Comment on “Austere quantum mechanics as a reductive basis for chemistry”

Hinne Hettema

Jeremy I. Musher

Ryan Michael Miller

Abstract The debate between ontological reductionists and emergentists in chemistry has revolved around quantum mechanics. What Franklin and Seifert (BJPS 2020) add to the long-running dispute is an attention to the measurement problem. They contend that all three realist interpretations of the quantum formalism capable of resolving the measurement problem also obviate any need for chemical emergence. I push their argument further, arguing that the realist interpretations of quantum mechanics actually subvert the basis for reduction as well, by undercutting the idea that fundamental physical particles are actual parts of molecules. With both reduction and traditional synchronic emergence pictures ruled out, the only option for realists about quantum chemistry is strong Thomistic emergence.

Thomas Freeman Babson

N. J. B. Green

Quantum Mechanics 1 starts from the basis that quantum mechanics is of central importance in chemistry. To understand matter and its chemical transformation it is necessary to take a microscopic view connecting experimental observation to the properties of constituent molecules. However, at this microscopic level, atoms and sub-atomic particles do not obey the classical laws of mechanics that pertain to the everyday macroscopic world. They obey the laws of quantum mechanics. This text explains the fundamentals of quantum mechanics from the point of view of chemistry; describes areas of chemistry where quantum mechanics is most important; and shows how quantum mechanics is applied to chemical problems. To this end, the book is divided into two parts: the first deals with the foundations of quantum mechanics (concentrating on exactly soluble problems and the reduction of complicated problems to simple foundations) and the second is a tool kit for applying quantum mechanics to chemical problems (thus concentrating on approximate methods).

Eric R. Scerri, HYLE Publications

I claim that the question of whether chemistry is reduced to quantum mechanics is more ambiguous and multi-faceted than generally supposed. For example, chemistry appears to be both reduced and not reduced at the same time depending on the perspective that one adopts. Similarly, I argue that some conceptual issues in quantum mechanics are ambiguous and can only be laid to rest by embracing paradox and ambiguity rather than regarding them as obstacles to be overcome. Recent work in the reduction of chemistry is also reviewed, including discussions of the ontological reduction of chemistry and the question of the emergence of chemistry from physics.