"Help me out with this..."

[humanbydefault]

Mike, because you really know your stuff, I've been puzzled by the way humans respond to the "unknown."

As you know, I've been pretty bussy these past month in the formulation of my theory ["Bonding Harmonics"].
It took me long hours drawing figures and diagrams, visualizations etc. then, I had to decide what will go into the web page and all the details related to its design.
The point is that I've included in my theory (as you can see for yourself) convicing arguments that coundn't be explained by any other ways and even so, people remains "closed mainded."

I wonder if that is part of our human nature... Behave like someone terrified by the changes.

One of the simplest example my theory can explain is the undeniable strength of the diamond crystals.

According to present theories, diamonds should be the result of carbon atoms bounded between them in 'single bonds.' [just like graphite].
Valence Bond Theory is based on the [alleged] number of electrons available in the molecular procedure = 4. That's it!
MO [Molecular orbital theory] on the other side would explain it in a different way since they base their theory in alleged elapsing of 'electronic clouds'. They called 'sigma bonds' to bonds made in l=o (S). and pi bonds l=1 (p). From the point of view of the bond strength this MO theory gets closer to the "real thing" since in my theory I have defined also the strength of chemical bonds based on the energy-level enjoyed by the actual harmonic that form the molecular bonding.

Now! From my theory you must reject the possibilities of a sigma and a pi bond occurring between two carbons at the same point of coupling. So it will be either a harmonic with the strength of a 'sigma bond' or another harmonic with the strength of a pi bond, but not both at the same time.

I go with the strongest bond between all carbons in the formation of a ring. That specific case is in direct confrontation with both presently used theories by their own reasons I don't feel necessary here to discuss.

So, my point is that I have come up with a solution [an answer if you whish] that justify why a diamond crystal is classified with a 10th grade level of strength among the rest of mineral of Earth [one of the strongest ever] and you know how manny opinions I received from the specialists I sent my proposal?

ZERO. It's simple, either they care none about what an outsider could say or they feel really confortable with repeating the same "stupid truth" to their chemistry students day by day... which one would be true?

I recognize that accepting "Bonding Harmonics" even partially would represent a collision with all that have been said in our books and awarded with our Nobel Prizes... Does it mean that I should give up finally?


HUMANBYDEFAULT

[mkirkpatrick]

Mike, because you really know your stuff, I've been puzzled by the way humans respond to the "unknown."

As you know, I've been pretty bussy these past month in the formulation of my theory ["Bonding Harmonics"].
It took me long hours drawing figures and diagrams, visualizations etc. then, I had to decide what will go into the web page and all the details related to its design.
The point is that I've included in my theory (as you can see for yourself) convicing arguments that coundn't be explained by any other ways and even so, people remains "closed mainded."

I wonder if that is part of our human nature... Behave like someone terrified by the changes.

I'll get back to you soon

HUMANBYDEFAULT

HBD,thanks for the vote of confidence in me,I am grateful to you,humans respond to
change with anxiety and with suspicion,we seem to feel comfortable with what is familiar
and resist any change to it.You are pioneer pushing the envelope of accepted science
and physics,so it is not unexpected that you are met with resistence and disbelief.
Keep up your excellent work,we,I,am proud of your bold endevour.

regards michael.