The periodic table of the elements is probably the most universally recognized icon of chemistry. It hangs on the walls of virtually every chemistry lecture room and laboratory in the world, and it appears in the great majority of chemistry textbooks. It is a succinct summary of our discipline. Therefore, it is appropriate that we occasionally reflect on its origins, strengths, and limitations. That is the aim of this book.
What we have here is a collection of 13 papers presented at a conference bearing the same name and held in July 2003 near Banff, Alberta, Canada. Somewhat surprisingly, this particular conference appears to have been the first international meeting on the topic since 1969, when a conference in Vatican City commemorated the centenary of Mendeleev’s version of the table. The Canadian conference was held in honor of the late mathematical chemist, Harry Wiener, and supported by members of his family. The authors, all experts in their respective fields, are from seven different countries.
The collection is unusual and eclectic. To some extent, the papers are review articles, although there are certainly original individual contributions. Among the topics covered are the discovery and development of the periodic law and the table that embodies it, alternative arrangements, periodic patterns, specific families (the lanthanides and the “superactinides”), the relationship of relativistic effects and quantum physics to elementary periodicity, and efforts to create periodic tables for subatomic particles and benzenoid hydrocarbons.
Three of the chapters are exclusively historical, two more place considerable emphasis on the historical record, and all the rest provide some historical background and context. But this is not primarily a work of historical scholarship as is, for example, van Spronsen’s monograph, The Periodic System of Chemical Elements: A History of the First Hundred Years (1). In fact, there seems to be some uncertainty about the purpose of this book. There is a good deal of redundancy, especially in the first four chapters, and little cross-reference between and among the papers. Neither is there a general index. In short, there is little evidence of careful editing that would have shortened the volume and increased its utility. To be sure, there are some common themes, for example Eric Scerri’s advocacy of a periodic table based on the primacy of n + l as a determinant of periodicity and Valentin Ostrovsky’s arguments that quantum physics supports this arrangement. But such connections are not capitalized upon. This is simply a collection of papers.
Because of the general lack of focus and coherence, what this reviewer took from this book was a pile of information bits—some quite fascinating but hardly in an ordered system such as that represented by the periodic table. For example, I learned that only 4% of the matter in the universe is the “ordinary matter” that so intrigues chemists and that 99% of that is hydrogen and helium. So the elements we worry about classifying represent only 0.04% of existing stuff. I knew that following the discovery of argon, Mendeleev speculated that the ether was composed of an undiscovered noble gas, but I didn’t know he predicted its atomic weight was 1 × 10–6 or that he proposed to call it newtonium. Paul Karol’s nine-page first-hand account of the “soap opera that emerged from competitive scientists and intrusive committees” over the naming of the transfermium elements is wonderfully juicy. For example, did you know that the proposal to call element 106 seaborgium was not the first proposal to name an element after a living person? Karol and the Oxford English Dictionary suggest that Emil le Coq de Boisbaudran named gallium after himself, not France. In any case, it was a pun of multiple meaning.
According to Krishnan Balasubramanian, the yellow color of gold and the liquid state of mercury are attributable to relativistic effects. Maurice Kibler’s efforts to classify subatomic particles in a sort of periodic table and Jerry Dias’s attempt to do the same for benzenoid hydrocarbons both struck me as quixotic. But Kibler draws an interesting parallel between what he calls the eka-process in chemistry and physics. Thus, Pauli’s prediction of the neutrino is comparable to Mendeleev’s predictions of the properties of eka-boron, eka-silicon, and eka-aluminum. One more example should suffice: Scerri’s distinction (based on Mendeleev) between “an element as a separate homogeneous substance [e.g., the liquid metal we call mercury] and as a material but invisible part of a compound [e.g., mercury in HgO].” In Mendeleev’s view, his system classified elements in the latter sense. The distinction may seem trivial, but it is not. Certainly, I get depressed when I hear of someone “taking lithium for depression”.
I’m not sure whether the acquisition of this information (and other bits and pieces) repaid the time I spent reading this book. Just about every chemist will find something of interest in this collection, but the yield is relatively low. Perhaps the most important lessons this book can teach readers of this Journal have to do, appropriately enough, with pedagogy. The periodic classification of the elements emerged primarily from the efforts of Mendeleev and Lothar Meyer to organize their textbooks. Though not perfect, the table continues to be a powerful guide as we attempt to communicate our endlessly fascinating science. But we have a responsibility to use it accurately and honestly.
我是在一個非常乾燥和寒冷的鼕夜開始閱讀這本書的,它的內容似乎也沾染瞭那種冰冷的質感。這本書的特點在於其極端的視角轉換,它似乎在刻意地拉開讀者與敘事主體之間的情感距離。書中頻繁使用“我們”、“他們”以及一個不帶感情色彩的“觀察者”,使得任何試圖對書中人物産生同情心的努力都變得徒勞無功。作者似乎對“係統”的運行機製有著異乎尋常的興趣,無論是社會係統、生物進化係統還是信息傳輸係統,他都以一種近乎冷酷的解剖刀來剖析它們。書中有一段關於“群體意識的形成與瓦解”的描寫,完全是基於數學模型的推演,沒有任何感性的介入,讀起來就像是在閱讀一份高質量的學術報告,但其結論卻比任何恐怖小說都要令人不寒而栗。這本書的成功之處在於,它並沒有試圖提供一個解決方案或道德評判,而是純粹地展示瞭“事物如何運轉”。這迫使我以一種前所未有的疏離感來審視我自己的生活——我所做的一切,是否也僅僅是某個更大、更復雜係統中的一個可預測的變量?這本書帶給我的震撼是結構性的,它沒有提供任何溫暖的慰藉,卻提供瞭一種洞察世界運作方式的、令人警醒的清晰度。
评分這本書的封麵設計,坦白說,讓我有點摸不著頭腦。它采用瞭極其簡潔的黑白配色,中間隻有一個抽象的幾何圖形,像是一個被分割成無數小塊的圓盤。初翻開來,我本以為會是一本深奧的哲學著作,或者至少是某種理論物理學的入門讀物。然而,隨著閱讀的深入,我發現作者試圖構建的世界觀,遠比我想象的要宏大和復雜得多。他沒有直接給齣任何明確的定義或結論,而是像一個精密的鍾錶匠,將各種看似不相關的元素——古代神話、現代生物學分支、乃至量子力學的某些晦澀概念——小心翼翼地並置在一起。整本書的敘事節奏是極其緩慢的,充滿瞭大量的旁白和對細節的執著描摹。特彆是關於“熵增”和“信息湮滅”的章節,作者用一種近乎詩意的語言,探討瞭宇宙中所有事物不可避免的消亡過程。這種閱讀體驗,與其說是吸收知識,不如說是在經曆一場漫長而迷幻的夢境。我不得不承認,我時常需要停下來,閤上書本,努力消化剛纔讀到的那些句子,它們像碎片一樣散落在我的腦海裏,難以拼湊成一個完整的圖像。如果說有什麼是貫穿始終的綫索,那大概是作者對於“連接性”的癡迷——他似乎在尋找隱藏在看似隨機的自然現象背後的,那條看不見的、絕對的邏輯鏈條。這本書無疑是對耐心的一種考驗,但對於那些享受在迷霧中摸索的讀者來說,它或許能提供一種獨特的、近乎冥想的智力快感。
评分說實話,這本書的裝幀設計完全沒有吸引我,那種過時的、有點廉價的米黃色紙張和粗糙的字體,讓人聯想到上世紀八十年代的平裝本盜版小說。我本來打算快速瀏覽一下,但很快就被它那近乎偏執的細節描繪所睏住瞭。作者似乎對十九世紀末期歐洲某個不知名小鎮的社會結構有著異乎尋常的熱情。他花費瞭整整一百頁的篇幅,細緻入微地描述瞭一個麵包師的日常作息,包括他揉麵團時的肌肉發力角度、清晨第一縷陽光如何落在他的工作颱上,以及他與鄰居之間關於房産稅的每一次不愉快的交談。這種對瑣碎日常的極度聚焦,反而産生瞭一種奇異的張力。它讓你覺得,在這個極其平凡的生活錶象之下,一定隱藏著某種巨大的、尚未揭示的秘密。書中幾乎沒有傳統意義上的情節高潮,衝突都是內化的、微妙的,比如一次眼神的對視,一次未發送齣去的信件,或是一個在午後陽光下被遺忘的物件。讀起來讓人感到壓抑,卻又有一種無可奈何的迷人之處。我仿佛親身感受到瞭那個小鎮停滯不前的空氣,以及其中居民被生活磨平的棱角。這本書成功地將“無聊”本身轉化成瞭一種強大的敘事工具,迫使讀者去尋找平凡背後的永恒。
评分這本書的章節劃分非常獨特,它不是按數字或主題來分的,而是用一係列晦澀的化學方程式作為標題。我一開始完全無法理解這其中的邏輯,直到我讀到中間部分,纔隱約察覺到作者可能試圖用這些方程式來隱喻不同人物性格之間的化學反應或情感的相互作用。比如,某一章的標題是“2H₂ + O₂ → 2H₂O”,內容卻講述瞭一對戀人從相識、熱戀到最終分離的完整軌跡,其隱喻之深,讓人拍案叫絕。作者對心理學的理解極其深刻,他筆下的人物都不是扁平化的符號,而是充滿瞭內在的矛盾和自我毀滅的傾嚮。他擅長描繪那種“想要逃離卻又無法自拔”的精神睏境。這本書的語言風格非常華麗,充滿瞭大量的排比句和復雜的主謂賓結構,閱讀起來需要大聲朗讀纔能真正體會到那種韻律感。我發現,如果隻是在腦海中默讀,很容易錯過作者精心布置的節奏和重音。特彆是關於“選擇的悖論”的討論,作者通過一個假設性的情景實驗,拷問瞭人類自由意誌的邊界。總而言之,這是一本需要被“聽見”的書,它用一種高度凝練、富含符號學意義的方式,探討瞭人類情感的最深層結構。
评分我是在一個朋友的強烈推薦下開始讀這本書的,他告訴我,這本書“重塑瞭他對時間的基本認知”。說實話,我帶著相當高的期待進入這個閱讀旅程的,但我很快意識到,這絕不是一本可以輕鬆消遣的書籍。作者的筆觸極其冷峻和客觀,仿佛他不是在寫故事,而是在記錄一樁已經發生且無法更改的曆史事件的檔案。書中大量運用瞭第一人稱敘述,但這個“我”的身份是模糊的,有時感覺像是一個觀察者,有時又像是一個參與者,甚至有時更像是一種純粹的意識形態。我尤其對其中關於“記憶的不可靠性”的那幾部分印象深刻。作者通過構建一係列交叉敘事,巧妙地展示瞭信息在代際傳遞過程中是如何被扭麯、被美化,最終蛻變成一種新的“現實”。有一段關於一次失敗的太空探索任務的描述,反復齣現在不同人物的迴憶中,每一次都帶有微妙的偏差,揭示瞭真相的相對性。這本書的結構非常像一個迷宮,每一章似乎都將你引嚮更深處,但當你以為找到齣口時,卻發現自己迴到瞭起點,隻是視角略有不同。它要求讀者投入極大的注意力去追蹤那些微妙的指代和時間綫的跳躍。讀完後,我沒有感到知識的增長,反而産生瞭一種深刻的、對自身所處環境真實性的懷疑。這本書更像是一次智力上的“洗禮”,而非知識的纍積,它讓你開始質疑那些你習以為常的確定性。
评分 评分 评分 评分 评分本站所有內容均為互聯網搜索引擎提供的公開搜索信息,本站不存儲任何數據與內容,任何內容與數據均與本站無關,如有需要請聯繫相關搜索引擎包括但不限於百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2026 qciss.net All Rights Reserved. 小哈圖書下載中心 版权所有