Every time I calm down and think about what has happed recently in me life, I will sigh the time move so fast and I try my best to race with it. On the other hand I sort of enjoy the frustration. In other words, the thing are always run as what is beyond your expectation, which is much bother me in my childhood.

Go to talk about something about my scientific work, the first thing come into my mind is the discussion of the bonding nature in C2, a simple molecule and having second strongest atomization energy in the world according to the available knowledge. And the reason I think is the too much information about the chemical bonding nature lectures presented by R. Hoffman and the conference "the challenges in homogeneous catalysis". There are several interesting guys involved in the topic, such as S. Saik, R. Hoffman, Schleyer, Schaefer..., A paper in Angwandte entitled" one molecule, two atoms, three views, four bonds. and then a critical comment from G. Frenking. Similar to this type of  debate actually happened a lot in the chemical society. I sometimes think that these guy go to more philosophy than science. I quit appreciate the idea from Hoffman, the world is fuzzy and let's enjoy it. With respect to the nature of bonding, I desire to understand it in terms of energy composition because the different energy between different species will lead to different dynamics effect during the reaction. In other word, the difference combination (ratio) will help us to illustrated the novel dynamics phenomenon( personal perspective).

Jump to the conference I mentioned above, it is organized by Fahmi from our department in Långholm in Stockholm. The topic is quit condense and of course all topics are related to the homogeneous catalysis. The well applied and applauded theory is transition state theory. My overall feeling is the guys are (whether talkative or not) friendly and easily to talk with. The eternal of the computational chemistry almost everyone mention as to design and predicted the reactivity (chemical reaction). And also this is maybe the experientialists usually say (Hi guys, can you tell us if this reaction can work, or can you design a novel reaction for me). I always think about what is the significance of the computational chemistry, (theoretical chemistry). R. Hoffman again inspired me some aspects, 1) the experiments need theory to illustrate 2) theory is easily to be taught to public...  I just want to say I enjoy the understanding. ( to explain the right things on the right reason). However, there is an ambition in my mind that let's created something. It origins the philosophy class in high school. Our action is to know the world and change the world.

Another thing always bother me is how to deal with the publications and get knowledge from the things I am work on. Some people in the are sort of happy with the quantity of the their publications and occupied the first person position in a filed. Yeah, whatever. Doing the things which fit my heart. If I feel happy and then do it!

Enjoy the fuzzy world and do whatever you want!