Relativistic Dynamics in Basic Chemistry

This paper revisits the historical sequence in which some of the major developments of 20th-century physics occurred, and explores how theories could have turned out differently, if the sequence of developments had been different. It shows how a delay in founding special relativity theory until after (1) at least one puzzling problem in electromagnetic theory could be acknowledged, and (2) sat least some of the experimental observations pertinent to the development of quantum mechanics had become well known, could have resulted in a larger theory that covers both domains in a manner quite different from that of any of the theories we use today. The revised theory dispenses with a separate postulate introducing Planck’s constant h, identifying instead a physical mechanism that implies the constant. Some important aspects of quantum chemistry then follow.

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

References

  1. 1.

    A. Einstein, “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies” (1905) and “On the Relativity Principle and the Conclusions Drawn from it” (1907), as translated in The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Vol 2, 140–171 & 252–311 (Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ, 1989).

  2. 2.

    A. Liènard, “Champ Electrique et Magnétique produit par une Charge Electrique Concentrée en un Point et Animée d’un Movement Quelconque”, L’Eclairage Electrique XVI (27) 5–14, (28) 53–59, (29) 106–112 (1898).

  3. 3.

    E. Wiechert, “Elektrodynamische Elementargesetze”, Archives Néerlandesises des Sciences Exactes et Naturelles série II, Tome IV (1901).

  4. 4.

    J. D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, 1st edn., (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1962), Chap. 14.

  5. 5.

    C. K. Whitney, 1980’s series of papers in Hadronic J. 10, 91–93 (1987); 10, 289–290 (1987); 11, 101–107 (1988); 11, 147–151 (1988); 11, 257–261 (1988); 12, 297–300 (1989).

  6. 6.

    Moon P., Spencer D.E. (1956). Phil. Sci. 23: 216–229

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Moon P., Spencer D.E., Moon E.E. (1990). Phys. Essays 3: 421–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Spencer D.E. (2005). Infinite Energy 11(63): 39–46

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    C. K. Whitney, Hadronic J. 29(1), entire issue (2006a); Infinite Energy 12(69), 25–33 (2006b).

  10. 10.

    L. H. Thomas, “The Kinematics of an Electron with an Axis”, The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Phil. Mag. and J. Sci. seventh series, 1–22 (1927).

  11. 11.

    C. K. Whitney, “Do Atoms Really Have ‘States’?,” in 2002 PIRT Proceedings (Physical Interpretations of Relativity Theory); “Planck’s Constant: a ‘yin/yang Balance’,” in 2005 ANPA Proceedings (Alternative Natural Philosophy Association).

  12. 12.

    H. Le Cornec, “The Distribution of Atomic Ionization Potentials Reveals an Unexpected Periodic Table,” http://preprint.chemweb.com/ physchem/0201007 (uploaded 9 January 2002 at 22.53 GMT).

  13. 13.

    D. M. P. Mingos, Essential Trends in Inorganic Chemistry (Oxford University Press, New York, 1998), p. 10.

  14. 14.

    S. Siekierski and J. Burgess, Concise Chemistry of the Elements (Horwood Publishing Series in Chemical Science, Horwood, Chichester, 2002).

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cynthia Kolb Whitney.

Additional information

Editor, Galilean Electrodynamics, Proceedings of the Natural Philosophy Alliance; Visiting Industry Professor, Tufts University, retired

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Whitney, C.K. Relativistic Dynamics in Basic Chemistry. Found Phys 37, 788–812 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-007-9124-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • relativistic dynamics
  • electrodynamics
  • quantum mechanics of atoms
  • ionization potentials