Leaderboard

oh! now I get it! thanks alot! thanks for the explanation, bud!

This also highlights the importance of the double bond. That forces the relative alignment of the two halves of the molecule to stay the same. That is a key reason that isomerism exists (otherwise you could just rotate half the molecule and get to the other form).

@mundane you could use the ideas above in digital tools* if you prefer. Here is an example of chloromethane (did not have time to create an animation of it in rotation) . Here is an example view of two types of But-2-ene. You cant rotate one to get to the other. *) There are free tools available online

The key thing is, can the two forms be made the same by one or more rotations. So in your G1, if you were to create an isomer by swapping the R and H at the top, then you could just rotate it by 180° to get back to G1. In G3, if you were to swap the orientation of the diether ring you can still rotate the whole molecule by 180° and get back to where you stated. But in G2 if you swap the R and H at the top, you can't rotate it to get back to the molecule you started with. You have to reflect it. In other words, you have a chiral pair (like a pair of gloves, rather than a pair of socks). If this is not clear from looking at the diagrams, then you need to build a model as Sensei suggests. (I bought a ball and stick kit when I was doing chemistry but never used it because I can see the symmetries immediately from the drawings. Which is bizarre because I have almost total aphantasia and can't tell left from right!)

A major hurdle being the graviton being the fundamental particle. I agree QFT via perturbation does a far better job of matching observational criteria. Though a careful study of both theories naturally involve highly similar mathematics. One thing I have learned from studying numerous treatments. Many of the same methodologies are applied in all theories once you get down to the nitty gritty. Developments to overcome are a part of physics. Regardless of model. String theory is still considered viable however myself I feel QFT does a more accurate and robust job with regards to particle physics. However that is only based on my studies (though intensive). Lol though all tools are handy in any personal modelling I do. I find a lot of lessons of value in the higher tensors in String theory. Ie past 4d symmetry treatments.

! Moderator Note That's a false dichotomy. In any event, having the discussion here, as you have framed it, is not consistent with our rules. You've made no effort to try and comply, and have made it clear you think you can't.

The video I posted constitutes evidence.

The next big challenge in the field of AI is machines that can logically argue with each other... the amount of insights we can derive from this capability is indefinite. I'd like to work on it... but I'm too busy using AI for solving business problems right now. It's called a career lol.