Introduction to Chemistry

Introduction
Chemical Bonds and Reactions
Experiment
Nearby Unification
Conclusion

1. Introduction

WARNING:

The explanation of chemical bonds and interactions below is not complete.
This is just a part of the laws/processes that take place during chemical reactions.
It may be considered as a special case (of more general and uniform processes) characteristic for the conditions and states of space/matter and other parameters that we have at earth and at the nearest surroundings.
For other conditions (or with change of basic parameters) the result (general image of observable states and interactions) may differ very significantly (actually this is one of the reasons why modern science cannot explain much beyond the conditions we have at earth).

All images and explanations are exclusively schematic and do not correspond to concrete atoms or specific states of other things/substances.

This is just a rough general overview to show some approximate image of part of reality in this area and conditions.

2. Chemical Bonds and Reactions

So, chemical bonds and chemical reactions.
There are molecules, atoms, energy, forces... and other things or substances.
Some of the properties of some basic substances we already touched in previous articles.
Matter can be transformed to energy which in turn creates forces.
This process of transformations is pretty complex.
Energy may be in (a little) different states, this results in presence of different forces.
Mutual influence of basic substances creates variety of phenomenons and states, etc.
I mention it all just to remind that there are different things/processes beyond the scene.
Concerning chemical bonds and reactions we have pretty limited special case, and this is what we're going to discuss here a little.

Some of the basic things we know:

Atoms can move and interact.
Atoms can form molecules -- consistent structures of atoms kept together by forces.
Energy is responsible for forces.
The more energy, the stronger force.
Atoms during chemical transformations/interactions may absorb and/or emit energy.
Influencing atoms by outer energy may result in chemical interactions: formation or destruction of bonds.
Atoms also can form bonds of some strength if they have kinetic energy and collide.
... and there are a lot of other facts.

I don't show at pictures nuclei and other possible components and just atoms and bonds in most generalized form.

This image shows some of the terms or symbols used in this article.

Atoms, bonds, molecules

The following two images show two ways of formation of bonds.

Reactions based on kinetic energy

And let's move to the facts about atoms and chemical bonds from KOE:

Chemical forces also encompass the same basic principle (which is actually just a part of more general processes) as gravitation or electrical forces do: F=kx₁x₂/f(R).
(Though, as you understand, for all of them this is just a part of more general processes which in different cases have different strength of appearance. Formulas in the form F=kx are just very special cases for our concrete parameters of environment).
And as you have noticed there's no (in general case) R².
Bonds are formed gradually.
(This follows from the dependency on R, but I noted it explicitly.)
The part of "chemical" energy and corresponding forces of an atom we're going to consider here have also the following property:
1. they are mostly directional towards objects of outer chemical influence and
2. during interaction they get divided (between different outer directions) proportionally to the strengths of the outer influences.
For gravitation this property is so tiny that it may be nearly completely ignored nearly for all cases, for electrical/chemical/liquid forces this property in these conditions is expressed more strongly and for chemical bonds and interactions this is one of the main characteristics.
You may see that if major part of force fades quickly even in comparison with atomic diameter then there is a large variety of abilities for manipulations inside of an atom to make the force partially/mostly directional, but we're not going to discuss this point today.
(It should be obvious already and it will become a little clearer when we touch a little unification.)
... and there are other properties.

Let's consider this on the examples and reveal the essence of chemistry.
In some cases I will be highlighting strength of bonds (or amount of dedicated to this direction underlying energy) by width of lines.
In the case below first two atoms form bond, then another atom joins them.
At stage 3 the atoms have most of their energy dedicated to the bond between them.
At stage 5 another atom comes close enough and starts to influence significantly one of the atoms. For the atom in the middle this causes redistribution of all "chemical" energy in the two outer directions proportionally to the strength of outer influence. Part of the energy from the bond on the left (of the atom in the middle) now interacts with the atom on the right.

The arrows show which bond loses force and where this part is now,
or in the other words: where (or towards what) that ("lost") part of underlying energy "works" now. (Quotes for the word "works" may be omitted.)

And stage 6 shows completion of formation of new bond.

Chemical reaction. Formation of bonds.

The same case as above but two bonds are formed at once.

Chemical reaction. Formation of bonds.

And another case where the initial molecule was split as it has no enough "chemical" energy to sustain that link in new configuration of atoms.

Chemical reaction. Formation of bonds.

I mentioned in previous article that different atoms have different configuration or preferences (or basic parameters) and we saw examples of how such small (or not small) internal differences may affect resulting observed image/processes,
and obviously the differences between elements cause different specifics of interactions in many areas and not only for electricity, though in many cases a lot of particulars are negligible.

And of course there's a variety of more complex variants... the world of chemistry and bio-chemistry.

The essence of chemical complexity and variety is complex redistribution of strength of bonds or forces (and dedicated energy inside of atoms) among atoms of molecules during interaction/reaction.

Now let's highlight some main characteristics of chemical interactions which involve molecules.

The propagation of redistribution of influence over molecule from the point of interaction fades.
During propagation of interaction from some point any bond in molecule may lose required minimum of strength of bond to sustain firmness (because of lack of energy) and break.
Atom/molecule can influence or interact with other molecule and break inside of it some bond or bonds, but at the same time it's not obliged to form firm bond with this molecule.

Some more complex (schematic) cases.

Let's comment the picture below.
Atoms 5 and 6 start to interact (form bonds) with atom 3 and this cause the following changes depicted at stage 2:

The energy dedicated to bonds 2-3 and 5-6 decrease,
because atom 3 start to form two new bonds and redistributes part of "chemical" energy to work towards atoms 5 and 6, atoms 5 and 6 in their turn dedicate part of own energy to atom 3.
Atom 2 does not experience new significant influence, but since atom 3 draws back part of energy, it in own turn redistributes own energy proportionally to strengths of outer influences and in this case increases influence in the directions 1 and 4.
As we see from stage 3, the strength of link 2-3 was not enough to sustain firm bond and this group of atoms breaks into two molecules. Two new bonds were formed and one old broken.

Besides the fact that influence may be indirect and break/formation of firm bonds may happen somewhere in the molecule and not in the point of interaction,
there is one more thing which needs to be highlighted, and which actually adds a lot to the resulting diversity in behavior of chemical (and adjacent) interactions:

the interactions (or points of significant interaction) may be multiple and the result of the influence for each bond/atom is superposition of distribution of redistribution from each point of interaction.

Obviously chemistry may transition from the lame ancient method of usage of tables (and antitables, or tables of exceptions to tables) to the variety of exact methods by analogy of development of methods for analyses of electrical networks, or by analogy of development of methods for "electrical" energy.

And, next example.
In the picture below at stage 2 we have the following tendencies:

bond 1-3 is formed
1-2 decreases
3-4 decreases, what causes larger amount of energy to be dedicated to atom 5 from atom 4 and
4-5 increases
5-6 decreases
6-7 increases

Another (schematic) example.
Because of redistribution of energy link 7-8 finally looses required minimum of strength to keep stable junction.
In this hypothetical case the reason was decrease of outer influence for atom 5 at once from two directions and the amount of proportionally redistributed energy to bond 5-7 was significant. Atom 7 increases force in the direction 5 proportionally to outer changes and this redistribution was crucial for atom 8. It flies away, and this additional change in the structure (at atom 7) causes further redistribution.

Complex chemical reaction.

All these principles of interactions was not "guessed" at the beginning or at some point.
Honestly (or one of the most interesting facts concerning this articles is that) if KOE will be ever published it will not even contain explanation of chemical reactions in depth from the point as I describe them here.
These all are just consequences of application of KOE for specific environment and cases.
This is rough investigation of unified functions and processes for specific conditions.

Now

you can see where (part of) the variety in chemistry comes from and
you can recognize known and yet unknown principles for a lot of (chemical) phenomenons.

3. Experiment

Let's carry out experiment where you can observe, touch and feel influence/running of described above processes.

We don't need fashionable particle accelerator/collider for billions of dollars.
Paper napkin is enough.
It should have grooves of some kind expressed on its surface.

Start to squeeze it very slowly at some place with two fingers to smooth its structure and make it flat.
As soon as you touch it you should feel that it's not smooth and actually has some structure as you should feel multiple lines or points and the feeling is different from touching flat surface.
It means that molecules of this structure and the whole structure of napkin have some level of firmness, or links between atoms and molecules have some force applied between them to keep the shape and you can feel that it has internal force by the resistance it applies to your fingers at points of roughness.
Now you can squeeze harder and this structure will be smoothed between your fingers.
If to compare this leveled (to some extent) place to the other rough places of napkin, you will see that it's soft or much softer than the other places.
This means that links between components of the structure at that place are broken, because you applied force larger than atoms and molecules applied to links between them to keep the structure.

From point of physical description it means that there are some energy inside of the atoms and molecules which sustain forces and keeps some level of firmness of the structure.

Now let's put a drop of water on the napkin (at rough place) and wait a little.
You can see that it changes its shape at that place.
Try to squeeze the wet place.
You will not (or almost will not) feel the resistance. I did not feel and only the presence of water and the difference relative to rough dry surface is very noticeable.
It can be stretched or torn with much lesser effort compared to dry pieces of the napkin.

This means that the mentioned earlier energy which sustains the firmness/strength of the links is not applied at the rate at wet place as in the dry place.
The force is many times weaker, and the amount of corresponding underlying/sustaining energy is lesser.

Moreover, now it can be nearly perfectly smoothed. It will not have perfectly flat shape, but there almost should not be grooves.
I did it as shown in the picture 2 below.
Stretch the wet place a little and let it dry.

Now we see that it retained its firmness.

This means the following.
The energy is back again and sustains the forces.

Of course you already see all the essence of what's going on inside, but let's discuss it once again.

Molecules of water surround structure of napkin and draw part of "chemical" and "intermolecular" energy to themselves, or partially distracts it or atoms from keeping firmness of shape.
This breaks significant part of intermolecular bonds and weakens or partially breaks bonds inside of molecules.
Wet structure of napkin practically has no resistance. You can easily stretch or tear it and then apply the same force to dry regions and see the difference.

And there's one more pretty interesting thing.
Now the dried region has stronger bonds (or more firm structure or higher resistance).

If you squeeze wet region you pack the molecules of napkin much more tightly compared to the previous density.
This creates larger amount of joint points.
Then, while water dries, the freed parts of energy redistribute proportionally towards the rest of existing close points of interaction thus increasing amount of force dedicated to intermolecular and molecular links of napkin.
In the resulting dry structure there are much more points of junction between molecules and because of these now larger part of "chemical" energy of the molecules is directed outside of the molecules than previously.
This (mostly) does not affect firmness of molecules (from point of us able to detect the difference), but the difference in the amount of intermolecular forces (and dedicated amount of corresponding energy) changes pretty significantly and we can feel the change with fingurs and observe visually the increase of firmness by the way the structure bends or keeps its shape.

Napkin

4. Nearby Unification

Comparison to other forces
Dissociation
Catalyst
Capacitor
Liquid
Amorphous substance

Comparison to other forces.

Energy or state of material sustained mainly by corresponding kind of energy	Main dependencies of force for current conditions (for two objects)
Gravitational	F=f(m₁, m₂, R, ...)
Electricity	F=f(q₁, q₂, R, ...)
Chemical, crystalline, amorphous, liquid, ...	F=f(x₁, x₂, R, ...)

Capacitor.

As we already know, there are no positive and negative charges, and electricity is a flow of energy, which I call superfluous (for ordinary conditions we have in our environment).
I mentioned in previous article capacitor.
... yeah, yeah, the principle of electrical energy is pretty much the same.
You can see actually direct analogy between electrical interactions (properties of electrical energy) in conductor+capacitor and chemical interactions of molecules/atoms forming chemical bonds.

Before we start I should note one difference, "chemical" energy cannot flow from one atom to another, disregarding the strength of chemical/crystalline bonds.
As you could notice from previous article, there's a string of transitions in matter→energy transformations and I distinguish or group forms of energy by their stability. Heat is very unstable, electricity is more stable, but can easily turn into heat and is not bound to atom and can flow over the structure of atoms, "chemical" energy is more stable than electricity and it cannot flow between atoms.

"Electrical energy" or electricity in a conductor with capacitor has the same basic principles (with different accents) as molecule and "chemical energy."
By default electrical energy has some average appearance throughout the material of conductor (and connected to it capacitor),
but if to move one plate of capacitor (atom/molecule in case of chemistry) towards the other plate, then the charged plate starts to attract some proportional amount of energy from the opposite plate.
The energy at this opposite plate flows to the edge of the crystalline structure of the plate to come closest to the charged plate and makes thing layer at surface.
But... right beyond this layer appears layer of negative (compared to average equilibrium in environment) density of electrical energy. From one side of this layer of negative/reduced density is increased density kept by other plate, but from the other side the energy can (and does) flow to the area with reduced density to make equilibrium. This energy flows from the material of the conductor and from the ground.
And now (by analogy from the "rule" of proportional redistribution of chemical energy) this higher amount of energy causes exactly the same process at the opposite side (which started the process).
Honestly, or actually, this increased density of energy tries to drag to itself everything it can, but (1) the opposite plate is stationary, and (2) it most efficiently influences exactly the same kind of energy or something filled with this energy, as chemical energy does in chemical interactions.
One plate filled with energy attracts the opposite side and causes increase of density there, than that side applies force to this side and increases its density, this side then applies more force to the opposite side... and they continually provoke mutual growth.
This process continues until (1) breakdown during which most of superfluous energy from the end connected to power supply quickly flows to the ground / low density, or (2) energy reaches such density when it prevents subsequent increase, and this point depends on number of parameters like characteristics of power supply and dimensions and properties of capacitor.
(I wonder if anyone ever measured this reverse current during charging of capacitor, otherwise you have chance to detect in practice new phenomenon.) Yeah, some of the laws of conservation still work and energy cannot appear out of nowhere.

And actually what happened is that we considered direct analogy and the essence (from different perspective or with different parameters) of creation of directional influence (inside of complex objects) but instead of atoms and molecules we had structure of atoms in form of conductor+capacitor.
Chemical energy is more stable then electrical, it cannot flow away from an atom like electricity, but principally atoms and molecules are the same conductors and capacitors with few of basic differences but pretty big resulting diversity.
And what's interesting about it is that if you'll consider this from point of view of physical reality they are indeed the same atoms and molecules )

The difference between chemical energy with corresponding interactions and electricity with corresponding interactions lies in different basic parameters of more basic substances and processes.

Basically the same processes resulted in unbelievable amount of different scientific areas, phenomenons and particularities.

Dissociation.

Molecules of dissolvent surround molecules of some material and when they come close they weaken links between molecules and atoms of separate molecules.
In the experiment with napkin molecules of water were dissolving structure of napkin.
You may dissolve sugar or salt completely to separate molecules.

If molecule has weak bonds it can be split by dissolvent.
More general statement: molecules of liquid can change (crystalline or other) structure of material or of particular molecules and split it to parts.
Obviously there's no principle difference between dissociation and chemical reaction.

And one pretty important note.
Water (when dissolves acid) weakens links between atoms of molecules of acid by surrounding them and drawing to themselves energy from main links of molecules of acid.
Looks like nothing special, but let's take a look from another perspective at what actually happens.
(1) A lot of energy is drawn back from main links of molecules of acid and is spread between surrounding atoms of water.
(2) At the same time all of these atoms of water do not form strong bonds and some of them because of motion of molecules of water may be replaced by others molecules of water, and
(3) if at this moment instead of molecule of water this group of atoms comes across some other molecule potentially able to form strong link with acid,
then this other molecule finds molecule of acid in more reactive state because molecules of water weakened internal bonds of molecule of acid and its atoms may dedicate more energy to outer bonds and thus more intensively or more likely form new bond(s).

Dissolvent which does not break molecules being dissolved makes them more reactive.
Now it all is easy.
Actually, you can continue on your own.

Catalyst.

The main thing that needs to be noted here is that catalysts are not obliged to form strong/firm chemical bonds with reacting components and there's no need anymore to fit the process into limiting tables of rules (possibly with non-existent intermediate components or rules).
Actually water in the previous example is an ordinary catalyst.
Though the word catalyst itself is limitation and as you see there's no much of principle ground to isolate some of the participants of reactions.
There are just atoms and molecules with their uniform properties and they interact. That's all.

Liquid.

Liquid: stick/unstick + weaker further surrounding attraction F=f(x₁, x₂, R, ...) and + [kinetic] motion.

Amorphous substance.

The same as liquids with the difference that amorphous materials consist of complex molecules.
This increases the amount of intermolecular forces because of possible multiple points of interaction and decreases the speed molecules stick/unstick to each other and thus slows down internal motion and forms viscosity.
Personally I don't account to amorphous materials which have firm structure at room temperature like for instance window glass. It is potentially amorphous and becomes amorphous at higher temperatures, but in ordinary environmental conditions as wee see window glass it is not amorphous.
Actually any structure (especially consisting of molecules) may be considered as amorphous (if such definition is applicable to material) at low scale right below melting point since bonds are formed gradually.

Wetting, capillary, surface tension, ...
Literally you can count/compose such effects or special cases infinitely if you know the basic rules.

Pretty much of similarities.
And guess why?
Because these are the same atoms, the same basic laws of nature (in our surrounding environment/conditions with a little bit different basic parameters), the same reality.
It may seem unbelievable, but it's true.
)

No need for tons of tables of rules and tons of tables with exceptions for these rules.

KOE provides completion and unity in (basic physical) understanding from any point of consideration of something in any direction concerning any substance or their interactions.

5. Conclusion.

We saw Knowledge of Everything in action.

Most of the rest of the questions and particulars are thoroughly considered in the Introduction above.

Modern science is driven by experiment.
The most advanced edge and the essence of development of modern science are laboratories with extensive/exhausting experiments to find out something new, some compound, molecule or composite with different properties.
There's no such question as to take theory and deduce some compound with specific qualities that would give advance to industry. (Because of absence of correct theory.)
Tiny shift in conditions at basis results in drastically different outcomes, as we saw on the examples of impurity conduction or electricity vs chemistry.
New (and often or periodically conceptually different) tables/theories are added for new unknown results from experiments, where in reality there was just a tiny change of one of the basic parameters.

There's proof of inconsistency of mathematics, but to complement it by physics you can easily prove that development of science in experiment driven form will last infinitely and will extend to infinite amount of information.

Modern science has dozens/hundreds (or more) of books just to describe the basics of physics/mathematics/philosophy/chemistry... (though probably/nearly each theory is equally basic, by definition or by the rules of development of science).
It all can be replaced by one book.
Unity, beauty, and absolute perfection (of the basis of science) from the point of introduction and till the end of humanity.

And, to be objective, I should note that we touched just a little (part of) an ordinary chemical reaction and few of adjacent similar effects for current environment, tiny special case, and there's still the whole universe.
Now you can imagine the power of KOE, and the beauty of reality.

Universal Absoluteness of Knowledge