text:
Involuntary commitment

Involuntary commitment, civil commitment, or involuntary hospitalization/hospitalisation is a legal process through which an individual who is deemed by a qualified person to have symptoms of severe mental disorder is detained in a psychiatric hospital (inpatient) where they can be treated involuntarily. This treatment may involve the administration of psychoactive drugs, including involuntary administration. In many jurisdictions, people diagnosed with mental health disorders can also be forced to undergo treatment while in the community; this is sometimes referred to as outpatient commitment and shares legal processes with commitment.

Criteria for civil commitment are established by laws which vary between nations. Commitment proceedings often follow a period of emergency hospitalization, during which an individual with acute psychiatric symptoms is confined for a relatively short duration (e.g. 72 hours) in a treatment facility for evaluation and stabilization by mental health professionals who may then determine whether further civil commitment is appropriate or necessary. Civil commitment procedures may take place in a court or only involve physicians. If commitment does not involve a court there is normally an appeal process that does involve the judiciary in some capacity, though potentially through a specialist court.

Purpose
For most jurisdictions, involuntary commitment is applied to individuals believed to be experiencing a mental illness that impairs their ability to reason to such an extent that the agents of the law, state, or courts determine that decisions will be made for the individual under a legal framework. In some jurisdictions, this is a proceeding distinct from being found incompetent. Involuntary commitment is used in some degree for each of the following although different jurisdictions have different criteria. Some jurisdictions limit involuntary treatment to individuals who meet statutory criteria for presenting a danger to self or others. Other jurisdictions have broader criteria. The legal process by which commitment takes place varies between jurisdictions. Some jurisdictions have a formal court hearing where testimony and other evidence may also be submitted and the subject of the hearing is typically entitled to legal counsel and may challenge a commitment order through habeas corpus. Other jurisdictions have delegated these power to physicians, though may provide an appeal process that involves the judiciary but may also involve physicians. For example, in the UK a mental health tribunal consists of a judge, a medical member, and a lay representative.

First aid
Training is gradually becoming available in mental health first aid to equip community members such as teachers, school administrators, police officers, and medical workers with training in recognizing, and authority in managing, situations where involuntary evaluations of behavior are applicable under law. The extension of first aid training to cover mental health problems and crises is a quite recent development. A mental health first aid training course was developed in Australia in 2001 and has been found to improve assistance provided to persons with an alleged mental illness or mental health crisis. This form of training has now spread to a number of other countries (Canada, Finland, Hong Kong, Ireland, Singapore, Scotland, England, Wales, and the United States). Mental health triage may be used in an emergency room to make a determination about potential risk and apply treatment protocols.

Observation
Observation is sometimes used to determine whether a person warrants involuntary commitment. It is not always clear on a relatively brief examination whether a person should be committed.

Containment of danger
Austria, Belgium, Germany, Israel, the Netherlands, Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, Russia, Taiwan, Ontario (Canada), and the United States have adopted commitment criteria based on the presumed danger of the defendant to self or to others.

People with suicidal thoughts may act on these impulses and harm or kill themselves.

People with psychosis are occasionally driven by their delusions or hallucinations to harm themselves or others. Research has found that those with schizophrenia are between 3.4 and 7.4 times more likely to engage in violent behaviour than members of the general public. However, because other confounding factors such as childhood adversity and poverty are correlated with both schizophrenia and violence it can be difficult to determine whether this effect is due to schizophrenia or other factors. In an attempt to avoid these confounding factors, researchers have tried comparing the rates of violence amongst people diagnosed with schizophrenia to their siblings in a similar manner to twin studies. In these studies people with schizophrenia are found to be between 1.3 and 1.8 times more likely to engage in violent behaviour.

People with certain types of personality disorders can occasionally present a danger to themselves or others.

This concern has found expression in the standards for involuntary commitment in every US state and in other countries as the danger to self or others standard, sometimes supplemented by the requirement that the danger be imminent. In some jurisdictions, the danger to self or others standard has been broadened in recent years to include need-for-treatment criteria such as "gravely disabled".

Deinstitutionalization
Starting in the 1960s, there has been a worldwide trend toward moving psychiatric patients from hospital settings to less restricting settings in the community, a shift known as "deinstitutionalization". Because the shift was typically not accompanied by a commensurate development of community-based services, critics say that deinstitutionalization has led to large numbers of people who would once have been inpatients as instead being incarcerated or becoming homeless. In some jurisdictions, laws authorizing court-ordered outpatient treatment have been passed in an effort to compel individuals with chronic, untreated severe mental illness to take psychiatric medication while living outside the hospital (e.g. Laura's Law, Kendra's Law).

In a study of 269 patients from Vermont State Hospital done by Courtenay M. Harding and associates, about two-thirds of the ex-patients did well after deinstitutionalization.

France
In 1838, France enacted a law to regulate both the admissions into asylums and asylum services across the country. Édouard Séguin developed a systematic approach for training individuals with mental deficiencies, and, in 1839, he opened the first school for intellectually disabled people. His method of treatment was based on the idea that intellectually disabled people did not suffer from disease.

United Kingdom
In the United Kingdom, provision for the care of the mentally ill began in the early 19th century with a state-led effort. Public mental asylums were established in Britain after the passing of the 1808 County Asylums Act. This empowered magistrates to build rate-supported asylums in every county to house the many "pauper lunatics". Nine counties first applied, and the first public asylum opened in 1812 in Nottinghamshire. Parliamentary Committees were established to investigate abuses at private madhouses like Bethlem Hospital - its officers were eventually dismissed and national attention was focused on the routine use of bars, chains and handcuffs and the filthy conditions in which the inmates lived. However, it was not until 1828 that the newly appointed Commissioners in Lunacy were empowered to license and supervise private asylums.

The Lunacy Act 1845 was a landmark in the treatment of the mentally ill, as it explicitly changed the status of mentally ill people to patients who required treatment. The Act created the Lunacy Commission, headed by Lord Shaftesbury, focusing on reform of the legislation concerning lunacy. The commission consisted of eleven Metropolitan Commissioners who were required to carry out the provisions of the Act; the compulsory construction of asylums in every county, with regular inspections on behalf of the Home Secretary. All asylums were required to have written regulations and to have a resident qualified physician. A national body for asylum superintendents - the Medico-Psychological Association - was established in 1866 under the Presidency of William A. F. Browne, although the body appeared in an earlier form in 1841.

At the turn of the century, England and France combined had only a few hundred individuals in asylums. By the late 1890s and early 1900s, those so detained had risen to the hundreds of thousands. However, the idea that mental illness could be ameliorated through institutionalization was soon disappointed. Psychiatrists were pressured by an ever-increasing patient population. The average number of patients in asylums kept increasing. Asylums were quickly becoming almost indistinguishable from custodial institutions, and the reputation of psychiatry in the medical world had was at an extreme low.

Sectioning is now regulated by the Mental Health Act 2007 in England and Wales, the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 in Scotland and other legislation in Northern Ireland.

United States
In the United States, the erection of state asylums began with the first law for the creation of one in New York, passed in 1842. The Utica State Hospital was opened approximately in 1850. The creation of this hospital, as of many others, was largely the work of Dorothea Lynde Dix, whose philanthropic efforts extended over many states, and in Europe as far as Constantinople. Many state hospitals in the United States were built in the 1850s and 1860s on the Kirkbride Plan, an architectural style meant to have curative effect.

In the United States and most other developed societies, severe restrictions have been placed on the circumstances under which a person may be committed or treated against their will as such actions have been ruled by the United States Supreme Court and other national legislative bodies as a violation of civil rights and/or human rights. The Supreme Court case O'Connor v. Donaldson established that the mere presence of mental illness and the necessity for treatment are not sufficient by themselves to justify involuntary commitment, if the patient is capable of surviving in freedom and does not present a danger of harm to themselves or others. Criteria for involuntary commitment are generally set by the individual states, and often have both short- and long-term types of commitment. Short-term commitment tends to be a few days or less, requiring an examination by a medical professional, while longer-term commitment typically requires a court hearing, or sentencing as part of a criminal trial. Indefinite commitment is rare and is usually reserved for individuals who are violent or present an ongoing danger to themselves and others.

New York City officials under several administrations have implemented programs involving the involuntary hospitalization of people with mental illnesses in the city. Some of these policies have involved reinterpreting the standard of "harm to themselves or others" to include neglecting their own well-being or posing a harm to themselves or others in the future. In 1987–88, a homeless woman named Joyce Brown worked with the New York Civil Liberties Union to challenge her forced hospitalization under a new Mayor Ed Koch administration program. The trial, which attracted significant media attention, ended in her favor, and while the city won on appeal she was ultimately released after a subsequent case determined she could not be forcibly medicated. In 2022, Mayor Eric Adams announced a similar compulsory hospitalization program, relying on similar legal interpretations.

Historically, until the mid-1960s in most jurisdictions in the United States, all committals to public psychiatric facilities and most committals to private ones were involuntary. Since then, there have been alternating trends towards the abolition or substantial reduction of involuntary commitment, a trend known as deinstitutionalisation. In many currents, individuals can voluntarily admit themselves to a mental health hospital and may have more rights than those who are involuntarily committed. This practice is referred to as voluntary commitment.

In the United States, Kansas v. Hendricks established the procedures for a long-term or indefinite form of commitment applicable to people convicted of some sexual offences.

United Nations
United Nations General Assembly Resolution 46/119, "Principles for the Protection of Persons with Mental Illness and the Improvement of Mental Health Care", is a non-binding resolution advocating certain broadly drawn procedures for the carrying out of involuntary commitment. These principles have been used in many countries where local laws have been revised or new ones implemented. The UN runs programs in some countries to assist in this process.

Criticism
The potential dangers of institutions have been noted and criticized by reformers/activists almost since their foundation. Charles Dickens was an outspoken and high-profile early critic, and several of his novels, in particular Oliver Twist and Hard Times demonstrate his insight into the damage that institutions can do to human beings.

Enoch Powell, when Minister for Health in the early 1960s, was a later opponent who was appalled by what he witnessed on his visits to the asylums, and his famous "water tower" speech in 1961 called for the closure of all NHS asylums and their replacement by wards in general hospitals:

"'There they stand, isolated, majestic, imperious, brooded over by the gigantic water-tower and chimney combined, rising unmistakable and daunting out of the countryside - the asylums which our forefathers built with such immense solidity to express the notions of their day. Do not for a moment underestimate their powers of resistance to our assault. Let me describe some of the defenses which we have to storm.'"

Scandal after scandal followed, with many high-profile public inquiries. These involved the exposure of abuses such as unscientific surgical techniques such as lobotomy and the widespread neglect and abuse of vulnerable patients in the US and Europe. The growing anti-psychiatry movement in the 1960s and 1970s led in Italy to the first successful legislative challenge to the authority of the mental institutions, culminating in their closure.

During the 1970s and 1990s the hospital population started to fall rapidly, mainly because of the deaths of long-term inmates. Significant efforts were made to re-house large numbers of former residents in a variety of suitable or otherwise alternative accommodation. The first 1,000+ bed hospital to close was Darenth Park Hospital in Kent, swiftly followed by many more across the UK. The haste of these closures, driven by the Conservative governments led by Margaret Thatcher and John Major, led to considerable criticism in the press, as some individuals slipped through the net into homelessness or were discharged to poor quality private sector mini-institutions.

Wrongful involuntary commitment
There are instances in which mental health professionals have wrongfully deemed individuals to have been displaying the symptoms of a mental disorder, and committed the individual for treatment in a psychiatric hospital upon such grounds. Involuntary commitment is undertaken when the information provided to the doctor during the period of evaluation appears to show that the patient is a danger to themselves or others. This can be challenging in some scenarios, when there isn't enough collateral information to disprove the claims erratic or dangerous behaviors. Therefore, claims of wrongful commitment are a common theme in the anti-psychiatry movement.

In 1860, the case of Elizabeth Packard, who was wrongfully committed that year and filed a lawsuit and won thereafter, highlighted the issue of wrongful involuntary commitment. In 1887, investigative journalist Nellie Bly went undercover at an asylum in New York City to expose the terrible conditions that mental patients at the time had to deal with. She published her findings and experiences as articles in New York World, and later made the articles into one book called Ten Days in a Mad-House.

In the first half of the twentieth century there were a few high-profile cases of wrongful commitment based on racism or punishment for political dissenters. In the former Soviet Union, psychiatric hospitals were used as prisons to isolate political prisoners from the rest of society. British playwright Tom Stoppard wrote Every Good Boy Deserves Favour about the relationship between a patient and his doctor in one of these hospitals. Stoppard was inspired by a meeting with a Russian exile. In 1927, after the execution of Sacco and Vanzetti in the United States, demonstrator Aurora D'Angelo was sent to a mental health facility for psychiatric evaluation after she participated in a rally in support of the anarchists. Throughout the 1940s and 1950s in Canada, 20,000 Canadian children, called the Duplessis orphans, were wrongfully certified as being mentally ill and as a result were committed to psychiatric institutions where they were allegedly forced to take psychiatric medication that they did not need and were abused. They were named after Maurice Duplessis, the premier of Quebec at the time, who deliberately committed these children to misappropriate additional subsidies from the federal government. Decades later in the 1990s, several of the orphans sued Quebec and the Catholic Church for the abuse and wrongdoing. In 1958, black pastor and activist Clennon Washington King Jr. tried enrolling at the University of Mississippi, which at the time was white, for summer classes; the local police secretly arrested and involuntarily committed him to a mental hospital for 12 days.

Patients are able to sue if they believe that they have been wrongfully committed. In one instance, Junius Wilson, an African American man, was committed to Cherry Hospital in Goldsboro, North Carolina in 1925 for an alleged crime without a trial or conviction. He was castrated. He continued to be held at Cherry Hospital for the next 67 years of his life. It turned out he was deaf rather than mentally ill.

In many U.S. states, sex offenders who have completed a period of incarceration can be civilly committed to a mental institution based on a finding of dangerousness due to a mental disorder. Although the United States Supreme Court determined that this practice does not constitute double jeopardy, organizations such as the American Psychiatric Association (APA) strongly oppose the practice. The Task Force on Sexually Dangerous Offenders, a component of APA's Council on Psychiatry and Law, reported that "in the opinion of the task force, sexual predator commitment laws represent a serious assault on the integrity of psychiatry, particularly with regard to defining mental illness and the clinical conditions for compulsory treatment. Moreover, by bending civil commitment to serve essentially non-medical purposes, statutes threaten to undermine the legitimacy of the medical model of commitment."

In the creative arts

 * One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (novel), (One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (film)), (One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (play))
 * if....
 * Forrest Gump novel and film based on the novel
 * Cool Hand Luke
 * Rebel without a Cause

title: Involuntary commitment


text:
Intermolecular force

An intermolecular force (IMF) (or secondary force) is the force that mediates interaction between molecules, including the electromagnetic forces of attraction or repulsion which act between atoms and other types of neighbouring particles, e.g. atoms or ions. Intermolecular forces are weak relative to intramolecular forces – the forces which hold a molecule together. For example, the covalent bond, involving sharing electron pairs between atoms, is much stronger than the forces present between neighboring molecules. Both sets of forces are essential parts of force fields frequently used in molecular mechanics.

The first reference to the nature of microscopic forces is found in Alexis Clairaut's work Théorie de la figure de la Terre, published in Paris in 1743. Other scientists who have contributed to the investigation of microscopic forces include: Laplace, Gauss, Maxwell, Boltzmann and Pauling.

Attractive intermolecular forces are categorized into the following types:
 * Hydrogen bonding
 * Ion–dipole forces and ion–induced dipole force
 * Cation–π, σ–π and π–π bonding
 * Van der Waals forces – Keesom force, Debye force, and London dispersion force
 * Cation–cation bonding
 * Salt bridge (protein and supramolecular)

Information on intermolecular forces is obtained by macroscopic measurements of properties like viscosity, pressure, volume, temperature (PVT) data. The link to microscopic aspects is given by virial coefficients and intermolecular pair potentials, such as the Mie potential, Buckingham potential or Lennard-Jones potential.

In the broadest sense, it can be understood as such interactions between any particles (molecules, atoms, ions and molecular ions) in which the formation of chemical, that is, ionic, covalent or metallic bonds does not occur. In other words, these interactions are significantly weaker than covalent ones and do not lead to a significant restructuring of the electronic structure of the interacting particles. (This is only partially true. For example, all enzymatic and catalytic reactions begin with a weak intermolecular interaction between a substrate and an enzyme or a molecule with a catalyst, but several such weak interactions with the required spatial configuration of the active center of the enzyme lead to significant restructuring changes the energy state of molecules or substrate, which ultimately leads to the breaking of some and the formation of other covalent chemical bonds. Strictly speaking, all enzymatic reactions begin with intermolecular interactions between the substrate and the enzyme, therefore the importance of these interactions is especially great in biochemistry and molecular biology, and is the basis of enzymology).

Hydrogen bonding
A hydrogen bond is an extreme form of dipole-dipole bonding, referring to the attraction between a hydrogen atom that is bonded to an element with high electronegativity, usually nitrogen, oxygen, or fluorine. The hydrogen bond is often described as a strong electrostatic dipole–dipole interaction. However, it also has some features of covalent bonding: it is directional, stronger than a van der Waals force interaction, produces interatomic distances shorter than the sum of their van der Waals radii, and usually involves a limited number of interaction partners, which can be interpreted as a kind of valence. The number of Hydrogen bonds formed between molecules is equal to the number of active pairs. The molecule which donates its hydrogen is termed the donor molecule, while the molecule containing lone pair participating in H bonding is termed the acceptor molecule. The number of active pairs is equal to the common number between number of hydrogens the donor has and the number of lone pairs the acceptor has.

Though both not depicted in the diagram, water molecules have four active bonds. The oxygen atom’s two lone pairs interact with a hydrogen each, forming two additional hydrogen bonds, and the second hydrogen atom also interacts with a neighbouring oxygen. Intermolecular hydrogen bonding is responsible for the high boiling point of water (100 °C) compared to the other group 16 hydrides, which have little capability to hydrogen bond. Intramolecular hydrogen bonding is partly responsible for the secondary, tertiary, and quaternary structures of proteins and nucleic acids. It also plays an important role in the structure of polymers, both synthetic and natural.

Salt bridge
The attraction between cationic and anionic sites is a noncovalent, or intermolecular interaction which is usually referred to as ion pairing or salt bridge. It is essentially due to electrostatic forces, although in aqueous medium the association is driven by entropy and often even endothermic. Most salts form crystals with characteristic distances between the ions; in contrast to many other noncovalent interactions, salt bridges are not directional and show in the solid state usually contact determined only by the van der Waals radii of the ions. Inorganic as well as organic ions display in water at moderate ionic strength I similar salt bridge as association ΔG values around 5 to 6 kJ/mol for a 1:1 combination of anion and cation, almost independent of the nature (size, polarizability, etc.) of the ions. The ΔG values are additive and approximately a linear function of the charges, the interaction of e.g. a doubly charged phosphate anion with a single charged ammonium cation accounts for about 2x5 = 10 kJ/mol. The ΔG values depend on the ionic strength I of the solution, as described by the Debye-Hückel equation, at zero ionic strength one observes ΔG = 8 kJ/mol.

Dipole–dipole and similar interactions
Dipole–dipole interactions (or Keesom interactions) are electrostatic interactions between molecules which have permanent dipoles. This interaction is stronger than the London forces but is weaker than ion-ion interaction because only partial charges are involved. These interactions tend to align the molecules to increase attraction (reducing potential energy). An example of a dipole–dipole interaction can be seen in hydrogen chloride (HCl): the positive end of a polar molecule will attract the negative end of the other molecule and influence its position. Polar molecules have a net attraction between them. Examples of polar molecules include hydrogen chloride (HCl) and chloroform (CHCl3).

Often molecules contain dipolar groups of atoms, but have no overall dipole moment on the molecule as a whole. This occurs if there is symmetry within the molecule that causes the dipoles to cancel each other out. This occurs in molecules such as tetrachloromethane and carbon dioxide. The dipole–dipole interaction between two individual atoms is usually zero, since atoms rarely carry a permanent dipole.

The Keesom interaction is a van der Waals force. It is discussed further in the section "Van der Waals forces".

Ion–dipole and ion–induced dipole forces
Ion–dipole and ion–induced dipole forces are similar to dipole–dipole and dipole–induced dipole interactions but involve ions, instead of only polar and non-polar molecules. Ion–dipole and ion–induced dipole forces are stronger than dipole–dipole interactions because the charge of any ion is much greater than the charge of a dipole moment. Ion–dipole bonding is stronger than hydrogen bonding.

An ion–dipole force consists of an ion and a polar molecule interacting. They align so that the positive and negative groups are next to one another, allowing maximum attraction. An important example of this interaction is hydration of ions in water which give rise to hydration enthalpy. The polar water molecules surround themselves around ions in water and the energy released during the process is known as hydration enthalpy. The interaction has its immense importance in justifying the stability of various ions (like Cu2+) in water.

An ion–induced dipole force consists of an ion and a non-polar molecule interacting. Like a dipole–induced dipole force, the charge of the ion causes distortion of the electron cloud on the non-polar molecule.

Van der Waals forces
The van der Waals forces arise from interaction between uncharged atoms or molecules, leading not only to such phenomena as the cohesion of condensed phases and physical absorption of gases, but also to a universal force of attraction between macroscopic bodies.

Keesom force (permanent dipole – permanent dipole)
The first contribution to van der Waals forces is due to electrostatic interactions between rotating permanent dipoles, quadrupoles (all molecules with symmetry lower than cubic), and multipoles. It is termed the Keesom interaction, named after Willem Hendrik Keesom. These forces originate from the attraction between permanent dipoles (dipolar molecules) and are temperature dependent.

They consist of attractive interactions between dipoles that are ensemble averaged over different rotational orientations of the dipoles. It is assumed that the molecules are constantly rotating and never get locked into place. This is a good assumption, but at some point molecules do get locked into place. The energy of a Keesom interaction depends on the inverse sixth power of the distance, unlike the interaction energy of two spatially fixed dipoles, which depends on the inverse third power of the distance. The Keesom interaction can only occur among molecules that possess permanent dipole moments, i.e., two polar molecules. Also Keesom interactions are very weak van der Waals interactions and do not occur in aqueous solutions that contain electrolytes. The angle averaged interaction is given by the following equation:

 * $$\frac{-d_1^2 d_2^2}{24\pi^2 \varepsilon_0^2 \varepsilon_r^2 k_\text{B} T r^6} = V,$$

where d = electric dipole moment, $$\varepsilon_0$$ = permittivity of free space, $$\varepsilon_r$$ = dielectric constant of surrounding material, T = temperature, $$k_\text{B}$$ = Boltzmann constant, and r = distance between molecules.

Debye force (permanent dipoles–induced dipoles)
The second contribution is the induction (also termed polarization) or Debye force, arising from interactions between rotating permanent dipoles and from the polarizability of atoms and molecules (induced dipoles). These induced dipoles occur when one molecule with a permanent dipole repels another molecule's electrons. A molecule with permanent dipole can induce a dipole in a similar neighboring molecule and cause mutual attraction. Debye forces cannot occur between atoms. The forces between induced and permanent dipoles are not as temperature dependent as Keesom interactions because the induced dipole is free to shift and rotate around the polar molecule. The Debye induction effects and Keesom orientation effects are termed polar interactions.

The induced dipole forces appear from the induction (also termed polarization), which is the attractive interaction between a permanent multipole on one molecule with an induced (by the former di/multi-pole) 31 on another. This interaction is called the Debye force, named after Peter J. W. Debye.

One example of an induction interaction between permanent dipole and induced dipole is the interaction between HCl and Ar. In this system, Ar experiences a dipole as its electrons are attracted (to the H side of HCl) or repelled (from the Cl side) by HCl. The angle averaged interaction is given by the following equation:

 * $$\frac{-d_1^2 \alpha_2}{16\pi^2 \varepsilon_0^2 \varepsilon_r^2 r^6} = V,$$

where $$\alpha_2$$ = polarizability.

This kind of interaction can be expected between any polar molecule and non-polar/symmetrical molecule. The induction-interaction force is far weaker than dipole–dipole interaction, but stronger than the London dispersion force.

London dispersion force (fluctuating dipole–induced dipole interaction)
The third and dominant contribution is the dispersion or London force (fluctuating dipole–induced dipole), which arises due to the non-zero instantaneous dipole moments of all atoms and molecules. Such polarization can be induced either by a polar molecule or by the repulsion of negatively charged electron clouds in non-polar molecules. Thus, London interactions are caused by random fluctuations of electron density in an electron cloud. An atom with a large number of electrons will have a greater associated London force than an atom with fewer electrons. The dispersion (London) force is the most important component because all materials are polarizable, whereas Keesom and Debye forces require permanent dipoles. The London interaction is universal and is present in atom-atom interactions as well. For various reasons, London interactions (dispersion) have been considered relevant for interactions between macroscopic bodies in condensed systems. Hamaker developed the theory of van der Waals between macroscopic bodies in 1937 and showed that the additivity of these interactions renders them considerably more long-range.

Relative strength of forces
This comparison is approximate. The actual relative strengths will vary depending on the molecules involved. For instance, the presence of water creates competing interactions that greatly weaken the strength of both ionic and hydrogen bonds. We may consider that for static systems, Ionic bonding and covalent bonding will always be stronger than intermolecular forces in any given substance. But it is not so for big moving systems like enzyme molecules interacting with substrate molecules. Here the numerous intramolecular (most often - hydrogen bonds) bonds form an active intermediate state where the intermolecular bonds cause some of the covalent bond to be broken, while the others are formed, in this way proceeding the thousands of enzymatic reactions, so important for living organisms.

Effect on the behavior of gases
Intermolecular forces are repulsive at short distances and attractive at long distances (see the Lennard-Jones potential). In a gas, the repulsive force chiefly has the effect of keeping two molecules from occupying the same volume. This gives a real gas a tendency to occupy a larger volume than an ideal gas at the same temperature and pressure. The attractive force draws molecules closer together and gives a real gas a tendency to occupy a smaller volume than an ideal gas. Which interaction is more important depends on temperature and pressure (see compressibility factor).

In a gas, the distances between molecules are generally large, so intermolecular forces have only a small effect. The attractive force is not overcome by the repulsive force, but by the thermal energy of the molecules. Temperature is the measure of thermal energy, so increasing temperature reduces the influence of the attractive force. In contrast, the influence of the repulsive force is essentially unaffected by temperature.

When a gas is compressed to increase its density, the influence of the attractive force increases. If the gas is made sufficiently dense, the attractions can become large enough to overcome the tendency of thermal motion to cause the molecules to disperse. Then the gas can condense to form a solid or liquid, i.e., a condensed phase. Lower temperature favors the formation of a condensed phase. In a condensed phase, there is very nearly a balance between the attractive and repulsive forces.

Quantum mechanical theories
Intermolecular forces observed between atoms and molecules can be described phenomenologically as occurring between permanent and instantaneous dipoles, as outlined above. Alternatively, one may seek a fundamental, unifying theory that is able to explain the various types of interactions such as hydrogen bonding, van der Waals force and dipole–dipole interactions. Typically, this is done by applying the ideas of quantum mechanics to molecules, and Rayleigh–Schrödinger perturbation theory has been especially effective in this regard. When applied to existing quantum chemistry methods, such a quantum mechanical explanation of intermolecular interactions provides an array of approximate methods that can be used to analyze intermolecular interactions. One of the most helpful methods to visualize this kind of intermolecular interactions, that we can find in quantum chemistry, is the non-covalent interaction index, which is based on the electron density of the system. London dispersion forces play a big role with this.

Concerning electron density topology, recent methods based on electron density gradient methods have emerged recently, notably with the development of IBSI (Intrinsic Bond Strength Index), relying on the IGM (Independent Gradient Model) methodology.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Intermolecular force


text:
IRQ

IRQ may refer to:

 * Interrupt request, a computer hardware signal
 * Iraq (ISO 3166-1 country code)
 * Qeshm Air (ICAO airline designator)

title: IRQ


text:
List of Internet top-level domains

This list of Internet top-level domains  (TLD) contains top-level domains, which are those domains in the DNS root zone of the Domain Name System of the Internet. A list of the top-level domains by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) is maintained at the Root Zone Database. IANA also oversees the approval process for new proposed top-level domains for ICANN. , their root domain contains 1502 top-level domains. , the IANA root database includes 1589 TLDs. That also includes 68 that are not assigned (revoked), 8 that are retired and 11 test domains. Those are not represented in IANA's listing and are not in root.zone file (root.zone file also includes one root domain).

Types
IANA distinguishes the following groups of top-level domains:

 * infrastructure top-level domain (ARPA)
 * generic top-level domains (gTLD)
 * generic-restricted top-level domains (grTLD)
 * sponsored top-level domains (sTLD)
 * country code top-level domains (ccTLD)
 * test top-level domains (tTLD)

Original top-level domains
Seven generic top-level domains were created early in the development of the Internet, and predate the creation of ICANN in 1998.
 * Name: DNS names
 * Entity: intended use
 * Administrator: managers
 * Notes: general remarks
 * IDN: support for internationalized domain names (IDN)
 * DNSSEC: presence of DS records for Domain Name System Security Extensions

Country code top-level domains
As of 20 May 2017, there were 255 country-code top-level domains, purely in the Latin alphabet, using two-character codes. , the number was 316, with the addition of internationalized domains.

Proposed internationalized ccTLDs
Internationalised domain names have been proposed for Japan and Libya.

ICANN-era generic top-level domains

 * Name: DNS name
 * Target market: intended use
 * Restrictions: restrictions, if any, on who can register, and how the domain can be used
 * Operator: entity the registry has been delegated to
 * IDN: support for internationalized domain names (IDN)
 * DNSSEC: presence of DS records for Domain Name System Security Extensions

B
D140290 (talk)tasnef.comD140290 (talk)

Internationalized generic top-level domains
All of these TLDs are internationalized domain names (IDN) and support second-level IDNs.

 * Notes: general remarks and intended use
 * DNSSEC: presence of DS records for Domain Name System Security Extensions

Geographic top-level domains

 * Name: DNS name
 * Entity: Target geographic area
 * Notes: general remarks
 * IDN: support for internationalized domain names (IDN)
 * DNSSEC: presence of DS records for Domain Name System Security Extensions

Brand and corporate top-level domains

 * Name: DNS name
 * Entity: company and/or brand
 * Notes: general remarks
 * IDN: support for internationalized domain names (IDN)
 * DNSSEC: presence of DS records for Domain Name System Security Extensions

Special-Use Domains
ICANN/IANA has created some Special-Use domain names which are meant for special technical purposes. ICANN/IANA owns all of the Special-Use domain names.

Non-IANA domains
Besides the TLDs managed (or at least tracked) by IANA or ICANN, other independent groups have created, or had attempted to create, their own TLDs with varying technical specifications, functions, and outcomes.

Internet Engineering Task Force proposals for local TLDs
The IETF has submitted several requests for comments on TLDs that could be used to represent local devices and services.

Blockchain-registered
Blockchain-based domains are registered and exchanged using a public blockchain like Ethereum. Oftentimes, these domains serve specific functions such as creating human-readable references to smart contract addresses used in DApps or personal wallet addresses. Generally, these non-standard domains are unreachable through the normal DNS resolution process and instead require clients to use some sort of transparent web proxy or gateway to access them

Alternate roots
In the case of alternative DNS roots, organizations or projects make use of the same mechanisms of the DNS but instead take on the role of ICANN in managing and administering an entirely separate root zone, thus having the ability to create new TLDs independently. However, this doesn't make these domains any less isolated from the rest of the internet, though the ability for clients to resolve them theoretically only requires switching to a recursive DNS resolver that recognizes and serves records underneath the alternate root zone.

title: List of Internet top-level domains


text:
Talk:Irrealism (the arts)

Older discussions from before the page was split have been archived at Talk:Irrealism/Archive2.

Even older discussions from before the page was split have been archived at Talk:Irrealism/Archive.

Hello, as you may have noticed, I have changed things around a bit. I hope that the Nelson Goodman enthusiasts won't mind the fact that I've changed the opening sectioin, and put his section down in the "philosophy" section. However, irrealism is a term that proceeds his use of it--e.g., the Czech writer Karel Teige was using it in the 1920's--so I didn't feel that it was accurate to create the sense for the reader that all the other manifestations of irrealism somehow flowed from his conceptual framework. Other than that, I greatly expanded the Literature section, and added a little bit to the end of the Art section. Only being superficially familiar with Goodman, I didn't do anything there, though the previous discussion regarding him looks quite interesting. Curiously, Sartre and Husserl also spoke of an "ireal" in the course of their work, so bringing in Sartre wasn't that out of place, though neither ever developed it into an irrealism as such. Anyway, let me know what you think. Jcimrman 8-27-06

 * Hmm. Just conceivable I guess. If you can find a definite reference that predates the Structure of Appearance I'll be convinced (and I'll submit it to the OED because they're currently looking for Irrealism refs.) If this is true the page should probably be split since in that case irrealism in art would be fairly separate to philosophical irrealism. --cfp 09:25, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Just jumping in here. The latin languages don't use "unreal" and "Anti-real" but rather "irreal" as in the French word "Irréalisme" or the Italian "Irrealismo". So occurances of the word won't be hard to find. But, if we want to stick to English here and allow for a distinction between Anti-realism, Realism, and Irrealism, we are going to require a little precision. Another problem: While we can mention Sartre, Kafka, and so on, we need to be careful not to confuse apples and oranges due to only certain similarities. Sartre was an Existentialist, not an Irrealist. It might be more correct to think of Kafka as a Surrealist or German Expressionist. We may find there is a whole lot of Hegel in Irrealism but that doesn't make Hegel an Irrealist. I am however very pleased with the bold changes being made to the article. Can we try to link the parts together a little better? Or do we prefer splitting the page?Joseane 13:48, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Ahh I should have known that. Well observed. In that case is most of the literature described as irrealist really just "unreal" (fantastical), e.g. calling it irrealist is just a mistranslation. I've read a fair bit of a Calvino and he is certainly fantastical, but I would be hard pressed to call him irrealist in the philosophical sense (though the odd bit might be structuralist, e.g. the first chapter of Mr.Palomar). I think this just reenforces the need to split this page. The "Irrealism in the Arts" page could discuss how it's merely a mistranslation of unreal, and the "Irrealism (philosophy)" page would say that Goodman appropriated the mistranslated word. I presume Jcimrman would vote against splitting (correct me if I'm wrong), so it looks like you have the deciding vote Joseane. What do you reckon? --cfp 16:05, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Regarding CFP's point: It's a little unclear, then, when Goodman first used "irrealism", as the text of the entry refers to a 1978, not a 1951 work.  If it is the '78 work, than it is clearly predated by the Barth qoute, which comes from a 1974 book (the one in the bibliography).  However, I'm not convinced that, even if Goodman used it first, in the field of philosophy, in English, that it therefore becomes universally applicable to all fields and all other uses of the word.  Regarding Joseane's point, that "While we can mention Sartre, Kafka, and so on, we need to be careful not to confuse apples and oranges due to only certain similarities. Sartre was an Existentialist, not an Irrealist. It might be more correct to think of Kafka as a Surrealist or German Expressionist."  Sartre was certainly an existentialist and not an irrealist, but elements of his philosophy might be useful toward a definition of irrealism as a literary or artistic style, and I think that's all the point that is being made here.  More importantly, I think it is the point of these writers that to judge Kafka as a Surrealist or German Expressionist is to deny him his innovations, and the innovations of a unique style of writing that has arisen in the last hundred years (would you also classify the Japanese writer Kobo Abe, for example, as a German Expressionist?).  That in fact what Kafka and others was and are doing was distinctive from existing terms, and that they are trying to find a term and set of characteristics to describe it, and have settled on irrealism. (Besides which the various Surrealist groups that follow in Breton's footsteps wouldn't and don't regard Kafka as a Surrealist).  Regarding CFP's point that somehow "irreal" was mistranslated, I don't really follow that.  It is true that it is, in the latinate languages, the dominant word that means "unreal", but in English, the Slavic languages and German it all takes on the secondary meaning that I described, so I don't see how it is that in English, which is as much Germanic as it is Latinate, it is somehow a mistranslation and we should condemn everybody who is so useing it by having the "Irrealism in the Arts" page could discuss how it's merely a mistranslation of unreal.  Regarding the question of splitting, that would depend, based on CFP's last point, whether all meaning of "irrealism" must be derived from Goodman.  Indeed, I have the sense that neither CFP nor Joseanne wants the term irrealism to leave Goodman's domain: it appears as if you think there will be a page devoted to Goodman, and then a page devoted to how everybody else is mistranslating the word.  And I don't believe that Goodman has the stature--the theoretical dominance over even his own field of philosophy, much less outside of it--to lay such a claim over it.  So, no, I certainly wouldn't favor splitting it.  Looking forward to your responses.  Jcimarman 28 August.

 * I was under the impression that all your old users of irrealism were not writing in English. If this is not the case, I apologize. Nonetheless, I think there is still a very strong case for splitting this page. Irrealism in the arts seems to have very little to do with irrealism in philosophy, and this is the generally accepted criterion for splitting a page. If you are worrying about Irrealism in the arts being a harder to find page, then I am happy for the main Irrealism page to be a disambiguation page between irrealism in the arts and irrealism in philosophy. --cfp 19:34, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

 * It is true that irrealism, such as it's being used in the arts, has little directly to do with Goodman's irrealism. I do think there's a certain synergy amongst all these uses of this term, which I would argue results from the term's hybrid status in English (which might be more linguistically friendly way to put it than as a mis-translation--unless of course you're terribly partial to the Latin languages), but it's probably true that such a synergy can't justify them being together given the criterion you have cited--it's more the topic of an interesting essay than an enclopedia entry.  So, in that context, I guess I wouldn't have any problem if, as you say, the main Irrealism page is a disambiguation page between irrealism in the arts and irrealism in philosophy, although that Tristan Tondino in the "Art" section does seem to refer to Goodman, so that could be a complication. -- Jcimrman 20:53, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

 * So much interesting stuff! Let's take a page out of Goodman's book. There won't be one definition of this term that will absorb all definitions. I have no idea what disambiguation entails so I'd say go for it! I still think we're mixing too many things together. I don't mind most of the opening - would love to see more on Irrealism in Philosophy (Elgin, Yablo) and the historical ancestry. Kant -(the antinomies - the enlightenment), Hegel (The Dialectic - Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis)- The Philosophy of Revolution, Marx, Bruno Bauer, the destruction of objectivity, the angst and general loss of direction that occured when history took "direct conversations with God" out of the picture... and left us with the big question that's at the core of this discussion. But that would require a book. Goodman's intention, I believe, was creating the philosophical groundwork for mediation i.e. there is some measure of truth in each view and while they contradict, they still describe similar things from alternate perspectives. Kafka's Metamorphosis is about a guy who can no longer live in the version of the world in which he's become trapped. He can't refuse his role openly so he does it by turning into a monster. His family can't live with his refusal so it ends in tragedy. If we are to look back and call authors like Kafka and Melville (e.g. Bartelby, the Scrivener) ancestors we might want one clear criteria. Do we have any suggestions? Also Tondino is arguably an Irrealist in that he at least makes the claim to be one. It is rather common place that each new trend looks back and claims others held similar views, nonetheless we are rewriting history by applying the "isms" of our time to our unsuspecting ancestors. How many times have we heard Kierkegaard described as a Christian Existentialist? Joseane 03:52, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I've stopped the indentation but I am adding one more thought. I would like to suggest the best definition of "Irrealism" is still Goodman's. I don't think we should be looking toward elements of style. (The fantastic, moody, murky or whatever) What is key to Irrealism is that it asks us to consider our views of the "really real" as finite views of infinity. By this definition, I would side with Tondino's claim that "Realism is (itself) an Irrealism" and that style is therefore irrelevant. I think this makes the idea "Irrealism" more powerful, in that it is attempting to push an ontological question into places it hasn't really been before. There is far too much Realism in this world - far too much certainty about the nature of things that are truly much more complicated than they appear. Joseane 13:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

 * To Joseane, who writes: "I don't think we should be looking toward elements of style. (The fantastic, moody, murky or whatever) What is key to Irrealism is that it asks us to consider our views of the "really real" as finite views of infinity."  I would answer:  I think you are underestimating what lies behind style.  There may be a few, very formalist, writers who write a given way (or painters who paint a given way,etc.) because they are purely experimenting with style.  But, in what we might call great literature, style becomes what Sartre calls a rhetorical act, a means to better express an idea or feeling.  In describing writers who write in a style called irrealism, then, I think we must say that they are necessarily expressing a sense of ambiguity about what is real, and challenging our tendency to want to proclaim a single, concrete reality.  Why would Donald Barthelme, for example, write in the way that he did, especially given the overwhelming dominance of realism in the United States?  I think because he wanted to "ambiguate" (to borrow a Wikipediaesque term) reality, and found this impossible to do in with the prevailing realism, which very much postulates that our current reality is the true reality, or some form of fantasy or science fiction, which postulates itself, after the suspension of belief, as being the true reality.)  As far as Goodman having the "best definition" of irrealism, I think obviously that depends on your point of view.  Coming from the Anglo-American phiosophical tradition, as you seem to be, I'm sure you'd feel that way.  And for good reason (in my opinion), as he seems to be, based on the secondary source reading I've been doing of Goodman in the last few days, quite an interesting philosopher.  Nonetheless, my background is more in the continental tradition, and I prefer Husserl's phenomological ambiguation of reality--the "ireel"--for a variety of reasons, but especially because it is then possible to bring in Heidegger and Sartre's existentialism, which I think is appropriate, as they describe the anxiety and absurdity that is inherent in a world in which there is no single world. Jcimrman 19:38, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

 * This is all very good. I don't consider myself on one side (Ang vs Con Phil). Both sides have had very interesting things to say and still do. My point is we can bring Kant, Hegel, Bauer, Heidegger, Sartre, Husserl, Kierkegaard, Frankenstein, Cocteau, Hitchcock, Terry Gilliam and so on into the definition but I'm not sure where we'll be able stop. Sartre's metaphysics in "The Transcendence of the Ego" is very close. But I'd suggest we avoid calling Sartre an Irrealist because he apparently preffered the term "Existentialism". Instead, I think we should be trying to show why Irrealism is distinct from Existentialism. i.e even if it is only a shiny new linguistic paint job. What do you think CFP?Joseane 19:14, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

 * My suspicion is that Husserl etc. are already covered extensively elsewhere. My suspicion is also that if their position has been described as irrealism, it is certainly not what they are usually known as. (I would probably call it post-Kantian pluralism or something, but like I said I don't really know the post-Kantians that well.) Also my understanding is that if you AAA-ize Husserl you end up with a position closer to Rorty than to Goodman. (And Rorty certainly isn't an irrealist.)
 * My guess is that the irrealism in the arts and irrealism in philosophy arose roughly in parallel. The below is my guess at the chronolgy of the term in english:

 * In the early 70s the term started being used in the arts in typical deconstructionist fashion, e.g. inventing a new-word where really one or more old words would have sufficed. It's meaning wasn't really specified, but those who used it thought in leaving its meaning unspecified they were making a higher point.
 * In 78 Goodman describes his position as "something akin to irrealism", based on the kind of works irrealism had been applied to up to then.
 * Later philosophical critics (who weren't as aware of the arts as Goodman was) who started taking Goodman's position as the definition of irrealism.
 * Later still, as Goodman's position was so much better specified than anthing that had come out of the (continental) artistic critical literature up to that point, it was also adopted as the definition of irrealism in the arts, though even for people like Tondino who explicitly mentioned Goodman's irrealism, it still seems their irrealism owes more to the original vague use than to Goodman.
 * So broadly I would say anything before 1970 is a distraction, and that a fairly clear split between irrealism in philosophy and the arts can be made. Tondino might be mentioned in both, though the bulk of the discussion of him should probably still go in the arts page, on the basis that the "in philosophy" page should stick to theory and at most brief examples.--cfp 20:28, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I certainly agree that for an encyclopedia entry they should be split, and also that Goodman’s concept should predominate in the philosophical section, as he wrote most clearly about it among English language writers. Also, I agree with your chronology up to: “Goodman's position was so much better specified than anthing that had come out of the (continental) artistic critical literature up to that point, it was also adopted as the definition of irrealism in the arts.”  Actually, I’ve been rather involved in the arts for quite some time in this context, both in the United States and in Europe, and only recently stumbled on Goodman’s irrealism. This isn’t too surprising since his use of the term has limited circulation even in philosophy: looking at 3 of the leading reference guide’s to philosophy (Oxford, Routledge, and the update to The Encyclopedia of Philosophy) in conjunction with our discussion I discovered that not only wasn’t “Irrealism” granted a separate entry as a term, but even the entries about Goodman, though mentioning “Ways of Worldmaking”, didn’t mention irrealism. So while I agree with your chronology, and your analysis regarding its use in the arts pre-Goodman, I once again have the sense that Goodman’s use of the term is being given credit for a wider currency than it might fully deserve. Additionally, there was a continental figure, a Czech writer of some note, Karel Teige, who wrote extensively developed his concept of Irrealism in his last work, The Phenomenology of Art, which he wrote in the late 1940’s (not the 1920’s, as I wrote earlier) but which wasn’t published for political reasons until the 1960s. Jcimrman 07:57, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree. Let's split the page. Unfortunately, I don't know how to do it. So... any suggestions on how? Regarding Goodman's lack of representation in the above mentioned Encyclopedias - it doesn't surprise me in the least. The slant toward science, physicalism, realism is so intense these days that I'd love to count the number of references to the word "art". If we split, we'll have the opportunity to represent the variety of versions which is in keeping with (I'm sure you'll all agree) the spirit of Irrealism.Joseane 08:44, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

 * OK the deed is done.--cfp 11:20, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks!!! I'm already thinking more clearly.Joseane 13:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Looks great. I did do a slight edit for the "arts" description, to something a bit more general, so you might want to see if it looks okay to you. Thanks for splitting the pages! Jcimrman 07:22, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:Irrealism (the arts)