As a senior one student, it is really commendable that you can ask such profound questions. You are ahead of the times.

It is true that many mathematical theorems and formulas are obtained from the study of physics, especially some advanced mathematical theorems and formulas are obtained from the study of advanced physics; On the contrary, the research and application of advanced mathematics promoted physics; All natural sciences and economics are closely related to mathematics, which is the foundation of other natural sciences and economics.

Discussion and discussion on the relationship between chemistry, physics and mathematics-

/p/ 198484 19 17

Talking about the relationship between mathematics, physics and chemistry late at night

Question 2: Physical manifestations of chemical reactions

Speaking of which, there are many children's papers that like to find fault. They have a theory: "All chemical reactions are essentially interactions between particles, so they can be explained by physics." This is true in theory, but no one has studied why hydrogen and oxygen get water through quantum physics. It is much easier to express physics in mathematics. What's the problem?

Because mathematics, physics and chemistry are three different languages, there must be a problem of "translation" in expression. If the two languages have similar grammatical structures and vocabulary, the translation between them will be easier-for example, the translation between French and Spanish is basically not a problem. But if the grammar of the two languages is very different, then translation will be very difficult-for example, Chinese and English; Moreover, the more serious problem here is that translation at this time sometimes makes the result more complicated than the original, and even inevitably changes some delicate expressions of the original.

Fortunately, both mathematics and physics have formulaic grammatical structures, so mathematics is not only very easy to express physics, but also very natural-can you imagine a written law of physics without mathematical expression?

Unfortunately, the grammatical structures of chemistry and physics are completely different. Although the translation between them is feasible in theory, today's translators, no matter how clever they are, can't translate the simplest equation-there may be such translators in the future, but is such translation really of practical value? When physicists spend a month accurately calculating the product of a reaction, chemists have spent a week experimenting and analyzing to understand the product.

In this case, the chemical reaction expressed by the laws of physics has no practical significance.

So chemistry can never be classified under physics. Why? Whether the two disciplines are separated or merged, the ultimate goal is to make research simpler-that is, to reduce "energy" as much as possible. When chemistry is merged by physics, it makes the research of chemistry more entangled. What is the value of such a merger?

Question 3: Discipline Breakthrough and Great Spirit

Before trying to understand the above two questions, the bird was also confused about where the final direction of chemical breakthrough was. Indeed, physical electromagnetists can use Maxwell's equations to highly summarize electromagnetism-the result is simple and beautiful. What about chemistry? It seems that apart from thermodynamics and kinetics, there is really no mathematical expression that can sum up a branch of chemistry.

This theory has been mentioned many times in chemistry, and the result of the debate among the holders of this theory is that there will be no essential breakthrough in chemistry.

But why must there be a mathematical expression? Because the mathematical expression of physics is highly concise, it has caused various breakthroughs? Because dolphins can breathe underwater after years of evolution as mammals, the ultimate goal of human evolution as mammals is to breathe underwater?

This is obviously unreliable, right? Dolphins and humans are usually mammals, but the similarity in animal taxonomy ends here. After that, they took a completely different evolutionary path, so they have completely different characteristics.

As mentioned earlier, physics and chemistry are two languages that express nature, and their grammatical structures are completely different. This difference is crucial.

Let's go back to the familiar human natural language and see what this difference means. Je t'aimerai is a French sentence, which is the representative of many inflectional words in the west. In the most conspicuous verb aimerai, the first three letters aim have already expressed the meaning of the verb itself-love-so what is Al? This structure only means that the verb will happen in the future, the verb will be issued in the first person singular, and the verb will not be completed. You don't need any auxiliary words. This sentence only expresses the meaning of the future through the change of the verb itself. This is conciseness-but this conciseness is only for people who know French. You can't imagine a person who doesn't know French at all. You can know this sentence is the future tense by looking it up in the dictionary. In fact, you can't find it in the dictionary. What about Chinese? I will love you in the future. Pay attention to the word "future" here-although the verbs in the sentence have no suffix changes, they still express the meaning of the future tense through time words. Isn't this another kind of conciseness-although a word is added, it allows language beginners to determine the meaning of sentences through simple dictionary lookup activities.

In contrast, physics is more like the former-all the laws of physics are composed of a very abstract code. You should not only understand the meaning of each letter of this code-whether it is magnetic induction intensity or electric field intensity, but also understand what kind of grammar this code is composed of-whether it is dot product or cross product or something else. There is no doubt that chemistry is more like the latter-there is no wonderful grammar, but it expresses profound connotations with simple pictures and arrows. For example, what do you need to do to understand the mechanism of an organic reaction? Just look at the direction of the arrow on the picture.

What does this difference mean? It means that physics will have a strict mathematical expression-which leads to the famous Maxwell equations, Schrodinger equations, Newtonian mechanics and relativity. However, chemistry is rarely expressed by mathematics, and in most cases it is a mechanism diagram, which gives people the illusion that chemistry is not physically exquisite-but how many people know that the substitution of halogenated hydrocarbons, aldol condensation and other reactions were discovered decades before the nucleophilic mechanism was put forward, and the nucleophilic mechanism is a highly concise summary of these reactions-what is the essential difference between this and Maxwell's equations in line with electromagnetic theory?

The breakthrough direction of physics lies in finding more mathematical expressions to improve one's theory. The breakthrough direction of chemistry is to find more mechanism diagrams to improve our own theory (although there seems to be no simple general mechanism in elemental chemistry now, birds believe there is, but they have not found it, and once they find it, it will be earth-shattering). Just two different grammars.

Many people only look at the surface, extremely superficial, and forcibly express their grand views, without seeing too many deep-seated things.

Many things in chemistry are independent and do not depend on others. If black chemistry is because the chemistry part is based on other disciplines, really hehe.

This thing, high school students especially like to discuss, so do junior undergraduates. Sadly, both of them are not deeply involved in the world, not proficient in learning skills, and have never seen the profoundness of chemistry, physics, mathematics and other disciplines. The argument put forward is quite superficial and groundless.

The Schrodinger equation mentioned above is an important mathematical formula in chemistry (you need a sophomore to understand it, but you are only a freshman now).

Let's talk about several important formulas related to mathematics in high school chemistry:

PH=-lg[H+].