
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
For more than a century, chemistry textbooks have promoted a flawed theory by incorporating faked drawings of benzene rings with three double bonds. If benzene had double bonds like cyclohexene, it should be easy to add halogens and other reagents across the double bonds. But no such thing happens. Some textbooks show benzene rings with little circles inside them instead of double bonds. This equivocation is to be expected because Benzenism is only a theory, and a theory in crisis at that. Nevertheless, chemistry teachers continue to teach Benzenism as a fact, despite plenty of evidence that refutes it. Look around in the chemistry literature. All you see are single bonds, double bonds and triple bonds, all of which are fixed kinds. Where are the transitionals? What good is half a bond? Fortunately, the Aromaticity Institute has come up with an alternative to Benzenism, by recognizing that the electron system in benzene and other aromatic compounds exhibits irreducible simplicity. Remove any of several constraints, like cyclic structure and 2n+2 pi electrons, and the ability to avoid addition reactions, cannot exist. Thus Intelligent Electron Theory was developed to explain the irreducible simplicity that naturalistic theories, such as Benzenism, cannot. As an analogy, if one sees human footprints on a beach, one rightly concludes that they were made by humans walking. Naturalistic explanations, such as "natural selection of wind and tide operating on random changes to sand patterns" cannot explain the footprints. Similarly, the irreducible simplicity of a benzene ring's refusal to add reagents across its double bonds can only be explained by pi electrons that anticipate the reagent and delocalize to prevent addition. There have been heroic efforts to save the sinking ship of Benzenism, of course, with high-tech gear like molecular orbital theory. But all this does is tack on ad-hoc hypotheses and "just-so" stories. Contrary to popular misrepresentation, Intelligent Electron Theory does explain facts and makes predictions. If aromatic pi electrons know that there are 2n+2 of them in a cyclic organic compound, they delocalize to prevent reagent addition. A prediction was fulfilled when it was observed that chlorine cannot be added to biphenyl. Reacting chlorine with biphenyl only produces a messy mixture of substitution products called PCBs. Benzenists have reacted with knee-jerk opposition to Intelligent Electron Theory because, while one side of the proverbial elephant is labeled "intelligent electrons," the other side might be labeled "free will." Moral relativists cannot bear the fact that electrons, and humans, have free will, and are thus responsible for their actions. It's no surprise that morally relativistic naturalists will do whatever it takes to defend the dogma of Benzenism. Benzenists complain that Intelligent Electron Theory does not have a solid record of peer-reviewed publications. But Intelligent Electron Theory is relatively recent theory. It's not fair to demand an extensive publication record, especially since Intelligent Electron theorists are shut out by the Benzenist orthodoxy. All Intelligent Electron theorists want is equal time in science class for their theory along side Benzenism, so that open-minded students, who have not yet been indoctrinated into the religion of Benzenism, can compare the two theories decide for themselves which is the true explanation.
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |