*(Fig.1) We can control and move the tip very small distance ( < 0.1 Å ) !*

In atomic force microscopy, we can observe and manipulate each single atom, using actuator .

It means we already have the technology of moving the tip of microscope very **small** distance ( < 0.1 Å ) to distinguish a *single* atom.

But under the useless quantum mechanics, we cannot move forward to the next step of making artificial molecules by controling each atom !

*(Fig.2) ↓ A single probe cannot feel true "force" specific to each atom*

All the present atomic force microscopes have only one **single** probe tip, which can detect only "*relative*" force to identify each atom.

When you press the tip of probe on some target atom. the force it can detect is **not** the true force specific to each atom.

The single probe can detect the force2 in Fig.2 between the whole molecule and the ground under it.

To know the true atomic force and **radius** *specific* to each atom, we need at least **two** probes, and put each atom between those probes !

Using two probe tips, not only identifying but also picking up each atom are possible !

*(Fig.3) Carbon and silicon with same valence electrons, but different sizes.*

It is known that both carbon and silicon atoms have the *same* four valence electrons, but have the **different** atomic sizes.

Because the molecular bond lengths of carbon and silicon are always **different**. Quantum mechanics **cannot** tell us the *clear* size of each atom !

Because quantum mechanics wave function has **NO** realistic concepts such as "separated electrons".

*(Fig.4) Bond lengths between C-H and Si-H are different. Why ?*

Both cabon and silicon have the same valence electrons and similar properties, but their molecular bond lengths are different.

Silicon (= Si ) bond length is always **longer** than the carbon (= C ). What determines these bond lengths specific to each atom ?

Unfortunately, useless quantum mechanics **cannot** show clear reason for these atomic size and bond length.

Because quantum mechanics does **NOT** allow us to introduce any real objects such as "separated electrons". It only shows *vague* wave function.

*(Fig.5) As de Broglie wavelength increases, the atom becomes bigger.*

Many experiments proved that an electron is actually de Broglie wave, and causes inteference in double-slit.

Despite those proofs, quantum mechanics **never** admit the existence of real de Broglie wave, and it gives up reality !

It is known that as *de Broglie* wavelength increases, the atomic radius increases. Carbon ( or silicon ) orbit is 2 ( or 3 ) × de Broglie wavelength.

From the ionization energies and this de Broglie wavelength, we can estimate each atomic **radius**, which agrees with experimental bond lengths.

In non-covalent bond, we have to consider Pauli exclusion effect after occupying de Broglie wave's holes.

*(Fig.6) Introducing real electrons' motion, real de Broglie wave is essential.*

We can measure each atomic force using atomic force microscope, but quantum mechanics **cannot** *formulate* these forces using 'concrete' models !

The first thing to do is introduce **real** and simple atomic models. Quantum useless wave function **cannot** *separate* each single electron.

So in Schrödinger equation, two electrons **cannot** avoid each other by Coulomb repulsions in the simple way, which makes it very hard to formulate atomic force.

Not only Coulomb forces but also de Broglie wave is necessary to estimate each atomic **radius** ( atomic radius is longer as 1, 2, 3 × .. de Broglie wavelength ).

Interference among electrons' *de Broglie* waves can explain well about Pauli exclusion force and valence electron number.

Quantum Schrödinger equation does **NOT** admit *real* de Broglie wave, so it **cannot** estimate actual atomic radius.

So under **vague** quantum wave function (= fake solution in multi-electrons ), it's **impossible** to formulate actual interatomic force and atomic tweezers.

*(Fig.7) They just choose "fake solution" from infinite choices ← useless !*

After detecting the slight force of a *single* atoms or molecule, we need to **interpret** those forces using some atomic model.

Unless we can explain each single atomic force, we cannot move forward to the next step of utilizing multi-atomic bahavior.

The problem is that there is the **only** useless quantum mechnaics (= Schrödinger equation ) as a tool to interpret these atomic data, now.

Quantum mechanics have NO exact solution in multi-electron atoms, so they just choose fake solution from **infinite** choices, meaning **no** power to predict anyhing.

In atomic force microspopy, they use densisty functional theory (= DFT ), which is a further approximation of quantum mechanics, so more incorrect and **useless**.

*(Fig.8) DFT is one of "false" approximations of Schrödinger equation.*

In atomic force microcopy, the **only** tool is *useless* density functional theory (= DFT ). **All** papers rely on this DFT ( this , this ).

Density functional theory (= DFT ) is one of approximate Schrödinger equations. DFT replaces electron-electron interaction by **fake** *artificial* potential.

In Schrödinger equation, they just choose fake approximate solutions as "trial wavefunction". In DFT, they have to choose "fake artificial *potential*", too.

There are NO restrictions in choosing these fake potentials. We can choose any forms of these potentials from **infinite** choices in DFT.

So DFT has **NO** ability to predict any atomic behavior. In spite of this, this DFT is the **only** tool for analysing atomic force microcsopy !

No matter how many times they catch slight atomic force, all they can use is useless density functional theory (= DFT, see this p.6 ).

All in these single molecule detections, useless density functional theory is the **only** method to **interpret** each atomic force ( see abstract of this and this ).

This is where out science stops. Physicists are **shackled** to old useless methods which **don't** admit "concrete *force*". It just gives us weird wavefunctions as a tool.

*(Fig.9) So DFT cannot predict any atomic behavior, useless.*

Density functional theory (= DFT ) forcedly changes muti-electron equation into one-electron approximation.

In **one**-electron DFT method, we need to *artificially* pick up "**fake**" forms of electrons' interaction *potential* called exchange correlation functional.

**Selecting** convenient functional for your purpose is all you have to do in DFT ( this p.9 ). There is **NO** universal functional describing any potential ( this p.2 ).

When you pick up one of functional ( ex. LDA ) from **infinite** choices and it **fails**, you can pick up *other* functionals as fake electrons' potential.

Selecting fake potential and fake solutions as you like means this DFT method has **NO** ability to predict any atomic behavior, so useless, too

2017/3/31 updated. Feel free to link to this site.