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.
我是在一个朋友的强烈推荐下开始读这本书的,他告诉我,这本书“重塑了他对时间的基本认知”。说实话,我带着相当高的期待进入这个阅读旅程的,但我很快意识到,这绝不是一本可以轻松消遣的书籍。作者的笔触极其冷峻和客观,仿佛他不是在写故事,而是在记录一桩已经发生且无法更改的历史事件的档案。书中大量运用了第一人称叙述,但这个“我”的身份是模糊的,有时感觉像是一个观察者,有时又像是一个参与者,甚至有时更像是一种纯粹的意识形态。我尤其对其中关于“记忆的不可靠性”的那几部分印象深刻。作者通过构建一系列交叉叙事,巧妙地展示了信息在代际传递过程中是如何被扭曲、被美化,最终蜕变成一种新的“现实”。有一段关于一次失败的太空探索任务的描述,反复出现在不同人物的回忆中,每一次都带有微妙的偏差,揭示了真相的相对性。这本书的结构非常像一个迷宫,每一章似乎都将你引向更深处,但当你以为找到出口时,却发现自己回到了起点,只是视角略有不同。它要求读者投入极大的注意力去追踪那些微妙的指代和时间线的跳跃。读完后,我没有感到知识的增长,反而产生了一种深刻的、对自身所处环境真实性的怀疑。这本书更像是一次智力上的“洗礼”,而非知识的累积,它让你开始质疑那些你习以为常的确定性。
评分这本书的封面设计,坦白说,让我有点摸不着头脑。它采用了极其简洁的黑白配色,中间只有一个抽象的几何图形,像是一个被分割成无数小块的圆盘。初翻开来,我本以为会是一本深奥的哲学著作,或者至少是某种理论物理学的入门读物。然而,随着阅读的深入,我发现作者试图构建的世界观,远比我想象的要宏大和复杂得多。他没有直接给出任何明确的定义或结论,而是像一个精密的钟表匠,将各种看似不相关的元素——古代神话、现代生物学分支、乃至量子力学的某些晦涩概念——小心翼翼地并置在一起。整本书的叙事节奏是极其缓慢的,充满了大量的旁白和对细节的执着描摹。特别是关于“熵增”和“信息湮灭”的章节,作者用一种近乎诗意的语言,探讨了宇宙中所有事物不可避免的消亡过程。这种阅读体验,与其说是吸收知识,不如说是在经历一场漫长而迷幻的梦境。我不得不承认,我时常需要停下来,合上书本,努力消化刚才读到的那些句子,它们像碎片一样散落在我的脑海里,难以拼凑成一个完整的图像。如果说有什么是贯穿始终的线索,那大概是作者对于“连接性”的痴迷——他似乎在寻找隐藏在看似随机的自然现象背后的,那条看不见的、绝对的逻辑链条。这本书无疑是对耐心的一种考验,但对于那些享受在迷雾中摸索的读者来说,它或许能提供一种独特的、近乎冥想的智力快感。
评分说实话,这本书的装帧设计完全没有吸引我,那种过时的、有点廉价的米黄色纸张和粗糙的字体,让人联想到上世纪八十年代的平装本盗版小说。我本来打算快速浏览一下,但很快就被它那近乎偏执的细节描绘所困住了。作者似乎对十九世纪末期欧洲某个不知名小镇的社会结构有着异乎寻常的热情。他花费了整整一百页的篇幅,细致入微地描述了一个面包师的日常作息,包括他揉面团时的肌肉发力角度、清晨第一缕阳光如何落在他的工作台上,以及他与邻居之间关于房产税的每一次不愉快的交谈。这种对琐碎日常的极度聚焦,反而产生了一种奇异的张力。它让你觉得,在这个极其平凡的生活表象之下,一定隐藏着某种巨大的、尚未揭示的秘密。书中几乎没有传统意义上的情节高潮,冲突都是内化的、微妙的,比如一次眼神的对视,一次未发送出去的信件,或是一个在午后阳光下被遗忘的物件。读起来让人感到压抑,却又有一种无可奈何的迷人之处。我仿佛亲身感受到了那个小镇停滞不前的空气,以及其中居民被生活磨平的棱角。这本书成功地将“无聊”本身转化成了一种强大的叙事工具,迫使读者去寻找平凡背后的永恒。
评分我是在一个非常干燥和寒冷的冬夜开始阅读这本书的,它的内容似乎也沾染了那种冰冷的质感。这本书的特点在于其极端的视角转换,它似乎在刻意地拉开读者与叙事主体之间的情感距离。书中频繁使用“我们”、“他们”以及一个不带感情色彩的“观察者”,使得任何试图对书中人物产生同情心的努力都变得徒劳无功。作者似乎对“系统”的运行机制有着异乎寻常的兴趣,无论是社会系统、生物进化系统还是信息传输系统,他都以一种近乎冷酷的解剖刀来剖析它们。书中有一段关于“群体意识的形成与瓦解”的描写,完全是基于数学模型的推演,没有任何感性的介入,读起来就像是在阅读一份高质量的学术报告,但其结论却比任何恐怖小说都要令人不寒而栗。这本书的成功之处在于,它并没有试图提供一个解决方案或道德评判,而是纯粹地展示了“事物如何运转”。这迫使我以一种前所未有的疏离感来审视我自己的生活——我所做的一切,是否也仅仅是某个更大、更复杂系统中的一个可预测的变量?这本书带给我的震撼是结构性的,它没有提供任何温暖的慰藉,却提供了一种洞察世界运作方式的、令人警醒的清晰度。
评分这本书的章节划分非常独特,它不是按数字或主题来分的,而是用一系列晦涩的化学方程式作为标题。我一开始完全无法理解这其中的逻辑,直到我读到中间部分,才隐约察觉到作者可能试图用这些方程式来隐喻不同人物性格之间的化学反应或情感的相互作用。比如,某一章的标题是“2H₂ + O₂ → 2H₂O”,内容却讲述了一对恋人从相识、热恋到最终分离的完整轨迹,其隐喻之深,让人拍案叫绝。作者对心理学的理解极其深刻,他笔下的人物都不是扁平化的符号,而是充满了内在的矛盾和自我毁灭的倾向。他擅长描绘那种“想要逃离却又无法自拔”的精神困境。这本书的语言风格非常华丽,充满了大量的排比句和复杂的主谓宾结构,阅读起来需要大声朗读才能真正体会到那种韵律感。我发现,如果只是在脑海中默读,很容易错过作者精心布置的节奏和重音。特别是关于“选择的悖论”的讨论,作者通过一个假设性的情景实验,拷问了人类自由意志的边界。总而言之,这是一本需要被“听见”的书,它用一种高度凝练、富含符号学意义的方式,探讨了人类情感的最深层结构。
评分 评分 评分 评分 评分本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2026 book.wenda123.org All Rights Reserved. 图书目录大全 版权所有