Abstract
In the context of the discussion about idealizations, the present chapter aims at two different but complementary objectives. Firstly, we will analyze different kinds of classifications of idealizations that the philosophical literature has proposed during the last decades. The purpose of this review is not merely analytical but mainly programmatic. This means that the goal is not pointing out that a certain classification is incomplete or insufficient, but rather arguing that, in general, an important feature of idealizations has not been considered. Secondly, we will consider the Born-Oppenheimer approximation (BOA); we will argue that, strictly speaking, it is an idealization. Based on the previous review of the kinds of classifications recently proposed, we will consider what kind of idealization the BOA is. A detailed analysis of this case will allow us to show the limits of the traditional classifications and, fundamentally, to introduce a new classificatory criterion that we consider indispensable to understand the scope and the aspiration of quantum theory in chemical practice.
The names of the authors have been arranged alphabetically, so the order does not indicate priority.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
A target system is that part or aspect of the world the model is concerned about.
- 2.
- 3.
For a detailed discussion regarding the history of the BOA, see Hettema, 2012.
- 4.
According to Norton (2012), this strategy is not successful in all cases: there are some approximations that cannot be conceived as idealizations.
- 5.
References
Accorinti, H., & Martínez González, J. C. (2016). Acerca de la independencia de los modelos respecto de las teorías: un caso de la química cuántica. Theoria, 31, 225–245.
Batterman, R. (1995). Theories between theories: asymptotic limiting intertheoretic relations. Synthese, 103, 171–201.
Bueno, O. (1997). Empirical adequacy: A partial structures account. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 28, 585–610.
Born, M., & Oppenheimer, J. (1927). Zur Quantentheorie der Molekeln. Annalen der Physik, 84, 457–484.
Brown, B. (1990). How to be realistic about inconsistency in science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 21, 281–294.
Cartwright, N. (1983). How the laws of physics lie. Clarendon Press.
Chang, H. (2015). Reductionism and the relation between chemistry and physics. In T. Arabatzis, J. Renn, & A. Simoes (Eds.), Relocating the history of science: Essays in honor of Kostas Gavroglu (pp. 193–210). Springer.
da Costa, N., & French, S. (1990). The model-theoretic approach in the philosophy of science. Philosophy of Science, 57, 248–265.
da Costa, N., & French, S. (2003). Science and partial truth: A unitary approach to models and scientific reasoning. Oxford University Press.
Fernández González, M. (2013). Idealization in chemistry: Pure substance and laboratory product. Science and Education, 22, 1723–1740.
Fortin, S., & Lombardi, O. (2021). Is the problem of molecular structure just the quantum measurement problem? Foundations of Chemistry. online first.
Frigg, R. (2002). Models and representation: why structures are not enough. In Measurement in physics and economics project discussion paper series (DP MEAS 25/02) (pp. 1–42). London School of Economics.
Frigg, R. (2006). Scientific representation and the semantic view of theories. Theoria, 55, 46–65.
Frigg, R., & Hartmann, S. (2020). Models in science. In E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2020 Edition), URL https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/models-science/
Frigg, R., & Nguyen, J. (2020). Modelling nature: An opinionated introduction to scientific representation. Springer.
Hartmann, S. (1998). Idealization in quantum field theory. Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, 63, 99–112.
Hendry, R. F. (2010). Ontological reduction and molecular structure. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 41, 183–191.
Hettema, H. (2012). Reducing chemistry to physics. Limits, models, consecuences. University of Groningen.
Jones, M. R. (2005). Idealization and abstraction: A framework. In M. R. Jones & N. Cartwright (Eds.), Idealization XII: Correcting the model (pp. 173–217). Rodopi.
Knuuttila, T. (2008). Representation, idealization, and fiction in economics: From the assumptions issue to the epistemology of modeling. In M. Suárez (Ed.), Fictions in science: Philosophical essays on modeling and idealization (pp. 205–231). Routledge.
Liu, C. (1999). Approximation, idealization, and laws of nature. Synthese, 118, 229–256.
Lombardi, O., & Castagnino, M. (2010). Matters are not so clear on the physical side. Foundations of Chemistry, 12, 159–166.
Lombardi, O., & Labarca, M. (2005). Los enfoques de Boltzmann y de Gibbs frente al problema de la irreversibilidad. Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía, 37, 39–81.
Lombardi, O., & Martínez González, J. C. (2012). Entre mecánica cuántica y estructuras químicas: ¿a qué refiere la química cuántica? Scientiae Studia, 10, 649–670.
Luczak, J. (2017). Talk about toy models. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 57, 1–7.
Martínez González, J. C. (2019). The problem of optical isomerism and the interpretation of quantum mechanics. Foundations of Chemistry, 21, 97–107.
McMullin, E. (1985). Galilean idealization. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 16, 247–273.
Meheus, J. (2002). Inconsistency on science. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Morrison, M. (2005). Approximating the real: The role of idealizations in physical theory. In M. R. Jones & N. Cartwright (Eds.), Idealization XII: Correcting the model (pp. 145–172). Rodopi.
Moulines, C. U., & Straub, R. (1994). Approximation and idealization from the structuralist point of view. In M. Kuokkanen (Ed.), Idealization VII: Structuralism, idealization and approximation (pp. 25–48). Rodopi.
Norton, J. (2012). Approximation and idealization: Why the difference matters. Philosophy of Science, 79, 207–232.
Primas, H. (1994). Hierarchic quantum descriptions and their associated ontologies. In K. V. Laurikainen, C. Montonen, & K. Sunnarborg (Eds.), Symposium on the foundations of modern physics (pp. 210–220). Editions Frontières.
Rott, H. (1989). Approximation versus idealization: The Kepler-Newton case. Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, 17, 101–124.
Suárez, M. (2003). Scientific representation: Against similarity and isomorphism. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 17, 225–244.
Sutcliffe, B. T., & Woolley, R. G. (2012). On the quantum theory of molecules. The Journal of Chemical Physics, 137, 22A544.
Tobin, E. (2013). Chemical laws, idealization, and approximation. Science and Education, 22, 1581–1592.
Vickers, P. (2008). Bohr’s theory of the atom: Content, closure and consistency. preprint (philsci- archive.pitt.edu/4005).
Vickers, P. (2009). Can partial structures accommodate inconsistent science? Principia: An International Journal of Epistemology, 13, 133–250.
Vickers, P. (2013). Understanding inconsistent science. OUP.
Villaveces, J., & Daza, E. (1990). On the topological approach to the concept of chemical structure. International Journal of Quantum Chemistry, 24, 97–106.
Weisberg, M. (2013). Simulation and similarity. Oxford University Press.
Winsberg, E. (2006). Models of success versus the success of models: Reliability without truth. Synthese, 152, 1–19.
Woolley, R. G. (1978). Must a molecule have a shape? Journal of the American Chemical Society, 100, 1073–1078.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Accorinti, H.L., González, J.C.M. (2022). Models and Idealizations in Quantum Chemistry: The Case of the Born-Oppenheimer Approximation. In: Lombardi, O., Martínez González, J.C., Fortin, S. (eds) Philosophical Perspectives in Quantum Chemistry. Synthese Library, vol 461. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98373-4_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98373-4_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-98372-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-98373-4
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)