Reveals a deterministic model of chemical bonding using unique hardware architecture, suggesting a breakthrough in molecular structure analysis.
Title: The Substrate Architecture of the Chemical Bond: Resolving VSEPR Anomalies via P-N-P Nucleodynamics and 90° Cartesian Hardware Locks Author: Marco Lindenbeck Description: Valence Shell Electron Pair Repulsion (VSEPR) theory and conventional quantum chemical orbital models rely on continuous electronic probability clouds and empirical repulsion factors. While effective for basic geometries, VSEPR fails systematically across several major classes of molecules—including heavy alkaline earth dihalides, stereochemically inactive lone pair complexes (AX₆E₁), d⁸ square planar complexes, and d⁰ trigonal prismatic geometries. This manuscript establishes a deterministic, hardware-based model of chemical bonding grounded in discrete Substrate Logistics. It demonstrates that molecular geometry is the macroscopic physical rendering of nuclear geometry, strictly governed by the $P-N-P$ Hetero-Nucleon Stacking Law. By evaluating the exact dihedral angle of regular dodecahedral nucleons (θdodeca = (-1/√5) ≈ 116.565^∘), this framework derives the fundamental 10.305^∘ Geometric Frustration wedge without free parameters. Classical "lone pairs" are physically reclassified as localized 0.511 MeV electron mortar partitions occupying these nuclear frustration gaps. The framework formalizes a second-order hardware protocol stack—comprising Mortar Tether Drag, 90.00^∘ Cartesian Hardware Locks, Core Caching, and z-Axis Phase Shielding—and validates it across 28 fundamental coordination configurations. This bare-metal architectural approach achieves $>99.8%$ numerical agreement with empirical bond angles, permanently resolving the "VSEPR Graveyard" and proving that the chemical bond is the localized, high-resolution geometry of a discrete scale-invariant hardware architecture.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marco Lindenbeck (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: