Why is Boron so boring?

Discussion concerning the first major re-evaluation of Dewey B. Larson's Reciprocal System of theory, updated to include counterspace (Etheric spaces), projective geometry, and the non-local aspects of time/space.
Post Reply
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2013 4:46 am

Why is Boron so boring?

Post by jdalton4 » Mon Dec 04, 2017 5:50 am

It occurred to me that Boron, next to Carbon in the Periodic Table, should have the valence attributes to form all the building blocks of complex compounds, namely positive radicals, negative radicals and magnetic neutral groups. Yet it is not nearly as prolific as carbon in forming chains and rings. This puzzle lead me to reread the last four chapters of NBM where Larson defines his "molecular orientation effect" by which he accounts for these structures. Larson cannot quantify this effect and admits on page 277 that this "introduces an element of awkwardness into the presentation", an incredible statement from such a genius.
I am going to venture an explanation of the "molecular orientation effect". First, it arises from one dimensional motion, the free positive electric displacement that is present in any magnetic valance. Therefore, I conclude that it is a linear force of attraction between atoms that modifies the inter-atomic force of cohesion. It is equal to the dot product of the free positive electric displacements of the atoms involved, in the case of carbon, the CH neutral group and the adjoining hydrogen atom . It is therefore at a maximum when these atoms are collinear, which, at equilibrium, would tend to form triangles, thereby giving the molecule an overall ring structure. The chain structure, on the other hand, requires positive and negative end radicals. I propose that these end radicals repel each other and their effect is to stretch the ring out into a linear structure forming a chain.
The reason Boron is boring is two fold. First, its positive electric displacement, the ring forming power, is 3. 75% less than carbon. Second, the repulsive force of its end radicals is higher due to its lower atomic number. It therefore pulls apart the rings, and doesn't allow chains to form either.

User avatar
Posts: 1484
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am

Re: Why is Boron so boring?

Post by bperet » Mon Dec 04, 2017 10:00 am

Good analysis.

Boron does form compounds typically with highly negative elements, such as hydrogen, fluorine, chlorine, bromine and iodine (the x-x-(1) displacements). It seems to prefer a group of these elements over bonding with a x-x-(5) valence (though it does; boron nitride exists). This would indicate the +3 electric displacement is rotational distributed on a plane (2-x, intermediate speed), giving 3(+1) nodes at 120° rather than 1(+3). All the even-number elements would tend to be bipolar.

A similar situation exists in electricity, concerning the efficiency of 3-phase power distribution (this is what is used on those HT wires that feed transformers). You might find it useful to look at the electric displacement on the complex plane as a phase relationship, like electronics does. The 2√1 = ±1, which is your typical bipolar setup. All the even numbered elements will have this bipolar grouping, as they all have ± solutions on the real axis. The odd elements are off-axis, having significant displacement on the imaginary axis, where the "energy" remains but the physical effectiveness diminishes (since physical interactions are spatial/real). For boron and aluminum, you are looking at 3√1, which only has 1 "real" solution of +1 -- hence its tendency to form links with the -1 elements. Once that bond is created, the orientation can change to move one of the off-axis solutions to the real axis, repeating until all 3 positions are occupied.


Elements of higher odd displacement have solutions that are closer to the real axis, so there is more "real" influence.

I took a quick look at the molecular geometry of some of these compounds and they are typically triagonal. The crystal structure tends to be rhombohedral, due to these angles.

There may also be the environmental conditions present at STP (and unit magnetic ionization) that come into play here.
Every dogma has its day...

Post Reply