I said to my friend that E = mc^2 might as well be a formula in chemistry and not physics like we always think. I think energy and matter are very much chemistry related qualities.

He was opposed to this and told me:
>NO. Chemistry _only_ concerns itself with what happens in the outer electron shell. Nothing more
I told him this can't be true. He still insisted everything in chemistry is about the outer electrons doing shit.

Which one of us is right?

Attached: DrTone.jpg (400x320, 108K)

your friend is right, stuff that happens in the nucleus of an atom is physics, and the bonding of atoms into compounds is chemistry

What a small mind you have. Acid and base reactions are proton swapping reactions, and they are not considered physics by a long shot.

the proton movement is physics, chemistry is derived from physics, physics is not derived from chemistry.

You're going around the subject and avoiding the argument.
Don't bring kinematics into this. Acid/base shit is clearly as chemistry as you can get and its definition is two molecules exchanging protons. This is non-electron related chemistry and disproves the "chemistry is only about valence electrons" bullshit.

OP here again.

In conclusion, chemistry needs a broader definition.
In reality chemistry isn't only about electrons. It's about matter and how matter forms compounds, how the compounds react with each other and transform. Chemistry is about change in matter. This is usually studied in a larger perspective than in physics. But still, the transformations of matter and the transfer of energy are chemistry.

Thus, Einstein's famous formula E = mc^2 belongs in chemistry, and chemistry alone.
Einstein was, in essence, a chemist.

Let me rephrase that.
Einstein was a theoretical chemist.

>in conclusion
>after talking to a random stranger for a total of 5 posts, I decree
Faggot, go take this up with someone that actually studies this shit snd see what they tell you instead of jerking yourself off like a retard.

Math > Physics > Chemistry > Biology

Been a while since i did chem but i never understood how that shit worked. I know some acids can lose or gain whichever fuck it is 2 protons instead of of one

>retard watches Dr Stone once and thinks he's a genius scientist and everyone is wrong
Are you underage?

Physics is the first real science motherfucker maths is all imaginary shit

Take solace in knowing that neither of you guys probably know what the fuck you're talking about. I don't know myself user, I'd have to read a lot to give you my answer.

Dr. Stone is the shit though.

Chemistry and physics are basically the same thing. Change my mind.

Jesus fucking christ. You are a fucking tool. The transfer of protons in chemistry really means the transfer of a Hydrogen atom less its one electron. Acid base reactions are described in terms of proton gain/loss but there is no actual change in atomic number. What its mean is movement of a hydrogen ion.
Pic very much related

Attached: 1563647112876.jpg (645x1000, 107K)

Ahem. Free body diagrams. That is all

>What its mean is movement of a hydrogen ion.

Nope, you still can't get around it. What's moving is an ION not a VALENCE ELECTRON

please just end this thread, it's just making everyone dumber

Attached: HSJHijfhuifhifua73743.jpg (200x193, 6K)

Fuck you Einstein was a chemist

No, he wasn't. However, you are a homosexual and a retard.

Not all chemistry deals with electrons, like thermal chemistry deals with entyre atoms

yes he was as much of a chemist as he was a physicist. My point still stands.

>No, he wasn't

Compare him to Newton. Newton studied movement, forces, vectors and stuff like that. THAT is physics.
Anything related to matter and its composition is chemistry. Non-experimental study of matter is theoretical chemistry.

Fundamentally, the only thing chemistry concerns itself with is interaction between the electrons and nuclei. This means neither you, nor your friend are necessarily right. For instance X-Ray spectroscopy deals with transitions from the inner orbitals, rather than the outermost ones. The same goes for other forms on spectroscopy.
The mass energy equivalence is trivially relevant in chemistry as it is fundamental in quantum mechanics, which form the foundation of modern physical chemistry, but that isn't really the context in which it is applied.

NMR is physical chemistry, if only because it is completely worthless to physicists. And NMR deals extensively with the magnetism of the nucleus.

Actually the acid/base model according to Lewis (the modern one) deals with bases as compounds that donate electrons, while acids accept electrons. This of course trivially includes the proton itself as an acid.

You are basically retarded.
Please just think of chemistry as that thing you do to make methamphetamine, you will be less wrong about everything.

Chemistry is a branch of science that involves the study of the composition, structure and properties of matter. Often known as the central science, it is a creative discipline chiefly concerned with atomic and molecular structure and its change, for instance through chemical reactions.
Physics is the natural science that studies matter, its motion and behavior through space and time, and that studies the related entities of energy and force.Physics is one of the most fundamental scientific disciplines, and its main goal is to understand how the universe behaves.

>Please just think of chemistry as that thing you do to make methamphetamine

I already do.

Attached: normiedisgust2.png (407x558, 297K)

>Actually the acid/base model according to Lewis (the modern one) deals with bases as compounds that donate electrons, while acids accept electrons

Sounds like oxidation, how do I not confuse these two

>concerned with atomic and molecular structure and its change

Proves my point


Attached: 1564684625896.jpg (314x234, 48K)

Those two are very different things and you can't really confuse them. And it's not really relevant for people who don't actually study chemistry.

When lewis acids and bases interact with one another they tend to form adduct complexes.
For instance, organic chlorine compounds (R-Cl)tend to dissociate into an organic cation (R+) and an anionic adduct (AlCl4-) in the presence of AlCl3 a strong Lewis acid, that does not include an protons.

However, it important to note that ALL traditional acids and bases still function the same way under the Lewis model, because all that changes is the scope.

Oxidation doesn't work that way, it (usually) features electron transfer from one compound directly to the other. The electrons are not bound to an intermediate like in the reaction I outlined. You can determine the difference by determining the reaction mechanism.

Does this answer your question?

Good, please don't think any further than that.

you're a retard.

We live in an age where you can easily shoot some emails with some questions to a bunch of university professors and other academics. The fact that you choose to ask around on Jow Forums instead shows that you're not actually confident in your conclusion. Suck my nuts.

I deserve more credit than this thoughtless slander because:
>it took me like 1 second to come up with this crazy thread
>nobody has still refuted my idea
Imagine what I could accomplish if I studied science. I question everything. If I was a science student, I'd redefine everything from the ground up. I'm currently trying to redefine a square. I know it's math but physics is really math and chemics is just physics. It's all just math that is being applied in an ever increasing scale, losing information and accuracy. Biology and psychology are the least accurate sciences, and I don't even believe in evolution. It's bullshit.

user, you are retarded
do you really think what you are peddling is innovative in any way? Stop smoking weed all day and actually fucking pick up a text book and read.

Oh and obviously the most important distinction is that lewis acid/base reactions form covalent bonds, while Redox reactions do not.

>do you really think what you are peddling is innovative in any way? Stop smoking weed all day

I came up with this pic as we were chatting.
Just look at what kind of divine physics I create within a matter of seconds in the middle of the night
I'm scared of my own intellect
Imagine if I actually wasnt unemployed and lazy but a student

Attached: kyrkle.png (1160x1078, 139K)

stop smoking weed and get a job

>I deserve more credit than this thoughtless slander because I asked a bunch of laymen

Chemistry is for retards and physics is the true way to see the universe.
Only big brained physicists know the truth to the world meanwhile you retards things chemistry explains everything.
Chemistry can't even explain why light is a wave of probability for a photon or quantum mechanics.
Those are all physics and not chemistry.
Chemistry is just atoms interactions with each other meanwhile physics is the interaction of particles in atom size or smaller. Protons, neutrons, quarks etc

>Chemistry can't even explain why light is a wave of probability for a photon or quantum mechanics.

This is a very weird way of thinking about science.
Chemistry "can't" explain it because it doesn't have to. It doesn't try to.
You seem to have the idea that the more abstract a science is the cooler it is. Try math. At one point it will seem too abstract and useless.