of pictures, the best of which we can use to
make specific, quantitative predictions.