Pauling's defence of bent-equivalent bonds: A view of evolving explanatory demands in modern chemistry

Julia R. Bursten

doi:10.1080/00033790.2011.609074

Pauling's defence of bent-equivalent bonds: A view of evolving explanatory demands in modern chemistry

Julia R. Bursten

Producción científica: Review article › revisión exhaustiva

2 Citas (Scopus)

Resumen

Linus Pauling played a key role in creating valence-bond theory, one of two competing theories of the chemical bond that appeared in the first half of the 20th century. While the chemical community preferred his theory over molecular-orbital theory for a number of years, valence-bond theory began to fall into disuse during the 1950s. This shift in the chemical community's perception of Pauling's theory motivated Pauling to defend the theory, and he did so in a peculiar way. Rather than publishing a defence of the full theory in leading journals of the day, Pauling published a defence of a particular model of the double bond predicted by the theory in a revised edition of his famous textbook, The Nature of the Chemical Bond. This paper explores that peculiar choice by considering both the circumstances that brought about the defence and the mathematical apparatus Pauling employed, using new discoveries from the Ava Helen and Linus Pauling Papers archive.

Idioma original	English
Páginas (desde-hasta)	69-90
Número de páginas	22
Publicación	Annals of Science
Volumen	69
N.º	1
DOI	https://doi.org/10.1080/00033790.2011.609074
Estado	Published - ene 1 2012

Nota bibliográfica

Funding Information:
This paper was made possible by the generosity of Oregon State University Special Collections and the Peter and Judith Freeman Fund. Special thanks to Clifford Mead and the staff of Special Collections for their help navigating Pauling’s extensive archives; to John Norton, Benjamin Goldberg, Yoichi Ishida, and Thomas Pashby for their patient revisions and invaluable advice; and to two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments. This paper is dedicated to my father, Bruce Bursten.

Copyright:
Copyright 2012 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

Financiación

This paper was made possible by the generosity of Oregon State University Special Collections and the Peter and Judith Freeman Fund. Special thanks to Clifford Mead and the staff of Special Collections for their help navigating Pauling’s extensive archives; to John Norton, Benjamin Goldberg, Yoichi Ishida, and Thomas Pashby for their patient revisions and invaluable advice; and to two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments. This paper is dedicated to my father, Bruce Bursten.

Financiadores
Oregon State University

ASJC Scopus subject areas

History and Philosophy of Science

Acceder al documento

10.1080/00033790.2011.609074

Otros archivos y enlaces

Citar esto

@article{89ce8d7b44854956936ab309457faf11,

title = "Pauling's defence of bent-equivalent bonds: A view of evolving explanatory demands in modern chemistry",

abstract = "Linus Pauling played a key role in creating valence-bond theory, one of two competing theories of the chemical bond that appeared in the first half of the 20th century. While the chemical community preferred his theory over molecular-orbital theory for a number of years, valence-bond theory began to fall into disuse during the 1950s. This shift in the chemical community's perception of Pauling's theory motivated Pauling to defend the theory, and he did so in a peculiar way. Rather than publishing a defence of the full theory in leading journals of the day, Pauling published a defence of a particular model of the double bond predicted by the theory in a revised edition of his famous textbook, The Nature of the Chemical Bond. This paper explores that peculiar choice by considering both the circumstances that brought about the defence and the mathematical apparatus Pauling employed, using new discoveries from the Ava Helen and Linus Pauling Papers archive.",

author = "Bursten, \{Julia R.\}",

note = "Funding Information: This paper was made possible by the generosity of Oregon State University Special Collections and the Peter and Judith Freeman Fund. Special thanks to Clifford Mead and the staff of Special Collections for their help navigating Pauling{\textquoteright}s extensive archives; to John Norton, Benjamin Goldberg, Yoichi Ishida, and Thomas Pashby for their patient revisions and invaluable advice; and to two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments. This paper is dedicated to my father, Bruce Bursten. Copyright: Copyright 2012 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.",

year = "2012",

month = jan,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1080/00033790.2011.609074",

language = "English",

volume = "69",

pages = "69--90",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pauling's defence of bent-equivalent bonds

T2 - A view of evolving explanatory demands in modern chemistry

AU - Bursten, Julia R.

N1 - Funding Information: This paper was made possible by the generosity of Oregon State University Special Collections and the Peter and Judith Freeman Fund. Special thanks to Clifford Mead and the staff of Special Collections for their help navigating Pauling’s extensive archives; to John Norton, Benjamin Goldberg, Yoichi Ishida, and Thomas Pashby for their patient revisions and invaluable advice; and to two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments. This paper is dedicated to my father, Bruce Bursten. Copyright: Copyright 2012 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

PY - 2012/1/1

Y1 - 2012/1/1

N2 - Linus Pauling played a key role in creating valence-bond theory, one of two competing theories of the chemical bond that appeared in the first half of the 20th century. While the chemical community preferred his theory over molecular-orbital theory for a number of years, valence-bond theory began to fall into disuse during the 1950s. This shift in the chemical community's perception of Pauling's theory motivated Pauling to defend the theory, and he did so in a peculiar way. Rather than publishing a defence of the full theory in leading journals of the day, Pauling published a defence of a particular model of the double bond predicted by the theory in a revised edition of his famous textbook, The Nature of the Chemical Bond. This paper explores that peculiar choice by considering both the circumstances that brought about the defence and the mathematical apparatus Pauling employed, using new discoveries from the Ava Helen and Linus Pauling Papers archive.

AB - Linus Pauling played a key role in creating valence-bond theory, one of two competing theories of the chemical bond that appeared in the first half of the 20th century. While the chemical community preferred his theory over molecular-orbital theory for a number of years, valence-bond theory began to fall into disuse during the 1950s. This shift in the chemical community's perception of Pauling's theory motivated Pauling to defend the theory, and he did so in a peculiar way. Rather than publishing a defence of the full theory in leading journals of the day, Pauling published a defence of a particular model of the double bond predicted by the theory in a revised edition of his famous textbook, The Nature of the Chemical Bond. This paper explores that peculiar choice by considering both the circumstances that brought about the defence and the mathematical apparatus Pauling employed, using new discoveries from the Ava Helen and Linus Pauling Papers archive.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84856934152

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84856934152#tab=citedBy

U2 - 10.1080/00033790.2011.609074

DO - 10.1080/00033790.2011.609074

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:84856934152

SN - 0003-3790

VL - 69

SP - 69

EP - 90

JO - Annals of Science

JF - Annals of Science

IS - 1

ER -

Pauling's defence of bent-equivalent bonds: A view of evolving explanatory demands in modern chemistry

Resumen

Nota bibliográfica

Financiación

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Acceder al documento

Otros archivos y enlaces

Huella

Citar esto