User talk:Elie.nasrallah

October 2012

Hello, I'm Crushspam. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Crushspam (talk) 11:05, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Quantum Chemistry

It would not be called "Quantum Chemistry" is it was Physics. Of course it uses physics, but so does thermochemistry. electrochemistry and other branches of physical chemistry. I would also add that those of us who call ourselves quantum chemists generally work in chemistry departments and have chemistry degrees. If you do not agree take it to the talk page of the article before trying to change it again. --Bduke (Discussion) 16:29, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

As I said in my edit summary, you have now been reverted by two people, so take your concerns to Talk:Quantum chemistry as I suggest above and try to convince people, and gain consensus for your change. --Bduke (Discussion) 07:43, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Please stop your campaign to have quantum chemistry a branch of physics as at Molecule. You are a new editor and you need to learn how wikipedia works. To date you are being disruptive. You need to discuss it on Talk:Quantum chemistry and produce sources that back your claim; sources that explicitly say that quantum chemistry is a branch of physics. Others may then counter with sources that say it is a branch of chemistry. I am sure I could if I was back at home but I am on holiday the other side of the world. --Bduke (Discussion) 07:59, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

"quantum chemistry" is a part of physics

why are you claiming that that "quantum chemistry" is a branch of chemistry and not a part of physics. I know that for most people the name "quantum chemistry" implies that it is a branch of chemistry but think a little: chemistry was the study of the elements in the periodic table, of the reactions between substances...until the great discovery of atoms and molecules which identifies every element in the periodic table to an atom but chemists didn't have any idea of what is an atom or how molecules form (and why?) and this is the end of the story, it's the end of chemistry and if you still don't believe me, here's a sentence from the book "physical biology, from atoms to medicine" of the nobel prize winner in chemistry Ahmed Zewail: "...a statement that chemistry has been reduced to physics is correct in the well-defined sense of interactions that involve sufficiently small numbers of atoms, and is most likely to be also correct in principle, for arbitrarily large molecules, their large ensembles, and their reactions." and another sentence which specifies quantum chemistry (the domain of Zewail): "both conceptual and computational advances in a branch of physics called quantum chemistry extended this understanding to complex atoms and chemical compounds, including organic ones." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elie.nasrallah (talk • contribs) 08:05, 29 October 2012

You should discuss this on the talk page, not here. Ahmed Zewail may be a Nobel Prize winner, but many philosophers of chemistry dispute his statement above. As I said above I am sure others can give sources that say it is a branch of chemistry. Of course they are close. I think of quantum chemistry as chemists doing molecular physics to get chemical answers. Note that I have reverted you again, but if you revert me, you will be in breach of the WP:3RR rule and are likely to be blocked from editing. --Bduke (Discussion) 08:24, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

Vsmith (talk) 09:50, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Hmm... as you are new around here, I've unblocked so you can discuss your concerns on talk:quantum chemistry and talk:molecule. Please join or start a discussion there rather than continuing to revert. Thanks, Vsmith (talk) 10:32, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Vsmith was right to revert his block, but I see you are continuing to be disruptive and not discussing your concerns on the talk page. The IP editor who has made the same reverts on the same two articles is clearly you. On wikipedia we use sources and then work to a consensus on the talk page. We do not just keep on reverting. You have now been reverted by 4 other editors and no editor has supported you. It is time to stop or you will be blocked for a longer period. Please discuss this at Talk:Quantum chemistry. --Bduke (Discussion) 12:05, 29 October 2012 (UTC)