Talk:Fluxional molecule
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | The contents of the Semi-rigid molecule page were merged into Fluxional molecule on 1 December 2018. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Absolute Zero edit
The statement the barriers to proton exchange are lower than the zero point energy. Thus, even at absolute zero there is no rigid 'molecular structure'. seems vaguely contradictory, or at least in need of better explanation. The way its written, it seems to imply that all of the barriers are less than zero-point energy, and that the lowest potential energy state for CH5+ is one in which the protons are constantly sliding around, accelerated in a manner analogous to a marble eternally rolling downhill in an Escher painting. But it seems to me to be more likely that the structure itself possesses an energy that cannot be dissipated in a way that leaves it stable - a macro-scale analogy to this concept of potential energy enabling a structure might be two weights tethered to each other in space, spinning about each other: should they ever stop, gravity will bring the two weights together, releasing the potential energy that the rotation previously kept 'trapped' - but this analogy is nowhere near an accurate picture of the concept presented here at all, so I'd like someone else explain it better if possible Zaphraud (talk) 18:22, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
definition - positions of atoms vs bonding details or both? edit
In research papers I have read, the term "fluxional" is exclusively restricted to discussions of the chemical bonding between atoms, including atoms that are treated as being "stationary" (such as being fixed in a lattice). The researchers use the term "spontaneous bond breaking at room temperature" to describe this process, indicating that fluxional molecules do indeed seemingly either consume and release equivalent amounts of energy in perfect unison or absorb KbT to do so. Regardless - the "pure bonding" nature of some of the research discussion seems to suggest that the definition in this article is incorrect or too restrictive. Here is a journal reference using the terminology that I have laid out. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-53488-5 "Multicenter FBs (fluxional bonds) in these fluctuating boron nanoclusters form and break constantly in concerted mechanisms at room temperatures."67.165.122.133 (talk) 07:59, 13 March 2024 (UTC)