The Many Chemists Who Could Have Proposed the Woodward-Hoffmann Rules But Didn't: The Organic Chemists Who Discovered the Smoking Guns[ ]

Revolutions in Chemistry: Assessment of Six 20th Century Candidates (The Instrumental Revolution; Hückel Molecular Orbital Theory; Hückel's 4n + 2 Rule; the Woodward-Hoffmann Rules; Quantum Chemistry; and Retrosynthetic Analysis)

Six 20th century candidates for revolutions in chemistry are examined, using a definitional scheme published recently by the author. Six groupings of 13 characteristics of revolutions in science are considered: causes and birthings of revolutions, relationships between the old and the new, conceptual qualities of the candidate revolutions, instrumental and methodological functions, social construction of knowledge and practical considerations, and testimonials. The Instrumental Revolution was judged to be a revolution in chemistry because of the enormous increase in community-wide knowledge provided by the new instruments and the intentionality in the identification of specific target instruments, in the mindfulness in their design, manufacture, testing, use, and ultimately commercialization. The Woodward-Hoffmann rules were judged to precipitate the Quantum Chemistry Revolution because of theoretical, practical, and social construction of knowledge characteristics. Neither Hückel molecular orbital theory nor Hückel's 4n + 2 rule was considered an initiator of a revolution in chemistry but rather participants in the Quantum Chemistry Revolution. Retrosynthetic analysis was not judged to initiate a revolution in chemistry.

Why Woodward and Hoffmann? And Why 1965?

Previous publications in this series on the history of the development of the Woodward-Hoffmann rules revealed why Woodward and Hoffmann were prime candidates to solve the pericyclic no-mechanism problem. This publication explains why it was the collaborative team of R. B. Woodward and Roald Hoffmann who did solve this mechanistic problem in a series of five communications in the Journal of the American Chemical Society in 1965. That is, the reasons why Woodward and Hoffmann were the perfect team, and why their individual capabilities, experiences, and qualities provided the perfect synergy are described. In part, this was the right time and the right place for them both, but the synergies were fundamental, intrinsic and idiosyncratic as a collaborative pair. Their orbital symmetry rules provided the mechanism of all concerted pericyclic reactions including electrocyclizations, cycloadditions, and sigmatropic rearrangements. Why it was 1965 and not earlier is also discussed.

Understanding chemistry: from "heuristic (soft) explanations and reasoning by analogy" to "quantum chemistry"

"Soft theories," i.e., "heuristic models based on reasoning by analogy" largely drove chemistry understanding for 150 years or more. But soft theories have their limitations and with the expansion of chemistry in the mid-20th century, more and more inexplicable (by soft theory) experimental results were being obtained. In the past 50 years, quantum chemistry, most often in the guise of applied theoretical chemistry including computational chemistry, has provided (a) the underlying "hard evidence" for many soft theories and (b) the explanations for chemical phenomena that were unavailable by soft theories. In this publication, we define "hard theories" as "theories derived from quantum chemistry." Both soft and hard theories can be qualitative and quantitative, and the "Houk quadrant" is proposed as a helpful categorization tool. Furthermore, the language of soft theories is often used appropriately to describe quantum chemical results. A valid and useful way of doing science is the appropriate use and application of both soft and hard theories along with the best nomenclature available for successful communication of results and ideas.