Most contemporary chemists consider quantum mechanics to be the foundational theory of their discipline, although few of the calculations that a strict reduction would seem to require have ever been produced. In this essay I discuss contemporary algebraic and diagrammatic representations of molecular systems derived from quantum mechanical models, specifically configuration interaction wavefunctions for ab initio calculations and molecular orbital energy diagrams. My aim is to suggest that recent dissatisfaction with reductive accounts of chemical theory may stem from both the inability of standard accounts of reduction to incorporate the diverse forms of representation found in chemical practice and our philosophical predilection to analyze all connections between theories in terms of logical reduction.
Most contemporary chemists consider quantum mechanics to be the foundational theory of their discipline, although few of the calculations that a strict reduction would seem to require have ever been produced. In this essay I discuss contemporary algebraic and diagrammatic representations of molecular systems derived from quantum mechanical models, specifically configuration interaction wavefunctions for ab initio calculations and molecular orbital energy diagrams. My aim is to suggest that recent dissatisfaction with reductive accounts of chemical theory may stem from both the inability of standard accounts of reduction to incorporate the diverse forms of representation found in chemical practice and our philosophical predilection to analyze all connections between theories in terms of logical reduction.
The field of quantum chemistry is concerned with the modelling and simulation of the behaviour of molecular systems on the basis of the fundamental equations of quantum mechanics. Since these equations exhibit an extreme case of the curse of dimensionality (the Schrödinger equation for N electrons being a partial differential equation on \mathbb R^{3N} ), the quantum-chemical simulation of even moderate-size molecules already requires highly sophisticated model-reduction, approximation, and simulation techniques. The workshop brought together selected quantum chemists and physicists, and the growing community of mathematicians working in the area, to report and discuss recent advances on topics such as coupled-cluster theory, direct approximation schemes in full configuration-interaction (FCI) theory, interacting Green’s functions, foundations and computational aspects of density-functional theory (DFT), low-rank tensor methods, quantum chemistry in the presence of a strong magnetic field, and multiscale coupling of quantum simulations.
Abstract The question of whether chemical structure is reducible to Everettian Quantum Mechanics (EQM) should be of interest to philosophers of chemistry and philosophers of physics alike. Among the three realist interpretations of quantum mechanics, EQM resolves the measurement problem by claiming that measurements (now interpreted as instances of decoherence) have indeterminate outcomes absolutely speaking, but determinate outcomes relative to emergent worlds—Maudlin (Topoi, 14:7-15, 1995). Philosophers who wish to be sensitive to the practice of quantum chemistry e.g. Scerri (The changing views of a philosopher of chemistry on the question of reduction, 2016) should be interested in EQM because Franklin and Seifert (J. Philos. Sci, 2020) claim that resolving the measurement problem also resolves the reducibility of chemical structure, and EQM is the interpretation which involves no mathematical structure beyond that used by practicing scientists. Philosophers interested in the quantum interpretation debate should be interested in the reducibility of chemistry because chemical structure is precisely the kind of determinate three-dimensional fact which EQM should be able to ground if it is to be empirically coherent—see Allori (Quantum Rep, 5:80-101, 2023). The prospects for reduction of chemical structure are poor if it cannot succeed in EQM; the prospects for EQM as a guide to ontology are poor if it cannot reduce chemical structure. Unfortunately for proponents of chemical reduction and EQM, there are three serious barriers to the reduction of chemistry to EQM. The first concern is that quantum treatments of chemical structure rely on the Born-Oppenheimer approximation, which holds nuclear locations fixed while minimizing the energy of the electronic configuration—Hendry (Philosophical Perspectives in Quantum Chemistry, 147-172, 2022), but this approximation is not licensed by EQM. The Born-Oppenheimer approximation relies on nuclei and molecular orbitals being simultaneously present, but in the three-dimensional ontology following from the Everett interpretation these only emerge at different energy scales and are not simultaneously present—Miller (Found. Chem, 25:405-417, 2023). The second concern is that the emergent worlds of EQM are supposed to be decoherent at the macro-scale—Wilson (The Nature of Contingency: Quantum Physics as Modal Realism 2020), but the recent development of superchemistry suggests that chemical reactions can occur in coherent states—Zhang et al. (Nat. Phys, 1-5, 2023). The third concern is that emergent worlds are only pragmatic pseudo-processes—Wallace (The Emergent Multiverse: Quantum Theory According to the Everett Interpretation, 2012b), but this means EQM trades realist physics for mere instrumentalism about chemistry. Absent a commitment to chemical realism, reduction is an empty promise. The prospects for reduction of chemical structure to EQM are therefore poor.
Abstract Quantum mechanical and classical aspects are of equal importance in chemistry, and theoretical chemistry must be able to deal with this situation. Classical quantities with which a chemist has to deal include, for example, the temperature and the chemical potential of a substance, and chirality, knot‐type and tertiary structures of molecules. Classical concepts of this type are no more consequences of traditional quantum chemistry than is the theory of complex chemical processes (for example adsorption, heterogeneous catalysis) and macroscopic systems. Algebraic quantum mechanics affords a general framework for the discussion of classical quantities and large systems. There are other independent approaches for the theoretical treatment of chemical problems; these can be summarized by using the keywords “fractals”, “chaotic motion”, “quasicrystals” and “knot theory”. The relationships between these four research topics and their connection with algebraic quantum mechanics, as well as their importance for theoretical chemistry, were discussed at a NATO Workshop in 1987 (see Ref. [1]). In an extended theoretical chemistry, the notion of “molecules” will not play a role as central as it does in quantum chemistry. In the theory of large systems in particular, the introduction of complementary approaches appears to be appropriate; the term “molecule” as used by the chemist does not appear either in the description of disordered systems by means of fractals or in the thermodynamic limit of algebraic statistical mechanics.
The concept of atomic and molecular orbitals has been a fundamental pillar in modern chemistry, shedding light on the structures and reactivity of chemical compounds. This article examines the evolution and significance of orbital theory, its applications in chemistry, and the ongoing debate about the existence of orbitals from both physics and chemistry perspectives. Philosophical aspects related to the ontology of orbitals are explored, emphasizing the complex interplay between mathematical abstractions and tangible reality. The multifaceted nature of orbitals, their role in quantum mechanics, and their implications for understanding the quantum realm are discussed. While the debate surrounding the ontological status of orbitals remains ongoing, it highlights the profound nature of inquiries into the fundamental essence of reality. This exploration underscores the significance of continuous research and discourse in advancing our understanding of these fundamental constituents of the quantum world.
This introductory chapter provides an overview of quantum mechanics, which is a subject of central importance in chemistry, and is by nature a mathematical theory. The chemist's approach to the understanding of matter and its chemical transformations is to take a microscopic view, connecting experimental observation with the properties of constituent molecules. However, at the microscopic level, atoms, molecules, and their constituent particles do not obey the familiar laws of mechanics that pertain to the everyday macroscopic world. For example, the existence of molecular line spectra indicates that molecules can be found only at certain well-defined energies, unlike objects at our own scale whose energy appears to be continuously variable. This book aims to explain the fundamentals of quantum mechanics from the point of view of chemistry; describe the areas of chemistry where quantum mechanics is most important; and show how quantum mechanics is applied to chemical problems.