Skip to main content
Log in

Another scientific practice separating chemistry from physics: thought experiments

  • Published:
Foundations of Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Thought experiments in the history of science display a striking asymmetry between chemistry and physics, namely that chemistry seems to lack well-known examples, whereas physics presents many famous examples. This asymmetry, I argue, is not independent data concerning the chemistry/physics distinction. The laws of chemistry such as the periodic table are incurably special, in that they make testable predictions only for a very restricted range of physical conditions in the universe which are necessarily conditioned by the contingences of chemical investigation. The argument depends on how ‚thought experiment’ is construed. Here, several recent accounts of thought experiments are surveyed to help formulate what I call ‚crucial’ thought experiments. These have a historical role in helping to judge between hypotheses in physics, but are not helpful in chemistry past or present.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • A. Aspect, P. Grangier and G. Roger. Experimental Realization of Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm Gedanken experiment: A New Violation of Bell's Inequalities. Physical Review Letters 49: 91–94, 1982

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown J.R. (1991). The Laboratory of the Mind: Thought Experiments in the Natural Sciences. New York, Routledge

    Google Scholar 

  • A. Einstein, B. Podolsky and N. Rosen. Can Quantum–Mecanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete? Physical Review 47: 777–780, 1935

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedrich B. (2004). Hasn’t it? A Commentary on Eric Scerri’s paper “Has Quantum Mechanics Explained the Periodic Table?”, now published under the title “Just HowAb Initio is Ab Initio Quantum Chemistry?’’. Foundations of Chemistry 6: 117–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gendler T.S. (1998). Galileo and the Indispensability of Scientific Thought Experiments. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49: 397–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norton J.D. (1996). Are Thought Experiments Just What You Thought? Canadian Journal of Chemistry 26: 333–366

    Google Scholar 

  • Scerri E. (2004). Just How Ab Initio is Ab Initio Quantum Chemistry? Foundations of Chemistry 6: 93–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • M.S. Silberburg. Chemistry: The Molecular Nature of Matter and Change, 2nd edn. Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 2000.

  • Sorensen R. (1992). Thought Experiments. New York, Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Vančik H. (1999). Opus Magnum: An Outline for the Philosophy of Chemistry. Foundations of Chemistry 1: 241–256

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkes K. (1992). Real People: Personal Identity without Thought Experiments. Toronto, Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. J. Snooks.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Snooks, R.J. Another scientific practice separating chemistry from physics: thought experiments. Found Chem 8, 255–270 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10698-006-9019-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10698-006-9019-5

Keywords

Navigation