369th, #369 AP book of science-- The History of LOGIC // Teaching True Logic textbook series by Archimedes Plutonium This is AP's 369th published book of science published on Internet, Plutonium-Atom-Universe, PAU newsgroup is this. Please read
Archimedes Plutonium
The History of LOGIC // Teaching True Logic textbook series
by Archimedes Plutonium
This is AP's 369th published book of science published on Internet, Plutonium-Atom-Universe, PAU newsgroup is this. Please read this textbook for free on Internet.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
Preface: A history of **true logic** is surprisingly short and sweet, and is composed mostly of scientists. A concept of symmetry emerges making Logic a sweet science. A concept of superdeterminism emerges making Logic a very complicated and complex science.
Cover picture: A picture of Aristotle, the likely founder of Logic and the systematic start of the science of biology.
-----------------------
Table of Contents
-----------------------
Introduction
Part 1: What is Logic?
1) What is Logic.
2) What is Logic versus math versus physics versus science and a glossary of terms.
Part 2: Prehistory Logicians.
3) Neanderthals making fire with flint and iron pyrite.
Part 3: Ancient Logicians.
4) Thales of Miletus (626 - 548 BC) -- static electricity and magnetism.
5) Pythagoras of Samos (570-495 BC) -- deductive reasoning and the link between numbers and geometry in A^2 +B^2 = C^2 for right triangles.
6) Leucippus (5th century BC) and Democritus (460-370 BC) greatest of all science theories, the Atomic Theory.
7) Socrates (470-399 BC)-- logic argument.
8) Plato (428- 348 BC)-- being into becoming.
9) Aristotle (384-322 BC)-- deductive syllogism.
10) Euclid (300BC) -- systematized math and geometry in a deductive proof method.
11) Aristarchus of Samos 270BC-- systematized the experimental science of Astronomy.
Part 4: Medieval Logicians.
12) Avicenna (980 -1037)-- scientific method.
13) William of Ockham (1287-1347) -- Ockham's razor.
Part 5: Modern day Logicians.
14) George Boole (1815-1864) and William Jevons (1835-1882) -- logic connectors.
15) Gottlob Frege (1848-1925)-- symbolic logic.
16) James Maxwell (1831-1879)-- unification of electricity and magnetism.
17) Pierre Curie (1859-1906) and Paul Dirac (1902-1984) --symmetry in science of the magnetic monopole existence.
18) John Bell (1928-1990) --superdeterminism.
19) Archimedes Plutonium (1950 - present)-- systematizes Logic by paralleling logic to mathematics-physics.
-------------
Text
-------------
Introduction
I was faced with the problem of making 2 years of Logic a mandatory subject for every student in college or university wanting a degree in science, or math, and possibly engineering. A problem because there does not exist an error free Logic textbook where all 4 simple connectors of Logic were true and correct. The 4 simple connectors are AND, OR, Not-Equal, If-->Then. So how in the world can AP demand science students have 2 years of logic study before graduating with a degree in science? My answer was that I myself write 4 Logic textbooks, free of error. That is the hope anyway.
The root problem here is that no-one in the 19th or 20th century, and now 21st century had a logical mind to be doing logic in the first place. I think of myself as the founding-framer of true logic having corrected so many of the mistakes of Old Logic. And I am sure that if I had not this powerful logic mind, I would never have discovered the Plutonium Atom Totality theory of physics, or that the true electron of atoms is the muon and not the 0.5MeV particle. It is my logic abilities that carries me far above and beyond other scientists.
Logic as a subject and a science is not appreciated in modern education. Why that is I am not fully sure but suspect religion is much of the blame. Religion is often adverse to logic and to science. I am told that biology science often, still, are taught Bible creationism rather than Darwin evolution.
Maybe education institutions are too busy filling up students curriculum with all sorts of subjects-- English, math, some science, that there is no more room for a mandatory course in Logic.
In the year 2025, I started to write these 4 textbooks of Logic, (1) Elementary Logic, (2) History of Logic (3) Intermediate Logic, (4) Advanced Logic, for I was pressuring all colleges and universities to mandatorily require science and engineering students to have 2 years of college logic training before they get their degree. I could not rightfully insist on that demand for there are no logic textbooks that have the 4 simple connectors of logic correct, the AND, OR, Not-Equal, If-->then. So why insist on mandatory logic with books that have error filled logic? So I set a course for myself in 2025 to write 4 textbooks of Logic to teach in college and university. As the years go by, I will write a 5th textbook for High School, but I need a vacation break away from logic to resume once I am refreshed.
This is a history of Logic, for it tells the good and bad of Logic throughout its long history, its triumphs and its mistakes. Actually there are few persons that need to be mentioned so it is not a long and struggling book.
Yes, this turned out to be a nice book for me, for I was happy to write it. It is about 150 pages and would make a lovely 1 quarter or 1 semester course in college.
It is a shame that academia does not really recognize "history" as a science. I do not mean propaganda but history that aims to tell the true data.
Part 1: What is Logic?
1) What is Logic?
The easiest definition of "What is Logic" is to take mathematics. Numbers are a fundamental element of mathematics. And math plays around and uses numbers. Fine, we replace numbers in Logic with "ideas". So, if math is the use and playing around of numbers, then Logic is the use and playing around with "ideas".
But of course, well, ideas are more complex and complicated than are numbers in mathematics.
And Logic is a larger set than is that of mathematics. Everything done in mathematics, is also done in Logic and we call math a subset of Logic. But Physics is even larger than is Logic and Logic is a subset of Physics. This might be difficult for people to grasp that physics is a larger set than logic, but there have been many quantum physics experiments performed in the 1900s and 2000s, especially those called quantum entanglement, which comes to the conclusion, as bizarre as it sounds, that thinking and ideas come from "out of the body", and John Bell described this as "superdeterminism". It means that there exists ___no free will___ in the world, and everything that happens and takes place is fated to happen and take place. But here I am getting ahead of myself for these ideas of superdeterminism are the last chapters.
2) What is Logic versus math versus physics versus science, and a glossary of terms.
Now I quote Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia often, especially in a history book, references are much in demand and needed. However, I must add a caveat to those quotes. Many of the quotes from Wikipedia follow no set of well-defined terms such as concept, theory, law-structure, statement, premiss. One author of Wikipedia calls something in science as a "theory" which I would call instead a rule, such as Darwin evolution, to me, is a "rule" and at best a hypothesis, but never a theory.
So I endeavor to make a glossary-like list of important terms of science in all 4 of my logic textbooks.
Let me stop here and give a list of terms often used in this book and in science. For it is ___highly logical___ to well-define the terms we use in science, for logic demands well-defined terms.
Terms for science, especially physics but all the other sciences chemistry, biology, astronomy, social sciences, medical science included.
----------------
(1) Statement-- Some call them fact or facts.
(2) Concept -- A collection of statements, that is a collection of facts.
(3) Hypothesis-- Some call them implies as in material implication, some call them prediction.
(4) Law-structure-- Some call them Principle--- these are borne from experiments especially physics. Just today in 21April2026 I am reading a National Geographic of May 2026 issue titled "Secrets of the Bees" with loads and loads of experiments performed upon bees, and was stunned to find out that humanity was spraying the bees to get rid of mites, but the spray itself was killing the poor bees.
(5) Theory-- Is a collection of law-structures or principles.
(6) Universal Axiom-- Is a summary of the total science.
For the science of Physics, this universal-axiom says--- All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. The Universal Axiom for Biology which includes Bees is very much different than the one for Physics.
The last one is a big surprise to me, for I had called it Primal Axiom for many years in Usenet and newsgroups that I had posted to from 1993 through 2026, but now it is the Universal Axiom. I suppose Science ends with a summary, each science having a summary and for Physics, that would be--- All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism.
Alas, well, I maybe able to get rid of the use of the word "law" by calling all laws simply "principle" so that human society with their jurisprudence and the law enforcement can have "law" all for themselves and science use "principle"-- Faraday principle or Ohm principle the gravity principle. You see, I hate it when ordinary language uses the term "law" to mean something far different than what science means when it says "law". For in science, laws are universal, not man-made-- here today-gone tomorrow.
Terms for Logic
---------------------
(1) Statement-- An idea which is either word or sentence algebra or picture-image which can have various truth values, T, F or partial T, partial F.
(2) Premiss--Checking the statements to see if true by best science on the subject matter. A statement is a raw, unvalued for truth idea. Once a statement is evaluated by science it is given a truth value. And premisses are statements of a large percentage of truth.
(3) Connector-structure -- This is easy for these are the 6 connectors of logic-- Existential quantifier, Not-Equal, AND, OR, If-->Then, Universal quantifier. These are similar to the 6 operators of mathematics.
(4) Reasoning, Discourse, Argument, -- a collection of premisses leading to a conclusion, the smallest is a 2 premiss argument called a Syllogism.
So take my pick, logical-reasoning, logical-discourse, logical-argument? In math this would be called a proof. I am going to stick with Reasoning.
(5) Equalities-- Some call them Rules of Induction or Rules of Inference such as commutative, associative, distributive, transposition. Copi in his "Introduction to Logic on inside front cover and back cover lists 19 Rules of Inference starting with Modus Ponens and ending with Tautology. Here in New Logic, we have very few Equalities because math has very few equalities among math's operators. Math does not have add equals to subtraction nor does math have that addition equals multiplication for these are independent operators. When Old Logic makes their many mistakes, they end up with 19 Rules of Inference. If Old Logic made no mistakes, they end up with only a few rules.
(6) Law-structure-- The summary of Logic in such structures as NonContradiction in logic and Occam's Razor in logic, EI existential instantiation, EG existential generalization, UI universal instantiation, UG universal generalization.
Terms for mathematics
-----------------------
(1) Statement-- Either in number algebra written out in symbols or numbers, or a picture of geometry figures.
(2) Axiom (some call them postulates and not to be confused with principle)-- Accepted statements without proof. In science we get to doing mathematics and we come to where we have to agree on truth that is common-sense and not able to be further analyzed, and so we accept them fully as true. Axioms such as add, subtract, multiply, divide, differentiate, integrate, and the proof deduction mechanism are accepted without any further analysis.
(3) Operator-structure-- These are the 6 operators of mathematics-- add, subtract, multiply, divide, derivative of calculus, integral of calculus.
(4) Proof -- Is a stepwise deduction using axioms and other data. The logic reasoned-argument becomes the math proof.
(5) Theorem -(corollary-is a smaller theorem)-- Is a statement with a given deductive proof, step by step proof.
(6) Theory-- The summary of parts of mathematics such as a geometry theory or algebra number theory or probability theory or set theory even a total mathematics theory.
--- end of list of terms, for science, logic, and math ---
Bizarrely, or should I say awesomely, that there appears some spin rotation in these crucial terms of science, logic, math.
So for **Science** we have Statement, Concept, Hypothesis, Law-structure, Theory, Universal Axiom.
For **Logic** we have Statement, Premiss, Connector-structure, Reasoning, Equalities, Law-structure.
For **Math** we have Statement, Axiom, Operator-structure, Proof, Theorem, Theory
Notice that Math ends in summary as a theory which is 2nd from bottom of science. Notice that Logic ends with summary of Law-structure which is 3rd from bottom for Science.
All three start with "statement". For physics that would be a observation, for logic that would be a idea in word-sentence form or picture-image form, and for math that would be a sentence of number algebra or geometry figure image.
The most often mistake of terms is the over-use of "theory". Theory should seldom be used except when talking physics or science, and the law-structures of electricity and magnetism.
Some people confuse Theorem of math with theory of physics.
Most people not in science confuse what is a Law-structure and what is a Rule. A law-structure works always and is universal, yet a rule works only sometimes not all the times. In Old Physics, their Ohm's law broke down when you had high voltage or high current. The problem was fixed by AP who replaced Resistance with (magnetic field x electric field) in the 1990s calling it New Ohm's Law. Voltage = current x magnetic field x electric field where the multiplication is a generalized multiplication being normal multiply or vector cross product or vector dot product.
Part 2: Prehistory Logicians
3) Neanderthals making fire with flint and iron pyrite
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 22, 2026, 4:42:43 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Part 2: Prehistory Logicians
3) Neanderthals making fire with flint and iron pyrite
Logic can be overall characterized as the 6 connectors of Logic.
1) Existential quantifier
2) Not-Equal
3) AND
4) OR
5) If-->Then
6) Universal quantifier
Does a fire exist or does it not exist is the existential quantifier.
Next is Not-Equal. Yes, fire exists for the Neanderthal in England 400,000 years ago or it does not exist. If not exist, then get out the Flint and Iron Pyrite rocks, smash them together to make a fire.
Fire for Neanderthal was equal to lightning causing fire. Maybe they were so bright in mind as to realize the Sun was fire and that stars were fire only far away.
Note of Caution:: Now I am well aware that the "fire of Stars and our Sun" is vastly different from a Neanderthal campfire of 400,000 years ago in England. The Sun and stars fire is caused by Atomic Energy of the Faraday law-structure going on inside every atom the resides in the Sun and only a tiny bit, say 5% is fusion. While the Campfire of Neanderthal is chemical energy of oxygen atoms bonding mostly to carbon atoms and as the oxygen atom bonds to carbon, it releases chemical energy. These two energies are not the same. And of course, no Neanderthal mind 400,000 years ago would have known that.
But what I am saying is many minds of Neanderthals 400,000 years ago would have seen and felt a similarity to their campfire, to the Sun of warmth by heat and the light to see, and compared that to the sparks emitted by striking flint to iron pyrite.
The connection of campfire to Sun and now to sparks when flint is struck on iron pyrite. That connection is Logic in action. It involves Exist--- fire exists or not, involves Not-Equal-- sparks generate campfire, involves AND in that Sun and campfire and now sparks from flint-iron pyrite, involves OR in experimenting to see if the sparks generate a campfire, involves If-->Then in "If the campfire dies out, then we start a new one with flint-iron pyrite."
The world's first science experiment, and hence scientific method and hence Logic starts --at least-- at least-- 400,000 years ago by Neanderthals in England. Logic could have easily started way earlier than equating sparks with fire. For in the Stonethrowing theory (a theory for we have bipedalism and over-arm throwing along with increasing brain size) of human evolution where humanity evolved 9-10 million years ago from a throwing ape, one can pick many moments out where a evolving species that throws rocks and stones would have "logical moments" such as throwing a rock at a target, or collecting rocks for future activity, or banging one rock against another rock and finding a sharp rock results and used to cut meat.
I happen to chose this flint to iron pyrite for making fires as a great starting point for human logic to start because we have 2 specimen rocks, undeniable what they were used for and an accurate dating of 400,000 years.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 22, 2026, 4:52:30 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
I am going to start this history of Logic some 400,000 years ago to a time when Neanderthals were living and roaming in England and had a fire making industry of flint and iron pyrite.
I had seen on TV the day that the BBC broadcast this news and showing a reporter with flint and iron pyrite in hand, and I thought to myself "Wow, wow wow wow, all those sparks that this reporter made with one vigorous strike of the two rocks together". I was amazed at how many sparks came from one strike.
Although there is more to the explanation of what creates those sparks than just "iron reacts with oxygen". We have to bring in the law-structures of electromagnetism for a full explanation.
Lovely, lovely, that science starts with banging together two different rocks. And as science starts here, so does Logic. To remember for Neanderthals, remember two different rocks-- flint and iron pyrite and bang them together. Realizing that the fire they produce is the same fire of lightning bolts or similar to Neanderthal fireplace or similar to Sun. Logic starts here.
To ignite fireA ferrocerium "flint" spark lighter in action
When struck against steel, a flint edge produces sparks. The hard flint edge shaves off a particle of the steel that exposes iron, which reacts with oxygen from the atmosphere and can ignite the proper tinder.
Prior to the wide availability of steel, rocks of pyrite (FeS2) would be used along with the flint...
--- end quoting Wikipedia---
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 22, 2026, 11:26:03 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Now quoting from the Internet on "Scientific Method"
Scientific Method from various sources on Internet
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Step 1-- Make observations and ask many questions.
Step 2-- Research the subject matter and Review the literature on the subject.
Step 3-- Formulate a Hypothesis of what you think is going on.
Step 4-- Conduct Experiments pertaining to your hypothesis.
Step 5-- Collect data from the experiment/s and analyze the data.
Step 6-- Draw conclusions.
Step 7-- Publish the results.
There are 7 steps there. Step 7 should be a part of step 6 where we say Draw conclusions and publish the results. Publishing is important for it forces others to repeat the experiment and repeatability is a major factor of true science experiments. Step 6 above should be Draw conclusion and publish the results.
Logic has 6 connectors as these.
1) Existential quantifier
2) Not-Equal
3) AND
4) OR
5) If-->Then
6) Universal quantifier
Step 1-- Make observations and ask many questions. Parallels Existential quantifier-- there exists Fire, as seen in Lightning bolt strikes and Sun as energy (although not chemical energy)
Step 2-- Research the subject matter and Review the literature on the subject.
Parallels Not-Equal, for Fire making is equal to fires of the past and how to make them with flint and iron pyrite.
Step 3-- Formulate a Hypothesis of what you think is going on.
Parallels AND in that a multiple steps take place to get the fire started. First collect tinder, then strike the rocks flint and iron pyrite. And then have the sparks start a fire.
Step 4-- Conduct Experiments pertaining to your hypothesis.
Parallels OR in looking for a deciding experiment of deciding on what is the true hypothesis.
Step 5-- Collect data from the experiment/s and analyze the data.
Parallels the IF-->Then connector in formulating a law. If I strike the flint into the iron pyrite then I get sparks then I can start a fire.
Step 6-- Draw conclusions and publish the results.
Parallels the Universal quantifier in you draw up a Law-structure of Science and it is universal and so you publish it for others to repeat the experiment.
For the fire started by Neanderthals 400,000 years ago, that two rocks struck together can release fire and the whole group of Neanderthals learns how to make fire.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 23, 2026, 12:45:40 AM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
So what I am trying to do here is make the Scientific Method to actually be the Logic connectors in the order of Existential quantifier then Not-Equal then AND then OR then IF-->Then, then the Universal quantifier.
And it appears I am having luck so far.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 23, 2026, 3:36:40 AM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
So this is extremely exciting for me--- to make the Scientific Method to be actually the 6 connectors of Logic.
Scientific Method from various sources on Internet
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Step 1-- Make observations and ask many questions.
This can be reduced to the Existential quantifier-- you see something exist such as sparks when you strike flint against iron pyrite.
In fire making-- there exists sparks from these two rocks.
Step 2-- Research the subject matter and Review the literature on the subject.
This is the Not-Equal connector where you see that the sparks are equal to the Sun and to fires of the past. The sparks are Not material matter but are of heat and light. The sparks are similar, equal to fires of the past and to the Sun.
In fire making--- these sparks are similar to old fires made and similar to lightning bolts and to the Sun as fire.
Actually I wonder if many of the people in Ancient times or Medieval times lost their eyesight by looking directly into the sun, not knowing that is dangerous. In modern times we are warned by many people.
Step 3-- Formulate a Hypothesis of what you think is going on.
This is the AND connector and AND is add, so we add ideas, even data concerning the initial observation.
In fire making this is the additive work of getting kindling, of blowing into the sparks for ignition.
Step 4-- Conduct Experiments pertaining to your hypothesis.
This is the OR connector and the one in which we have to decide on different ideas are true-- the Deciding Experiment.
In fire making this is the idea of deciding which hypothesis is the best one.
Step 5-- Collect data from the experiment/s and analyze the data.
This is the IF-->Then connector and more experiments to decide which is the true hypothesis.
Step 6-- Draw conclusions.
This is the Universal quantifier and drawing conclusions, is the hypothesis a law-structure of science or maybe a rule of science or a pattern of science.
Logic has 6 connectors as these.
1) Existential quantifier
2) Not-Equal
3) AND
4) OR
5) If-->Then
6) Universal quantifier
Step 1-- Make observations and ask many questions. Parallels Existential quantifier-- there exists Fire, as seen in Lightning bolt strikes and Sun as energy (although not chemical energy)
Step 2-- Research the subject matter and Review the literature on the subject.
Parallels Not-Equal, for Fire making is equal to fires of the past and how to make them with flint and iron pyrite.
Step 3-- Formulate a Hypothesis of what you think is going on.
Parallels AND in that a multiple steps take place to get the fire started. First collect tinder, then strike the rocks flint and iron pyrite. And then have the sparks start a fire.
Step 4-- Conduct Experiments pertaining to your hypothesis.
Parallels OR in looking for a deciding experiment of deciding on what is the true hypothesis.
Step 5-- Collect data from the experiment/s and analyze the data.
Parallels the IF-->Then connector in formulating a law-structure. If I strike the flint into the iron pyrite then I get sparks then I can start a fire.
Step 6-- Draw conclusions, and publish the results.
Parallels the Universal quantifier in you draw up a Law-structure of Science and it is universal and so you publish it for others to repeat the experiment.
For the fire started by Neanderthals 400,000 years ago, that two rocks struck together can release fire and the whole group of Neanderthals learns how to make fire.
I am very much beginning to think that Neanderthal and Cro-Magnons were of the same species.
I know that Svante Paabo "Neanderthal man: in search of lost genomes" and others, deem Neanderthals as a different species from us-- and see the "species problem". The divergence of say 3 different ATCG in DNA. But then the confounding evidence that many humans alive today have those Neanderthal genes in them. So species Neanderthal able to mate with Cro-Magnon means they are not different species.
If Neanderthals in England 400,000 years ago had a fire industry, makes me more inclined to say Neanderthal was still the same species as Cro-Magnon.
And people who want to believe they are two separate species are more interested in stupid splashy news than in the truth.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 23, 2026, 11:39:49 AM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Alright this is an excellent idea of making the Scientific Method be nothing but the 6 Connectors of Logic, except, I need to scramble the order around.
For Logic the order of presentation is Existential quantifier, then Not-Equal, then AND, then OR, then IF-->Then, then finally Universal quantifier.
For Scientific Method, the order seems to be Existential quantifier, then AND, then IF-->Then for the hypothesis making of several hypothesis, then conducting experiments is the OR, then Not-Equal and OR for analysis of data from experiments and finally Universal quantifier if your hypothesis is a law-structure of science, or even that of just a rule.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 23, 2026, 5:19:21 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
First let me fix the Scientific Method.
Scientific Method from various sources on Internet
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Step 1-- Make observations and ask many questions.
Step 2-- Research the subject matter and Review the literature on the subject.
Step 3-- Formulate a Hypothesis of what you think is going on.
Step 4-- Conduct Experiments pertaining to your hypothesis.
Step 5-- Collect data from the experiment/s and analyze the data.
Step 6-- Draw conclusions, and publish the results.
Step 1-- Make observations and ask many questions.
No, I think the Scientific Method starts with a Observation of Existence and a curiosity of a idea. I think science is curiosity.
Step 2-- Research the subject matter and Review the literature on the subject.
This is good, and would be Not-Equal. Is the idea equal to known ideas and whether the new idea is not equal to known ideas.
Step 3-- Formulate a Hypothesis of what you think is going on.
Yes this is the IF--> Then hypothesis.
Step 4-- Conduct Experiments pertaining to your hypothesis. Step 5-- Collect data from the experiment/s and analyze the data.
Yes this is the AND connector, both step 4 and step 5 is one step, the doing of experiments and collecting data and information.
Step 6-- Draw conclusions and publish the results.
Yes, we also need to decide between competing hypotheses and ideas and this is the OR where we have Deciding Experiments.
Step 6 would be the Universal quantifier where the idea that started the research and experiments may be a new law-structure of science or a rule of science and the conclusion should be published for others to repeat the experiments.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 23, 2026, 8:16:31 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Yes, at first I was not sure I could get a pattern of the Scientific Method using strictly just the 6 connectors of Logic, now I am sure that is the case.
In other words, the Scientific Method is the sequence of the Logic Connectors.
Let me try it out using the Earth's first science experiment by Neanderthals some 400,000 years ago in England starting a fire with flint and iron pyrite.
On Monday, February 23, 2026 at 5:19:21 PM UTC-6 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
First let me fix the Scientific Method.
Scientific Method from various sources on Internet
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Step 1-- Make observations and ask many questions.
Step 2-- Research the subject matter and Review the literature on the subject.
Step 3-- Formulate a Hypothesis of what you think is going on.
Step 4-- Conduct Experiments pertaining to your hypothesis.
Step 5-- Collect data from the experiment/s and analyze the data.
Step 6-- Draw conclusions, and publish the result for others to repeat the experiment.
Step 1-- Make observations and ask many questions.
No, I think the Scientific Method starts with a Observation of Existence and a curiosity of a idea. I think science is curiosity.
With Neanderthal fire making 400,000 years ago, they had a tool industry already of flint and iron pyrite, as hand tools, to cut or to grind or as axes. One day a Neanderthal smashed flint against iron pyrite and to his/her amazement, sparks flew off.
Step 2-- Research the subject matter and Review the literature on the subject.
This is good, and would be Not-Equal. Is the idea equal to known ideas and whether the new idea is not equal to known ideas.
Of course Neanderthal had no books or libraries or science journals. What they did have is a mind with ideas. And one or several of them seeing sparks would ask the question--- are the sparks equal to fire of the campfire?? Equal to campfire or not campfire.
Step 3-- Formulate a Hypothesis of what you think is going on.
Yes this is the IF--> Then hypothesis.
Here the Neanderthals would have formed a hypothesis, If the sparks are fire, then we can form a new fire with tinder of leaves or dry grass.
Step 4-- Conduct Experiments pertaining to your hypothesis. Step 5-- Collect data from the experiment/s and analyze the data.
Yes this is the AND connector, both step 4 and step 5 is one step, the doing of experiments and collecting data and information.
Here the Neanderthals using the AND connector-- collect leaves and dry grass and strike flint against iron pyrite AND see if fire starts.
Step 6-- Draw conclusions, and publish the results.
Yes, we also need to decide between competing hypotheses and ideas and this is the OR where we have Deciding Experiments.
Here the Neanderthals had no competing hypothesis and the fire making was successful with the AND connector. So I have to wait in History of Logic for another science experiment that does need the OR connector. Fortunately, the next great Science experiment in human history is Thales with magnetism and the Lodestone and with static electricity of rubbing amber on fur. This Thales experiment goes all the way out to OR connector and then to Universal quantifier.
Step 6 would be the Universal quantifier where the idea that started the research and experiments may be a new law of science or a rule of science and the conclusion should be published for others to repeat the experiments.
The Neanderthal fire experiment goes out to AND and stops there. But the Thales science experiment of Lodestone magnetism and static electricity goes through the entire gamut of Scientific Method as delineated by the 6 connectors of Logic.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 23, 2026, 10:17:06 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
I propose this archeological site in Barnham, Suffolk be made a International Monument, where humanity (I believe Neanderthals were the same species as humans Cro-magnon) a Monument with tourist visitor center showing how flint striking iron pyrite produces sparks and fires.
This monument is the world's first known Science Experiment.
And likely in the scheme of things, a more important monument than even the Stonehenge.
--- quoting search hit list of fire-making---
Groundbreaking discovery shows earliest evidence of fire- ...
British Museum
https://www.britishmuseum.org › press › press-releases
Dec 10, 2025 — Evidence from research led by the British Museum indicates that humans were making fire 350000 years earlier than previously thought.
Archaeologists Find Oldest Evidence of Fire-Making
The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com › 2025/12/10 › science › arch...
Dec 10, 2025 — Some 400,000 years ago, in what is now eastern England, a group of Neanderthals used flint and pyrite to make fires by a watering hole — not ...Read more
This could be the oldest evidence of fire-making
National Geographic
https://www.nationalgeographic.com › Science
Dec 10, 2025 — Based on a pile of archaeological evidence, researchers think that Neanderthals were deliberately lighting fires as a site in England around ...Read more
Earliest evidence of making fire
Nature
https://www.nature.com › articles
by R Davis · 2025 · Cited by 5 — Fire use developed over a million years, progressing from harvesting natural fire to maintaining and ultimately making fire. However, ...Read more
Did Neanderthals learn to make fire before us?
BBC Earth
https://www.bbcearth.com › news › did-neanderthals-le...
Though they clearly used fire, Prof Sandgathe argues Neanderthals were incapable of making fire on their own. His excavations of Neanderthal sites at the ...Read more
Videos
How Neanderthals mastered fire 400000 years ago
YouTube · nature video
Dec 11, 2025
YouTube · nature video
1:29
Archaeologists found evidence in the UK that Neanderthals started fires 400,000 years ago using pyrite rocks.
Humans made fire 350000 years earlier than previously ...
YouTube · BBC News
Dec 10, 2025
YouTube · BBC News
5:26
Evidence of humans creating fire more than 400,000 years ago, 350,000 years earlier than previously thought.
Let´s do it like a Neanderthal! Neanderthal fire making.
YouTube · Campsite Sweden
May 13, 2022
YouTube · Campsite Sweden
9:22
Neanderthals likely made fire using marasite and flint to create sparks, with amadou (a mushroom) as tinder.
Feedback
View all
Neanderthals mastered fire-making tools 400000 years ago
Science News
https://www.sciencenews.org › article › neandertal-fire-...
Dec 10, 2025 — Previously the earliest known use of iron pyrite and flint to strike fire came from Neanderthals in northern France about 50,000 years ago. The ...Read more
--- end quoting search hit list for fire-making---
Part 3: Ancient Logicians
4) Thales of Miletus (626 - 548 BC) -- static electricity and magnetism
Born
c. 626/623 BC
Died
c. 548/545 BC (aged c. 78)
Philosophical work
Era
Pre-Socratic philosophy
Region
Western philosophy
School
Ionian / Milesian
Main interests
Notable ideas
Thales of Miletus (/ˈθeɪliːz/ THAY-leez; Ancient Greek: Θαλῆς; c. 626/623 – c. 548/545 BC) was an Ancient Greek pre-Socratic philosopher from Miletus in Ionia, Asia Minor. Thales was one of the Seven Sages, founding figures of Ancient Greece.
Beginning in eighteenth-century historiography,[1]many came to regard him as the first philosopher in the Greek tradition, breaking from the prior use of mythology to explain the world and instead using natural philosophy. He is thus otherwise referred to as the first to have engaged in mathematics, science, and deductive reasoning.[2]
Thales's view that all of nature is based on the existence of a single ultimate substance, which he theorized to be water, was widely influential among the philosophers of his time. Thales thought the Earth floated on water.
In mathematics, Thales is the namesake of Thales's theorem, and the intercept theorem can also be referred to as Thales's theorem. Thales was said to have calculated the heights of the pyramids and the distance of ships from the shore. In science, Thales was an astronomer who reportedly predicted the weather and a solar eclipse. The discovery of the position of the constellation Ursa Major is also attributed to Thales, as well as the timings of the solstices and equinoxes. He was also an engineer, known for having allowed the Lydian army to cross the Halys River. Plutarch wrote that "at that time, Thales alone had raised philosophy from mere speculation to practice."[3]
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 23, 2026, 11:39:49 AM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Alright this is an excellent idea of making the Scientific Method be nothing but the 6 Connectors of Logic, except, I need to scramble the order around.
For Logic the order of presentation is Existential quantifier, then Not-Equal, then AND, then OR, then IF-->Then, then finally Universal quantifier.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 23, 2026, 5:19:21 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
First let me fix the Scientific Method.
Scientific Method from various sources on Internet
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Step 1-- Make observations and ask many questions.
Step 2-- Research the subject matter and Review the literature on the subject.
Step 3-- Formulate a Hypothesis of what you think is going on.
Step 4-- Conduct Experiments pertaining to your hypothesis.
Step 5-- Collect data from the experiment/s and analyze the data.
Step 6-- Draw conclusions, and publish the results.
Step 1-- Make observations and ask many questions.
No, I think the Scientific Method starts with a Observation of Existence and a curiosity of a idea. I think science is curiosity.
Step 2-- Research the subject matter and Review the literature on the subject.
This is good, and would be Not-Equal. Is the idea equal to known ideas and whether the new idea is not equal to known ideas.
Step 3-- Formulate a Hypothesis of what you think is going on.
Yes this is the IF--> Then hypothesis.
Step 4-- Conduct Experiments pertaining to your hypothesis. Step 5-- Collect data from the experiment/s and analyze the data.
Yes this is the AND connector, both step 4 and step 5 is one step, the doing of experiments and collecting data and information.
Yes, we also need to decide between competing hypotheses and ideas and this is the OR where we have Deciding Experiments.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 23, 2026, 8:16:31 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Yes, at first I was not sure I could get a pattern of the Scientific Method using strictly just the 6 connectors of Logic, now I am sure that is the case.
In other words, the Scientific Method is the sequence of the Logic Connectors.
Let me try it out using the Earth's first science experiment by Neanderthals some 400,000 years ago in England starting a fire with flint and iron pyrite.
On Monday, February 23, 2026 at 5:19:21 PM UTC-6 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
First let me fix the Scientific Method.
Scientific Method from various sources on Internet
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Step 1-- Make observations and ask many questions.
With Neanderthal fire making 400,000 years ago, they had a tool industry already of flint and iron pyrite, as hand tools, to cut or to grind or as axes. One day a Neanderthal smashed flint against iron pyrite and to his/her amazement, sparks flew off.
Step 2-- Research the subject matter and Review the literature on the subject.
This is good, and would be Not-Equal. Is the idea equal to known ideas and whether the new idea is not equal to known ideas.
Of course Neanderthal had no books or libraries or science journals. What they did have is a mind with ideas. And one or several of them seeing sparks would ask the question--- are the sparks equal to fire of the campfire?? Equal to campfire or not campfire.
Step 3-- Formulate a Hypothesis of what you think is going on.
Yes this is the IF--> Then hypothesis.
Here the Neanderthals would have formed a hypothesis, If the sparks are fire, then we can form a new fire with tinder of leaves or dry grass.
Step 4-- Conduct Experiments pertaining to your hypothesis.
Here the Neanderthals using the AND connector-- collect leaves and dry grass and strike flint against iron pyrite AND see if fire starts.
Here the Neanderthals had no competing hypothesis and the fire making was successful with the AND connector. So I have to wait in History of Logic for another science experiment that does need the OR connector. Fortunately, the next great Science experiment in human history is Thales with magnetism and the Lodestone and with static electricity of rubbing amber on fur. This Thales experiment goes all the way out to OR connector and then to Universal quantifier.
The Neanderthal fire experiment goes out to AND and stops there. But the Thales science experiment of Lodestone magnetism and static electricity goes through the entire gamut of Scientific Method as delineated by the 6 connectors of Logic.
I suspect there are monuments on Miletus commemorating Thales. However, I insist a International Monument be erected with a tourist center showing the Lodestone magnet and the Amber rubbed in fur giving static electricity.
A monument in Surrey England for fire making 400,000 years ago. And here a monument of where the first science experiments of truly magnificent in electricity and magnetism for the Universal Axiom over all science is = All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism.
In fact, all these famous persons in the History of Logic should have an International Monument.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb,2026 to Plutonium Atom Universe
Yes, I could not complete the Scientific Method with all 6 connectors for Fire Making by Neanderthals, but I sure can complete it using Thales scientific experiment discovery of magnetism and static electricity.
In other words, the Scientific Method is the sequence of the Logic Connectors.
Scientific Method from various sources on Internet
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Step 1-- Make observations and ask many questions.
Let me say he discovered them roughly in one year. He made observations that the Lodestone attracted iron nails and called it a Magnet for the rock came from Magnesia. And he observed that rubbed amber attracts small objects.
Thales says --- there exists Lodestone and there exists Amber and fur and nails and small paper of his time.
The Existential quantifier.
Step 2-- Research the subject matter and Review the literature on the subject.
This is good, and would be Not-Equal. Is the idea equal to known ideas and whether the new idea is not equal to known ideas.
Step 3-- Formulate a Hypothesis of what you think is going on.
Yes this is the IF--> Then hypothesis.
Step 4-- Conduct Experiments pertaining to your hypothesis.
Here Thales may have experimented to see if the Lodestone attracts Amber. Or if the Lodestone attracts the fur. Or if the Lodestone attracts paper.
He may have experimented to see if rubbed amber attracts a tiny piece of iron nail.
Yes, Thales needed to decide between competing hypotheses and ideas and this is the OR where we have Deciding Experiments.
Thales makes a competing Hypothesis, Either the Amber is composed of tiny lodestones or it is not.
Here Thales needs to perform a Deciding Experiment.
So he smashes nails to get iron flakes, iron filings.
Now he sets up the Deciding Experiment, the OR connector of Logic.
Will the rubbed Amber in fur pick up any iron filings?????
Step 5-- Collect data from the experiment/s and analyze the data.
Thales makes a Hypothesis that inside the Amber exists tiny lodestones that do the attracting. So tiny they cannot attract big nails only tiny nails.
Step 6-- Draw conclusions, and publish the results.
Based on his Experiments, Thales concludes that no Universal or does he conclude a Universal law????
Leave the reader to find out. Clue: In the textbook Physics of the Atom, 4th ed, 1985 Wehr,Richards,Adair, page 539 state: c.400 Saint Augustine (Aurelius Augustinus)(North Africa, 354-430) was the first to report that the forces exerted by rubbed amber and by lodestone are different properties.
Teacher for class demonstration: Bring a amber and fur and a lodestone and small nails to class and demonstrate the attraction force for the entire classroom to see the physics.
5) Pythagoras of Samos (570-495 BC) -- deductive reasoning and the link between numbers and geometry in A^2 +B^2 = C^2 for right triangles
Deductive Reasoning is a part of Logic.
Born
c. 570 BC
Died
c. 495 BC (aged around 75)
Philosophical work
Era
Pre-Socratic philosophy
Region
Western philosophy
Pythagoreanism
Attributed ideas:
Pythagoras of Samos[a] (Ancient Greek: Πυθαγόρας; c. 570 – c. 495 BC)[b] was an ancient IonianGreek philosopher, polymath, and the eponymous founder of Pythagoreanism. His political and religious teachings were well known in Magna Graecia and influenced the philosophies of Plato, Aristotle, and, through them, Western philosophy. Modern scholars disagree regarding Pythagoras's education and influences, but most agree that he travelled to Croton in southern Italy around 530 BC, where he founded a school in which initiates were allegedly sworn to secrecy and lived a communal, ascetic lifestyle.
In antiquity, Pythagoras was credited with mathematical and scientific discoveries, such as the Pythagorean theorem, Pythagorean tuning, the five regular solids, the theory of proportions, the sphericity of the Earth, the identity of the morning and evening stars as the planet Venus, and the division of the globe into five climatic zones. He was reputedly the first man to call himself a philosopher ("lover of wisdom").[c] Historians debate whether Pythagoras made these discoveries and pronouncements, as some of the accomplishments credited to him likely originated earlier or were made by his colleagues or successors, such as Hippasus and Philolaus.
Archimedes Plutonium
Rearrangement proof of the Pythagorean theorem.(The area of the white space remains constant throughout the translation rearrangement of the triangles. At all moments in time, the area is always c2. And likewise, at all moments in time, the area is always a2 + b2.)
In one rearrangement proof, two squares are used whose sides have a measure of and which contain four right triangles whose sides are a, b and c, with the hypotenuse being c. In the square on the right side, the triangles are placed such that the corners of the square correspond to the corners of the right angle in the triangles, forming a square in the center whose sides are length c. Each outer square has an area of (a + b)2 as well as 2ab + c2, with 2ab representing the total area of the four triangles. Within the big square on the left side, the four triangles are moved to form two similar rectangles with sides of length a and b. These rectangles in their new position have now delineated two new squares, one having side length a is formed in the bottom-left corner, and another square of side length b formed in the top-right corner. In this new position, this left side now has a square of area (a + b)2 as well as 2ab + a2 + b2. Since both squares have the area of (a + b)2 it follows that the other measure of the square area also equal each other such that 2ab + c2 = 2ab + a2 + b2. With the area of the four triangles removed from both side of the equation what remains is a2 + b2 = c2.
and which contain four right triangles whose sides are Thales in Miletus and Pythagoras in Samos, both Greek Islands in Ancient times, in what is today near the country Turkey. I cannot help but think that students of Thales 626-548 BC and students of Pythagoras 570-495 BC along with Thales and Pythagoras, met each other and conversed and logically argued one another over ideas of the times.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 26, 2026, 7:21:58 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Now I am curious to see if this copy paste quote video holds up under Google groups post below.
The idea of the Pythagorean Theorem was known long before Pythagoras, but what the group of people the Pythagoreans did, remarkably is give a proof of the idea, a deductive proof. And without any words, just two pictures, the Pythagorean theorem was proven.
In some sense, if we stretch our imagination, the Laws of Physics, such as law of gravity or Coulomb or Ampere or Faraday, these Laws are Proofs to mathematics.
I have no evidence for this comment I am about to make. I think the Pythagorean Theorem was the first proof in all of mathematics. I say that because I cannot think of a proof in arithmetic or numbers or algebra that dates earlier to the Pythagorean Theorem.
This is a milestone in the history of Logic, because the deductive method is a part of Logic, a huge part of logic. For taking premisses of ideas and concluding a new truth via deductive steps is the heart of Logic. But logic is even bigger than just the deductive method.
What is often left-out in the discussion of the Pythagorean Theorem is the geometry that you need out of necessity a 90degree angle.
And the importance of this theorem, linking numbers to 90 degrees if you hand me lengths 3.5, 4, 5, that it cannot form a right-triangle. It forms a triangle, but not a right-triangle.
Physics uses the Pythagorean theorem everywhere for the laws of Electromagnetism depend on the perpendicular, such as Faraday Law, and even the Light Ray where the Electric field is perpendicular to the Magnetic field.
It looks as though the video above made it through.
6) Leucippus (5th century BC) and Democritus (460-370 BC) greatest of all science theories, the Atomic Theory
Alright, I come to this chapter which is dear to my heart, it is the Atomic theory, the greatest idea ever to come to humanity. All science pivots around the Atomic Theory. If you do not believe me, just look at the first few pages of Feynman in his Lectures on Physics.
If I recall correctly, the way that Leucippus and Democritus pictured atoms in their minds were geometrical, some were triangular, some circular, some square.
Of course now in modern times we picture them as the Periodic Table of Chemical Elements. I know of only a few of the elements that can be seen as being pure of that element. Carbon and iron and copper and mercury can be pure elements. Water of course is a compound of hydrogen and oxygen.
We discussed Thales earlier with his discovery of lodestone magnet and static electricity, and in some sense Thales made a try of a theory similar to the Atomic Theory. Thales thought that everything reduces to water. Which in a sense is a Atomic Theory of not 114 chemical elements but singularly just water. Which we laugh at today, but astonishingly, Thales probably provoked others into thinking--- we reduce all matter to particles that can no longer be reduced (the last cut). That is what Atom means in Ancient Greek times--- the last cut.
Perhaps that is how the Atomic Theory was borne. Thales had his water as the last cut. Then comes along Leucippus and Democritus broadening out the idea of Last Cut to be more than just water.
Really, really, as simple as that is of Logic, to form the greatest idea, the greatest theory of science-- the Atomic theory--- requires only a simple idea itself-- the Last Cut. If there is a last cut and no more cuts possible then you have a atom, and the whole world is composed of these atoms.
So remarkable, so genius that the idea of Atomic Theory had to take over 2,200 years to be confirmed by science in the likes of John Dalton 1766-1844 and many many others.
At home here, I have many pictures of the Periodic Table of Chemical Elements where the purified element is shown.
Here I see this chart by Minerals Education Coalition showing the pure element in each square.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 26, 2026, 7:52:20 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
What is the logic of the Atomic Theory? What is its essence.
Suppose we were back in Ancient Greek times of roughly 2500 years ago. Suppose no Atomic Theory existed. And suppose we were thinking about Matter.
The logic is this, we cut away at a piece of matter, cut cut cut cut cut. There must be a Last Cut. And there you have it--- The Atomic Theory. Such simple logic, such great importance.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 26, 2026, 9:18:41 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
So, the Atomic Theory, greatest single idea of all time and how should it be reflected by its discovery??? Should it be simple to discover or should it have been difficult??
It was simple because it takes only a little logical reasoning and deduction. Should it have been more simple than the Pythagorean Theorem or more difficult?
It is easy to discover it for you need just Common Sense. If you have a material object, Matter, you can cut away and cut away until there is nothing more to cut--- the Last Cut--- the Atom. Common Sense.
So beautifully easy to deduce. But to prove it takes 2,200 years into the future where we have the science of chemistry and people like John Dalton. So difficult to prove because we are talking of entities that eyesight vision can no longer see. We have to wait thousands of years to discover and build tools to look into such small entities, like the microscope and the electron microscope.
Why does it take so long to prove because of size. Well, because it is so easy to discover--- logic common sense that naturally, an easy discovery will be 2,200 years ahead of its time. If it were difficult to discover, then the discovery of the Atomic Theory could have been just 50 or 100 years before Dalton. No, the ease of Logic to think--- cut .... cut.... cut.... there must be a Last Cut, a series of divisions.
This is Logic in action, perhaps its most beautiful action.
And this is why I insist all science students before they graduate must have 2 years of College Logic taken, not by the corrupt Old Logic textbooks but by AP Logic textbooks.
So we go forward in time and all of mathematics in the 1900s, not a single math professor has the correct numbers of mathematics with their silly Reals, for Reals are a continuum according to fools like Paul Cohen, Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao. Did they not learn a single thing about Science, about the Atomic Theory. The last-cut. Can you have a Last-cut in Reals????? Certainly not, for between any two Reals sits another Real.
If Leucippus and Democritus had foolish minds like all the 1900 and up to 2026 mathematicians with Reals, they would not have discovered the Atomic Theory.
In fact, so stupid was every math professor after the year 1900 when Max Planck starts Quantum Mechanics where numbers have to be discrete, for "quantum" means discrete, that the math professors around the world needed to drop whatever they were doing, stand up and take notice. Numbers have to be discrete, for discreteness allows a Last Cut.
Every math professor from 1900 to 2026 was a logical misfit and failure, and will be seen in history as a logical misfit.
Quantum Mechanics is discrete, numbers must be discrete, for Atomic theory is discrete.
This is what I say, if you go to college and university seeking a degree in science and never take logic to help you think straight and clear, chances are--- you will fail in that science or not amount to much as your mind is full of illogical babble.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 26, 2026, 9:27:49 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe.
Now, can I say the Atomic Theory is the easiest theory of science to discover?? It certainly was 2,200 years ahead of its time indicating it must have been easy.
How easy of a theory if we can call it a theory, more like a theorem to discover the Pythagorean Theorem???
How easy was it to discover fire-making from flint and iron pyrite??
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 26, 2026, 11:54:38 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Let me apply some math numbers figures for discovery.
We can say that the Stone Age lasted for 3.4 million years. And fire making by flint & iron pyrite is 400,000 years old, possibly earlier. So in the working of making stone tools does fire-making get discovered. Some bright Neanderthal noticing the sparks and wondering if his/her campfire is the same thing. So we have 400,000/3,400,000 = 12%.
Magnetism and Static Electricity with Thales, needed iron and the Iron Age was 1200 to 550BC. Thales lived (626 - 548 BC), here I have 74/650 = 11%.
The Pythagorean Theorem arises after mathematics is known to exist. About 3000 BC Babylonians and Egyptians used arithmetic and geometry for taxation and building construction. Pythagoras was (570-495 BC) and here I have approximately 495/3000= 16%.
Atom as the final cut, so we have the iron age of cutting tools 1200 to 550BC. The Atomic theory (460-370 BC)
370/1200= 30%.
Euclid (300BC) from that of early math 3000BC is 300/3000= 10%
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 27, 2026, 2:26:56 AM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
What I am doing here is what I call reverse calculus. Figuring out a straight line calculus function.
So if it takes Humanity starting 3.4 million years ago and takes until 400,000 years ago to learn and discover how to make fire from flint and iron pyrite struck together that is a slope of 400,000/3,400,000, or a slope of roughly 10%
Now the Atomic theory started with Leucippus and Democritus 460 + 2026 = roughly 2500 years ago and taking 10% of that gives me approximately 250 years ago. I look up the history of the atomic theory to see what was available in 1750. Well in chemistry history is Robert Boyle, considered a pioneer of modern chemistry.
What I am considering here is an environment necessary for a discovery to take place. We could not have Thales discover magnetism of the lodestone if iron was not available. The Iron Age started 1200BC which is 1200 + 2026=3226. Now 10% of 3226 = 322. So 2026-322=1704. By 1705 Hauksbee in England made a powerful electrostatic generator.
The discovery of the Periodic Table of Chemical Elements led by John Dalton 1803 is 2026-1803=223. And 10% of that is 22 years. The Plutonium Atom Totality theory was started in 1990.
This is not a good match up.
If I said Boyle-Hooke-Newton of 1700 as Boyle's work explaining the kinetic motion of gases we have 2026-1700=326 and 10% of that is close to the year 1990.
I would not take much stock in this digression. I am just probing to see if we can think of the world as being a plowed and fertilized field and that 10% will yield a new discovery.
Now the simple idea that discovered the Atomic Theory is the "Last Cut" that is division and we can safely say that the Atomic Theory is a division of matter down to a point where you no longer can divide.
Appropriately using the concepts of "indivisible". And in recent times, we can say Light Rays have an aspect of indivisible once we get down to Microwaves of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation.
Division in math is the IF--> Then of Logic
Born
5th century BCE
Philosophical work
Era
Pre-Socratic philosophy
School
Atomism
Notable students
Democritus
Language
Ancient Greek
Main interests
Metaphysics, cosmology
Leucippus (/luːˈsɪpəs/; Λεύκιππος, Leúkippos; fl. 5th century BCE) was a pre-Socratic Greek philosopher. He is traditionally credited as the founder of atomism, which he developed with his student Democritus. Leucippus divided the world into two entities: atoms, indivisible particles that make up all things, and the void, the nothingness that exists between the atoms. He developed his philosophy as a response to the Eleatics, who believed that all things are one and the void does not exist. Leucippus's ideas were influential in ancient and Renaissance philosophy. Leucippus was the first Western philosopher to develop the concept of atoms, but his ideas only bear a superficial resemblance to modern atomic theory.
Leucippus's atoms come in infinitely many forms and exist in constant motion, creating a deterministic world in which everything is caused by the collisions of atoms. Leucippus described the beginning of the cosmos as a vortex of atoms that formed the Earth, the Sun, the stars, and other celestial bodies. As Leucippus considered both atoms and the void to be infinite, he presumed that other worlds must exist as cosmoses are formed elsewhere. Leucippus and Democritus described the soul as an arrangement of spherical atoms, which are cycled through the body through respiration and create thought and sensory input.
The only records of Leucippus come from Aristotle and Theophrastus, ancient philosophers who lived after him, and little is known of his life. Most scholars agree that Leucippus existed, but some have questioned this, instead attributing his ideas purely to Democritus. Contemporary philosophers rarely distinguish their respective ideas. Two works are attributed to Leucippus (The Great World Systemand On Mind), but all of his writing has been lost with the exception of one sentence.
The thing I remember most of Democritus besides his Atomic theory, is that he was the "Laughing philosopher". I say that because he must have come up against fierce resistance especially from religionists. If you say that Atoms are everything, in a sense you omit the Gods. And I, being the founder-framer of the Plutonium Atom Totality have had to adopt the Democritus reaction to critics--- laughing my way outright in any discussion.
Archimedes Plutonium
Born
c. 460 BC
Died
c. 370 BC (aged approximately 90)
Philosophical work
Era
Pre-Socratic philosophy
Region
Western philosophy
School
Atomism
Main interests
Notable ideas
Democritus (/dɪˈmɒkrɪtəs/, dim-OCK-rit-əs; Greek: Δημόκριτος, Dēmókritos, meaning "chosen of the people"; c. 460 – c. 370 BC) was an Ancient Greek pre-Socratic philosopher from Abdera, primarily remembered today for his formulation of an atomic theory of the universe.[2] Democritus wrote extensively on a wide variety of topics.[3]
None of Democritus' original work has survived, except through second-hand references. Many of these references come from Aristotle, who viewed him as an important rival in the field of natural philosophy.[4] He was known in antiquity as the ‘laughing philosopher’ because of his emphasis on the value of cheerfulness.[5]
Democritus among the AbderitesAlthough many anecdotes about Democritus' life survive, their authenticity cannot be verified and modern scholars doubt their accuracy.[6]
According to Aristotle, Democritus was born in Abdera, on the coast of Thrace.[7][6] He was a polymath and prolific writer, producing nearly eighty treatises on subjects such as poetry, harmony, military tactics, and Babylonian theology. Some called him a Milesian, and the name of his father too is stated differently.[8] His birth year was fixed by Apollodorus in the first year of the 80th Olympiad, or 460 BC, while Thrasyllus had referred it to as the 3rd year of the 77th Olympiad.[9] Democritus had called himself forty years younger than Anaxagoras. His father, Hegesistratus,--or as others called him Damasippus or Athenocritus,--was possessed of so large a property, that he was able to receive and treat Xerxes on his march through Abdera.[10]
Democritus spent the inheritance left to him by his father on travels to distant countries, which he undertook to satisfy his extraordinary thirst for knowledge. He travelled over a great part of Asia, and, as some state, he even reached India and Aethiopia.[11] We know that he wrote on Babylon and Meroe; he must also have visited Egypt, and Diodorus Siculus[12] even states, that he lived there for a period of five years. He himself declared,[13] that among his contemporaries none had made greater journeys, seen more countries, and made the acquaintance of more men distinguished in every kind of science than himself. Among the last he mentions in particular the Egyptian mathematicians (ἀρπεδονάπται ; comp. Sturz, de Dialect. Maced. p. 98), whose knowledge he praises, without, however, regarding himself inferior to them. Theophrastus, too, spoke of him as a man who had seen many countries.[14] It was his desire to acquire an extensive knowledge of nature that led him into distant countries at a time when travelling was the principal means of acquiring an intellectual and scientific culture; and after returning to his native land he occupied himself only with philosophical investigations, especially such as related to natural history.[15]
AP writes:: I do not know why most of these old pictures are so "dark". Can they be cleaned in modern day restorations???
As mathematician, I know subtraction relates to division, in that rapid subtraction is division.
Also, rapid addition is the same as multiplication.
So , let me do a tidy argument ending up saying that Physics is division.
So if the Atomic theory, the greatest theory in all of Science is division. And, since the Atomic theory is the greatest theory in physics, then it is the main composition of Physics. And if Atomic theory is division. Must mean that Physics, overall is division since Atomic Theory is division.
Do you buy that???
Then what is biology in terms of a mathematics operator?? Would not biology be that of multiplication? For reproduction is the main feature characteristic of life. So we have Physics as division and we have biology, Aristotle's biology as multiplication. What can we say is the operator for Logic??
My guess is that chemistry is the operator of addition for chemistry is about Atoms and atoms are ordered in terms of the number of protons from 1 for hydrogen to 94 for plutonium and onward. This is similar to mathematics Mathematical Induction of counting numbers, where starting with 0 and adding 1, a constant adding of 1 we get to 94 and onwards. And perhaps we can classify all of mathematics as addition. Also chemistry as addition.
If physics is division and chemistry is addition and biology is multiplication, what is Logic?? Is it subtraction in the vague idea that we are taking apart the argument and examining for inspection the various parts, the various ideas? And the bad parts we remove, the way of deciding what to keep as good science and throw away as bad science?
I better sleep on that for awhile before I jump to any conclusions.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 27, 2026, 1:13:37 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Alright, let me fine-tune this AP Rule of Discovery of great new ideas. It is approximately a 10% to 12% Rule. The idea is that human society needs an environment where a great new discovery can take place.
So we have the Stone Age be about 3.4 million years ago that eventually leads into a metal age.
In that 3.4 million years of working with rocks and stones, humanity will come upon two rocks of special importance, the flint and the iron pyrite. These early humans would notice as they struck flint on iron pyrite that a burst of Sparks emanate forth. And eventually one or more early humans would have had the idea that those sparks are the same as their campfire. Thus the Fire-Making discovery occurs. So the Rule is that if you take 3.4 million years and 10- to 12% of 3.4 million is 400,000 years ago is flint-iron pyrite Fire Making industry discovered.
The next discovery to consider with the 10-12% Rule is the birth of physics with Thales discovery of Lodestone magnetism simultaneously the static electricity of Amber rubbed in fur. The environment needed for that discovery is an Iron Age for you need iron be attracted to the Lodestone. The Iron Age started 1200BC which is 1200 + 2026=3226. Now 10% of 3226 = 322. So 2026-322=1704. By 1705 Hauksbee in England made a powerful electrostatic generator.
Note to Reader:: remember a Rule is not a law-structure or theory of science, a rule works some to the time but not always.
Let me test this AP Rule out on AP's most famous discovery-- the Plutonium Atom Totality. To make that discovery I obviously needed the Atomic Theory and the Periodic Table of Elements which is the heart of the science Chemistry.
Now the Atomic theory started with Leucippus and Democritus 460 + 2026 = roughly 2500 years ago and taking 10% of that gives me approximately 250 years ago. I look up the history of the atomic theory to see what was available in 1750. Well in chemistry history is Robert Boyle, considered the father of modern chemistry.
What this rule suggests is that the discovery of Great Important ideas requires an Environment of time to grow in that environment and be discovered, a rule of about 10%.
7) Socrates (470-399 BC)-- logic argument
Now I come to the history where we can say Logic as a science is borne of three famous philosophers, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle.
Logic is borne with these three teachers.
5) Socrates (470-399 BC)-- logic argument
6) Plato (428- 348 BC)-- being into becoming
7) Aristotle (384-322 BC)-- deductive syllogism
Let me try out the 10% rule of AP to see what that yields if anything. So 322 + 1990 =2312 and 10% of that is 231. If I subtract 231 from that of 1990 (year of discovery of Atom Totality), I get 1759. What was happening in Logic if anything in 1759? Well the closest recognizable Logic person is Leibniz but he is 1646 -1716. So this goes to show the Rule is only half the time of any use.
Logic starts with these 3 Ancient Greek philosophers and should it start in Ancient Greek times??? Yes, we can say affirmatively that when mathematics deductive reasoning of the Proof method by Pythagoras (570-495 BC) will cause the birth of Logic. Let me try out the 10% Rule on the birth of Logic. I can use Socrates 399 or Aristotle 322.
So 495 + 1990 =2485 and 10% of that is 248. If I add 248 to 399 = 647, and if I add 248 to 322 is 570 which is Pythagoras. A Rule in science is of interest, but not of any stern seriousness.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 27, 2026, 1:50:23 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
So, let us review the Logic we learned from the Atomic Theory by Leucippus and his student Democritus, the greatest science theory to ever come along. We learned the Logic of that theory is ---- a Final Cut ---- causes the existence of the Atomic Theory. A final cut can be viewed as division.
We are now in history with Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. They are considered the founding-framers of Logic and their discovery can be summarized in the syllogism.
All Men are Mortal.
Socrates is a man.
Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
A syllogism by Aristotle is 2 lines of premisses that leads to a conclusion. In short, a syllogism is Logic's smallest argument. Can the syllogism be compared to Pythagoras proof of A^2 + B^2 = C^2, which was a 2 picture proof of a right triangle sides???
If the birth of the Atomic Theory is the Final Cut, which is division. For as you keep cutting to reach the atom, that is division.
Can we then say the birth of Logic is addition??? We add at least 2 premisses to reach a conclusion. And in more fancy complicated arguments we add more even more premisses to reach a conclusion. Premisses are "true statements".
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 27, 2026, 7:47:39 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
On Friday, February 27, 2026 at 1:40:27 PM UTC-6 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Now I come to the history where we can say Logic as a science is borne of three famous philosophers, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle.
Logic is borne with these three teachers.
5) Socrates (470-399 BC)-- logic argument
6) Plato (428- 348 BC)-- being into becoming
7) Aristotle (384-322 BC)-- deductive syllogism
Born
c. 470 BC
Died
399 BC (aged approx. 71)
Cause of death
Forced suicide by poisoning
Spouse(s)
Xanthippe, Myrto (disputed)
Children
Lamprocles, Menexenus, Sophroniscus
Family
Sophroniscus (father), Phaenarete(mother), Patrocles (half-brother)
Philosophical work
Era
Ancient Greek philosophy
Region
Western philosophy
School
Classical Greek philosophy
Notable students
Main interests
Notable ideas
Socrates (/ˈsɒkrətiːz/;[2] Ancient Greek: Σωκράτης, romanized: Sōkrátēs; c. 470 – 399 BC) was an ancient Greek philosopher from Classical Athens, perhaps the first Western moral philosopher, and a major inspiration on his student Plato, who largely founded the tradition of Western philosophy.[3] An enigmatic figure, Socrates authored no texts and is known mainly through the posthumous accounts of classical writers, particularly his students Plato and Xenophon. These accounts are written as dialogues, in which Socrates and his interlocutors examine a subject in the style of question and answer; they gave rise to the Socratic dialogue literary genre. Contradictory accounts of Socrates make a reconstruction of his philosophy nearly impossible, a situation known as the Socratic problem. Socrates was a polarizing figure in Athenian society. In 399 BC, he was accused of impiety and corrupting the youth. After a trial that lasted a day, he was sentenced to death. As related by Plato, he was put to death by administration of poison after refusing offers from allies to help him escape.
Plato's dialogues are among the most comprehensive accounts of Socrates to survive from antiquity. They demonstrate the Socratic approach to areas of philosophy including epistemology and ethics. The Platonic Socrates lends his name to the concept of the Socratic method, and also to Socratic irony. The Socratic method of questioning, or elenchus, takes shape in dialogue using short questions and answers, epitomized by those Platonic texts in which Socrates and his interlocutors examine various aspects of an issue or an abstract meaning, usually relating to one of the virtues, and find themselves at an impasse, unable to define what they thought they understood. Socrates frequently proclaims his ignorance, saying that he is only sure that he does not know.
Socrates exerted a strong influence on philosophers in later antiquity and has continued to do so in the modern era. He was studied by medieval and Islamic scholars and played an important role in the thought of the Italian Renaissance, particularly within the humanist movement. Interest in him continued unabated, as reflected in the works of Søren Kierkegaard and Friedrich Nietzsche. Depictions of Socrates in art, literature, and popular culture have made him a widely known figure in the Western philosophical tradition.
Archimedes Plutonium
I especially like the statement by Socrates -- "The unexamined life is not worth living."
And of course, the famous syllogism of Aristotle involves Socrates.
All men are mortal.
Socrates was a man.
Therefore, Socrates was mortal.
Analyzed: "All men are mortal" is the major premiss. And "Socrates was a man" is the minor premiss. The Conclusion is "Therefore, Socrates was mortal".
I am going to attribute the birth of the science of Logic to all three of these Ancient Greek Philosophers--- Socrates and his student Plato and then Plato's student Aristotle, a long chain of three great minds, one building on the work of the others. This of course long chain of great minds focusing on a topic of science is seen in the Atomic theory starting with Leucippus (5th century BC) then his student Democritus (460-370 BC):
--- quoting in parts Physics of the Atom, 4th edition, Wehr, Richards, Adair, 1985---
Aristotle 335 BC held that all matter was basically composed of the same primordial stuff
Epicurus of Samos 300BC founded a philosophical system based on the atomism of Democritus
Titus Lucretius Carus 60 BC extended the Atomic theory of Democritus and Epicurus and his poem De Rerum Natura is the most complete record of Greek atomism extant.
A curious note:
Saint Augustine 400 AD was the first to report that the forces exerted by rubbed amber and by lodestone are different properties. (Thales of Miletus 550BC recorded the attractive properties of rubbed amber and of lodestone.
--- end quoting in parts Physics of the Atom, 4th edition, Wehr, Richards, Adair, 1985---
AP writes: The greatest theory of science of all time was a chain of thinkers on the subject, one lifting the other. For Thales also had the idea that the Final Cut was water.
And this all chimes in with AP in 2026--- and the Primal Axiom of Science= All is Atom, and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism.
So we have in Ancient Greek times the birth of Atomic theory as geometry objects, and Thales saying it is water. Leaping forward in time of 550+2026=2576 years. Because of the Primal Axiom, we can offer a Syllogism of the Atomic Theory.
All Matter is made up of Atoms.
And since "All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism.
Therefore everything reduces to electricity and magnetism.
8) Plato (428- 348 BC)-- being into becoming
This is the time of the rise of Biology as a science with Plato then his student, Aristotle.
Philosophical work
Era
Ancient Greek philosophy
Notable students
Aristotle
Main interests
Epistemology, Metaphysics
Political philosophy, Ethics
Notable works
Notable ideasPlato (/ˈpleɪtoʊ/ PLAY-toe; Greek: Πλάτων, Plátōn; born c. 428–423 BC, died 348/347 BC) was an ancient Greek philosopher of Classical Athens who is most commonly considered the foundational thinker of the Western philosophical tradition.[1] An innovator of the literary dialogue and dialectic forms, Plato influenced all the major areas of theoretical philosophy and practical philosophy, and was the founder of the Platonic Academy, a philosophical school in Athenswhere Plato taught the collection of philosophical theories that would later become known as Platonism.
Plato's most famous contribution is his Theory of Forms (or Ideas), which aims to solve what is now known as the problem of universals. He was influenced by the pre-Socratic thinkers Pythagoras, Heraclitus, and Parmenides, although much of what is known about them is derived from Plato himself.
Along with his teacher Socrates, and his student Aristotle, Plato is a central figure in the history of Western philosophy. Plato's complete works are believed to have survived for over 2,400 years—unlike that of nearly all of his contemporaries.[2] Although their popularity has fluctuated, they have consistently been read and studied through the ages.[3] Through Platonism's outgrowth Neoplatonism, he also influenced Christian philosophy, and both Jewish and Islamic philosophy. In modern times, Alfred North Whitehead said: "the safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato."[4]
LifePlato was born between 428 and 423 BC[5][6] into an aristocratic and influential Athenian family
--- end quoting Wikipedia---
Archimedes Plutonium
Ancient Greek times experimentation is often downplayed by historians. Thinking there was little hands on experimentation. I severely doubt that to have been the case. Probably paper and pencil in those times was hard to keep in supply to tell us how much experimentation ensued. If you do mathematics, like Plato or Archimedes, you often do it in the sand and that is never preserved.
I believe the Ancient Greeks had a robust Experimentation programs going on. And I might add that Gods and Godessess in religion of Ancient Greek times was far more amenable to experimentation, use of logic in arguments than was human history during the Middle Ages where religion took a violent stance on Logic as interference in faith.
9) Aristotle (384-322 BC)-- deductive syllogism
---quoting Wikipedia---
Born
384 BC
Died
322 BC (aged 61–62)
Education
Education
Platonic Academy
Philosophical work
Era
Ancient Greek philosophy
Region
Western philosophy
School
Peripatetic school
Notable students
Alexander the Great, Theophrastus, Aristoxenus
Main interests
Notable works
Notable ideas
Aristotelianism
Aristotle[A] (Attic Greek: Ἀριστοτέλης, romanized: Aristotélēs;[B] 384–322 BC) was an ancient Greek philosopher and polymath. His writings cover a broad range of subjects spanning the natural sciences, philosophy, linguistics, economics, politics, psychology, and the arts. As the founder of the Peripatetic school of philosophy in the Lyceum in Athens, he began the wider Aristotelian tradition that followed, which set the groundwork for the development of modern science.
Little is known about Aristotle's life. He was born in the city of Stagira in northern Greece during the Classical period. His father, Nicomachus, died when Aristotle was a child, and he was brought up by a guardian. At around eighteen years old, he joined Plato's Academyin Athens and remained there until the age of thirty seven (c. 347 BC). Shortly after Plato died, Aristotle left Athens and, at the request of Philip II of Macedon, tutored his son Alexander the Great beginning in 343 BC. He established a library in the Lyceum, which helped him to produce many of his hundreds of books on papyrus scrolls.
Though Aristotle wrote many treatises and dialogues for publication, only around a third of his original output has survived, none of it intended for publication. Aristotle provided a complex synthesis of the various philosophies existing prior to him. His teachings and methods of inquiry have had a significant impact across the world, and remain a subject of contemporary philosophical discussion.
Aristotle's views
Archimedes Plutonium
To be what is called the creator (founding-framer) of a Science, such as biology is one of the highest distinctions in a career. It is a magnificent honor for Aristotle to be the founding-father of biology.
Most people when they bring up biology, immediately think of Darwin and evolution. Few think of Aristotle.
Then of course, Socrates-Plato-Aristotle start the science of Logic.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 28, 2026, 3:51:44 AM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Aristotle has a impressive list of notable ideas, far larger than Socrates or Plato. But in my opinion, the most impressive credential other than Logic, is that Plato discovered the Platonic Solids, the 5 regular polyhedron which come down to us in modern times in almost the same condition as back in Ancient Greek times when Plato discovered them. Mathematics sharpness impresses me, for mathematics is clear logic in action.
Do not get me wrong, being founders of Logic and biology for Aristotle is impressive.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 28, 2026, 5:54:40 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Yes, indeed, we can think of the Atomic Theory as the most important theory in all of Science and that would make Physics be Division, for the Last Cut is a process of Division. Division is also the definition of the calculus derivative dy/dx.
Then Chemistry which is the study of the chemical elements is Addition as you add one more proton to achieve the next element, a mathematical induction and then the science Mathematics is Addition for you craft the numbers out of Mathematical Induction.
Then the science of Biology, which Aristotle started in Ancient Greek times, what operator is Biology????? Looks to me like that is naturally Multiplication. You live to multiply, reproduce. And the calculus integral is multiplication in terms of area under function graph.
That leaves us only one operator remaining--- subtraction. And only one major science remaining of Logic. Can we say that Logic in general is a subtraction process???? When we are being Logical, is that like saying we are being picky, fussy, prying apart, choosy???? Are we subtracting, meaning removal of something and keeping something else?????
I do not know as of yet whether Logic is a process of subtraction removal, but many circumstances such as in science deciding experiment, that the decision is the logic of removal.
Archimedes Plutonium Feb 28, 2026, 6:00:42 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
On the other hand--- the OR connector of Logic is subtraction and is the operator that makes the success of the Deciding Experiment. In the Deciding Experiment of Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden 1906-1913 saying Atoms have a nucleus while AP in 2017 saying Atoms have ____No Nucleus___ The deciding experiment--- either Rutherford is correct or AP is correct--- the deciding experiment is the Gold Leaf Foil Experiment where a 180 degree bounce back alpha particle is impossible to have a faster speed coming out than going in. This thus decides that AP was correct and Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden were wrong.
So yes, the entire enterprise of doing Logic is the same as the process of Subtraction. By subtracting we eliminate, we remove wrong ideas.
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 1, 2026, 5:53:43 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Now I very much hate the word "father" to mean the creator of a subject, such as Thales the father of Physics with his lodestone magnetism and static electricity of amber and fur.
What other word can I find to better describe the first pioneer who ends up forming a major science?? Even in US History we are fond of calling them the Founding Fathers, to the chagrin of probably every female.
So, what word can replace "father"????
I am looking at synonyms--- creator, founder, pioneer, framers.
Creator sounds too strong and pioneer sounds too weak.
Founder sounds about right.
Framers maybe even better than founder.
Perhaps I can do it as Founder-Framer. So that Thales was the Founder-Framer of Physics. And Aristotle was the Founder-Framer of Biology, and the trio Socrates-Plato-Aristotle were the Founder Framers of Logic.
An interesting question that I need to look up is who is the Founder-Framers of Chemistry????
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 1, 2026, 5:59:28 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Would the Founder-Framer of Chemistry be Cavendish, 1766 who first discovered hydrogen? Or perhaps Lavoiser 1789, or perhaps John Dalton 1803 who clearly champions the Atomic theory??
I am inclined to think Chemistry is founded in 1803 with Dalton.
10) Euclid (300BC) -- systematized math and geometry in a deductive proof method
I am at chapter 10, Euclid, and it seems that in writing every book I learn something new and important. Here I am going to learn the importance of Systematizing a science, as that systematizing is making the science Universal quantifier, with law-structures of science. A collection of law-structures of science forms a "theory". In other words, collection of science law-structures equals a theory.
So in this chapter I can clarify the Theory of science from the theorem in mathematics and the axioms in mathematics.
A-lot of mistakes are made when people use wrong words or use words wrongly. Even an entire philosophy was based on the theme that language mistakes is the source of error in thinking-- Wittgenstein, Russell and many others, called Analytic Philosophy. In AP's opinion that Analytic Philosophy is vastly overblown, and that they lacked logical minds, for the philosophy of pragmatism tells us the meaning of words.
Euclid systematized mathematics both numbers and geometry and would now be seen as the Maxwell of electromagnetism in modern times to that of mathematics. Where Maxwell systematized electromagnetism.
--- quoting Wikipedia---
Euclid
Εὐκλείδης
Euclid by Jusepe de Ribera, c. 1630–1635[1]
Years active
fl. 300 BC
Known for
The ElementsOpticsData
Various concepts
Euclidean geometry
Euclidean algorithm
Euclid's theorem
Euclidean relation
Euclid's formula
Numerous other namesakes
Scientific career
Fields
Mathematics (Geometry)
Euclid (/ˈjuːklɪd/; Ancient Greek: Εὐκλείδης; fl. 300BC) was an ancient Greek mathematician active as a geometer and logician.[2] Considered the "father of geometry",[3] he is chiefly known for the Elements treatise, which established the foundations of geometry that largely dominated the field until the early 19th century. His system, now referred to as Euclidean geometry, involved innovations in combination with a synthesis of theories from earlier Greek mathematicians, including Eudoxus of Cnidus, Hippocrates of Chios, Thales and Theaetetus. With Archimedes and Apollonius of Perga, Euclid is generally considered among the greatest mathematicians of antiquity, and one of the most influential in the history of mathematics.
Very little is known of Euclid's life, and most information comes from the scholars Proclus and Pappus of Alexandria many centuries later. Medieval Islamic mathematicians invented a fanciful biography, and medieval Byzantine and early Renaissance scholars mistook him for the earlier philosopher Euclid of Megara. It is now generally accepted that he spent his career in Alexandria and lived around 300 BC, after Plato's students and before Archimedes. There is some speculation that Euclid studied at the Platonic Academy and later taught at the Musaeum; he is regarded as bridging the earlier Platonic tradition in Athens with the later tradition of Alexandria.
In the Elements, Euclid deduced the theorems from a small set of axioms. He also wrote works on perspective, conic sections, spherical geometry, number theory, and mathematical rigour. In addition to the Elements, Euclid wrote a central early text in the optics field, Optics, and lesser-known works including Data and Phaenomena. Euclid's authorship of On Divisions of Figures and Catoptrics has been questioned. He is thought to have written many lost works.
--- end quoting Wikipedia---
Εὐκλείδης
Years active
fl. 300 BC
Known for
Scientific career
Fields
Mathematics (Geometry)
Euclid (/ˈjuːklɪd/; Ancient Greek: Εὐκλείδης; fl. 300BC) was an ancient Greek mathematician active as a geometer and logician.[2] Considered the "father of geometry",[3] he is chiefly known for the Elementstreatise, which established the foundations of geometry that largely dominated the field until the early 19th century. His system, now referred to as Euclidean geometry, involved innovations in combination with a synthesis of theories from earlier Greek mathematicians, including Eudoxus of Cnidus, Hippocrates of Chios, Thales and Theaetetus. With Archimedes and Apollonius of Perga, Euclid is generally considered among the greatest mathematicians of antiquity, and one of the most influential in the history of mathematics.
Very little is known of Euclid's life, and most information comes from the scholars Proclus and Pappus of Alexandria many centuries later. Medieval Islamic mathematicians invented a fanciful biography, and medieval Byzantine and early Renaissancescholars mistook him for the earlier philosopher Euclid of Megara. It is now generally accepted that he spent his career in Alexandria and lived around 300 BC, after Plato's students and before Archimedes. There is some speculation that Euclid studied at the Platonic Academy and later taught at the Musaeum; he is regarded as bridging the earlier Platonic tradition in Athens with the later tradition of Alexandria.
In the Elements, Euclid deduced the theorems from a small set of axioms. He also wrote works on perspective, conic sections, spherical geometry, number theory, and mathematical rigour. In addition to the Elements, Euclid wrote a central early text in the optics field, Optics, and lesser-known works including Data and Phaenomena. Euclid's authorship of On Divisions of Figures and Catoptrics has been questioned. He is thought to have written many lost works.
Archimedes Plutonium
I do not know about you, but for me, that picture of Euclid is far too dark, can they brighten it up for it is a discredit to Euclid.
Please, can someone brighten up Euclid's picture instead of mocking him. Perhaps the easiest way is to take a photo of that painting then reverse the image where the black now becomes light-white.
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 2, 2026, 3:02:25 AM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Yes, please, can someone brighten or put more light into that picture of Euclid????? We should not mock Euclid.
Now Euclid is the first scientist to Systematize a science, that of mathematics, both numbers and geometry. And he does it with what are called Axioms or Postulates.
Today in modern science we look upon Axioms or Postulates the same as we look upon the law-structures of Physics.
And in math, we have proofs which we call theorems. In Physics we end up calling such things as math proof and theorems by calling them Experimental Results becoming law-structures.
Now Math both numbers and geometry are based on these Axioms which Physics would call law-structures such as Faraday law-structure or Ampere law-structure or Coulomb law-structure or gravity law-structure.
For math the axioms are many such as to build the Counting Numbers you start with 0 and 1 and keep adding 1 to obtain all the Counting Numbers in Mathematical Induction, or in geometry, the axiom that between any two points there does __ not always exist___ another new point for points are discrete and holes between one number and the next successor point. In algebra the axioms that an equation of math must always have a positive nonzero decimal grid number all alone by itself at all times on the right side of the equation to be a valid equation. For example x^2 + 2x = 10 is a valid equation of math but that x^2 +2x -10 = 0 is a phony equation. When you have 0 all alone on the right-hand side of the equation, 0 is not a reality number for it means representing "nothing". And that leaves the left side of the equation representing "something equal to nothing", which is another contradiction, not to mention it is a mindboggling philosophical trash of something equaling nothing, when you come to think about it.
With Euclid we have the first large scale Systematization of a science, comparable to Maxwell in the 1860s with electromagnetism theory of physics or the cell theory in biology or the continental drift theory in geology.
Here we can define a Theory of Science as a Systematization. The bringing together of law-structures to form a system of law-structures. In our glossary at the beginning of this book we defined a theory as being one which has a collection of law-structures in describing phenomena. Most of the law-structures come from electricity and magnetism. In continental drift, the tectonic plates are pushed about by electromagnetism and the cores of Earth are acting as electric motors to give off vibrations. Vibrations from cores of Earth causing continents to move.
Theory becomes the same as systematization if law-structures are involved.
So the Logic glossary of terms is this.
So for **Science** we have Statement, Concept, Hypothesis, Law-structure, Theory, Universal Axiom.
For **Logic** we have Statement, Premiss, Connector-structure, Reasoning, Equalities, Law-structure.
For **Math** we have Statement, Axiom, Operator-structure, Proof, Theorem, Theory
I use a mnemonic to remember the colors in a rainbow Roy G Biv, red orange yellow green blue indigo violet. Another mnemonic to remember the Linnaeus biology classification-- Do keep pond clean or fish get sick --- domain, kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species.
Logic involves the 6 connector-structures--- Existential quantifier, Not-Equal, AND, OR, IF-->Then and Universal quantifier. Math has 6 operator-structures. The number 6 sure comes up a-lot.
The theory of Physics should have the equal number of law-structures as does Logic -- 6 of them. For logic we have as summary-- Law-structure-- the summary of Logic in such structures as NonContradiction in logic and Occam's Razor in logic, EI existential instantiation, EG existential generalization, UI universal instantiation, UG universal generalization.
These are the 6 Law-structures of Physics that describes all of Science, not just Physics.
The 6 AP-Electromagnetic Equations and the 6 Structures (Laws) of Physics and all sciences.
Domain as Atomic Theory-- Periodic Table of Chemical Elements
1) B and E primal unit structures Magnetic Field B = kg / (Ampere*second^2) and Electric field E = kg*m/(Ampere*second^3)
2) V = A*B*E New Ohm's Law-structure of electricity
3) V' = (A*B*E)' Capacitor-Transformer Law-structure
4) (V/A*E)' = B' Ampere-Maxwell Law-structure
5) (V/(B*E))' = A' Faraday Law-structure
6) (V/(A*B))' = E' the new structure of Coulomb force with EM gravity force and DeBroglie pilot wave structure
V= voltage, A = ampere current, B = magnetic field, E = electric field.
Primal Axiom over all Science = All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. This is the primal axiom of all sciences.
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 2, 2026, 3:12:20 AM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
In a sense, math numbers have just 6 operators-- Add, Subtract, Multiply, Divide, Derivative, Integral.
Geometry needs 6 axioms --- Point, Line, Plane, 3D space, Empty space, distance.
And, we can reduce all Sciences to just 1 single Axiom, the Universal Axiom-- All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism.
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 2, 2026, 7:24:17 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Let me do some Systematization on all Sciences myself, here in 2026.
Systematization of Physics
------------------------------------------
A ___theory___ is a collection of Law-structures of Physics.
A ___law-structure___ of physics is a collection of experiments implying a universal truth.
A ___experiment____ of physics is a testing of what is true.
Systematization of Math, both Numbers and Geometry
---------------------------------------------------------------
Both numbers and geometry follow the same pattern, so I outline only one.
A _____ math subject_____ is a collection of Axioms (some prefer to call them postulates).
A ____axiom____ of math is similar to a Law-structure of physics. An axiom is accepted as common sense and is not required to have a argument-proof in favor of it.
A ___argument-proof___ of math is like the experiment of physics, where the argument uses axioms and ends up in a conclusion for the argument. The conclusion is given a fancy name of "theorem" which in physics would be called the summary of a experiment.
A ____theorem____ of math is the end result of statements, deduced as true in a proof.
Systematization of Logic
---------------------------------------
Logic is math, only instead of numbers or geometry figures we utilize "ideas" to replace numbers and geometry figures.
Logic starts with a idea called a ____statement____
If the statement is true, as measured by the best current available science of the time, then it is elevated to the status of ___ premiss___.
__Premisses____ all true statements, forms a Logic Argument, as short as 2 premisses makes a syllogism or a longer collection of premisses makes a long logic argument and the argument ends with a conclusion.
__Conclusion___ of a logic argument is the end result of deduction on those premisses. The conclusion is similar to the Math theorem and similar to the summary of an experiment in physics.
The 6 operators of math numbers-- add, subtract, multiply, divide, derivative, integral forms a collection and is the operator-structure of math. The 6 connectors of Logic --- Existential quantifier, Not-Equal, AND, OR, If-->Then, Universal quantifier forms a collection and is the connector-structure of logic. The 6 law-structures of Electromagnetism in physics forms a collection in physics and is the theory of physics.
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 3, 2026, 1:59:09 AM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Now many have the impression that once you establish a Law-structure of Physics, they are true for all time. That is far from being true.
In physics at present time we teach in University the silly Gauss's law in Maxwell Equations.
We teach in physics the insanity of Atom's having a dense nucleus of protons and neutrons of all being about 945MeV and where the electrons are tiny balls of 0.5MeV traveling outside the nucleus in orbits which is far from the truth. Atoms have no nucleus and the muon is the true electron of atoms.
We teach in Physics the Pauli Exclusion Principle, which easily contradicts the stupid idea that black holes exist. If you believe in black-holes, you fail as a scientist.
So, law-structures in physics are not eternal once discovered. Future experiments can unravel a law-structure in science. The Darwin evolution theory, so it was called, had come unhinged once quantum mechanics physics performed experiments on "quantum entanglement" also known as superdeterminism.
In mathematics many of the axioms are outright nonsense. The axiom that between any two numbers exists a new third number is simply not true, especially when Max Planck discovers quantum mechanics in year 1900, for quantum means discrete--- the fabric of space is holes in between one number and the next successive number. In algebra, the axioms telling us what is a valid equation where the rightside of equation has to be always a nonzero positive decimal grid number all alone at all times.
In Logic, Boole and Jevons in late 1800s get all 4 of the simple logic connectors all wrong with error filled truth tables, and worse, they never understood that OR connector cannot have two different tables but must be unique.
No wonder physicists after the gold foil experiment, thought that the Atom had a dense nucleus when no-one at the time--- early 1900s had a grasp of correct logic.
11) Aristarchus of Samos 270BC-- systematized the experimental science of Astronomy
What I am saying is that a system of Religion of Multiple Gods, that some science and logic can flourish in that system by simply attaching a god like Apollo to your reasoning.
Whereas, by the Middle Ages, Religion was no longer flexible, and many suffered and payed the price of going against religion in their reasoning, logic and science. Aristarchus could flourish in his thoughts, while Galileo was almost tortured.
In the back of Wehr, Richards, Adair textbook of "Physics of the Atom", 1985, is a history of the "Chronology of the Atomic View of Nature".
And although it is only the science of Atomic view, it serves good measure as to the history of all of logic and all of science through history.
There is a huge gap of nothing after Lucretius 60BC with his De Rerum Natura-- the most complete record of Greek atomic theory. And then Saint Augustine 400AD that the forces by rubbed amber is different from forces of lodestone.
We have to jump to 1600 AD for important science to emerge with William Gilbert's textbook on magnetism.
What I am trying to explain is that the history of science had a fierce competitor in Religion, and religion wants people to place faith in dogma. So scientists and logical reasoning was anathema to religion. Before 60BC, where scientists and logicians could be allowed freedom of thought with their multiple gods--- especially Apollo, the god of light and truth. But once the multiple gods were no longer extant, scientists and logicians risked death if they pushed their ideas. From 60BC to 1600AD the world was likely to have been 95% under the control of Religion as to what to think, say or even do. This period in time is commonly called the Dark Ages. A time period where science and logic are almost forbidden or risk losing your life.
Only by the year 1712 with the steam engine of Newcomen then Watt and then many others do we have a rise of science that takes a firm stand against dogma way of thinking.
By 1712 onwards, we have science and logic arising and we see it today in that our science technology put us on the Moon, not religion.
Multi-gods of Ancient Greek religion allowed for science and logic to flourish when put under the auspice of Apollo and Athena. When Multi-gods waned and religion was more one god and dogma, then science and logic had to be hidden and not given attention. Aristarchus could fully do Astronomy. But Copernicus 1473-1543 and Galileo (1564-1642) risked torture or death for their science and logic. Even the great Newton (1642-1727) was circumspect on what he said and published to not raise the ire of religion.
Moving on to Aristarchus, another systematizer, only this time astronomy.
I am trying to think of what Aristarchus used as learning aids. I would probably taken a seed pod and drive a small branch into it representing Sun, Earth, Moon, Venus. Then when the students came for a lesson have them go around Earth or Earth go around Sun to figure out what was true.
Of course, being in the Northern Hemisphere, Aristarchus would have figured out that the Earth rotated on a axis that was tilted and rotated counterclockwise since the full Moon start out at NorthEast at 7PM sun set and as the night progresses, slowly ends up SouthWest in the sky.
AP writes:: I consider Aristarchus the founding-framer of the science Astronomy.
You rarely get any higher commendation of deeds than to be a founding-framer of a science.
.jpeg)
Born
c. 310 BC
Died
c. 230 BC
Occupations
Aristarchus of Samos (/ˌærɪˈstɑːrkəs/; Ancient Greek: Ἀρίσταρχος ὁ Σάμιος, Aristarkhos ho Samios; c. 310 – c. 230 BC) was an ancient Greek astronomerand mathematician who presented the first known heliocentric model that placed the Sun at the center of the universe, with the Earth revolving around the Sun once a year and rotating about its axis once a day. He also supported the theory of Anaxagoras that the Sun was just another star.[2]
Born in Samos in approximately 310 BC, Aristarchus likely moved to Alexandria and became a student of Strato of Lampsacus, who later became the head of the Peripatetic school in Greece. According to Ptolemy, Aristarchus observed the summer solstice of 280 BC.[3]Vitruvius writes that Aristarchus built two different sundials: one a flat disc; and one hemispherical.[4]Aristarchus estimated the sizes of the Sun and Moon as compared to Earth, and the distances from the Earth to the Sun and to the Moon. His estimate that the Sun was 7 times larger than Earth (it's actually 109 times, in diameter) brought about the further insight that the Sun's greater size made it the most natural central point of the universe, as opposed to Earth.
Aristarchus was influenced by the concept presented by Philolaus of Croton (c. 470 – 385 BC) of a fire at the center of the universe (i.e. by contemporary understanding, at the center of the Earth). Aristarchus recast this "central fire" as the Sun, and he arranged the other planets in their correct order of distance around the Sun.[5]
Like Anaxagoras before him, Aristarchus suspected that the stars were just other bodies like the Sun, albeit farther away from Earth. His astronomical ideas were often rejected in favor of the geocentrictheories of Aristotle and Ptolemy. Nicolaus Copernicus knew that Aristarchus had a 'moving Earth' theory, although it is unlikely that Copernicus was aware that it was a heliocentric theory.[7][8]
The original text has been lost, but a reference in a book by Archimedes, entitled The Sand Reckoner (Archimedis Syracusani Arenarius & Dimensio Circuli), describes a work in which Aristarchus advanced the heliocentric model as an alternative hypothesis to geocentrism:
Aristarchus proposed that the fixed stars were extremely distant, and because ancient cosmology placed them all on a single celestial sphere, the modern concept of stellar parallax did not apply to his model. He placed the stars at a great distance so that their apparent positions relative to each other would remain constant throughout Earth's motion. Aristarchus reconciled this issue by postulating that the stars were other suns that are very far away,[2] far enough that the parallax was not observable. This implied a universe much larger than had been believed.
It is a common misconception that the heliocentric view was considered sacrilegious by the contemporaries of Aristarchus.[10] Lucio Russo traces this to Gilles Ménage's printing of a passage from Plutarch's On the Apparent Face in the Orb of the Moon, in which Aristarchus jokes with Cleanthes, who is head of the Stoics, a sun worshipper, and opposed to heliocentrism.[10] In the manuscript of Plutarch's text, Aristarchus says Cleanthes should be charged with impiety.[10]Ménage's version, published shortly after the trials of Galileo and Giordano Bruno, transposes an accusative and nominative so that it is Aristarchus who is purported to be impious.[10] The resulting misconception of an isolated and persecuted Aristarchus is still promulgated.[10][11]
According to Plutarch, while Aristarchus postulated heliocentrism only as a hypothesis, Seleucus of Seleucia, a Hellenistic astronomer who lived a century after Aristarchus, maintained it as a definite opinion and gave a demonstration of it,[12] but no full record of the demonstration has been found. In his Naturalis Historia, Pliny the Elder later wondered whether errors in the predictions about the heavens could be attributed to a displacement of the Earth from its central position.[13] Pliny[14] and Seneca[15] referred to the retrograde motion of some planets as an apparent (unreal) phenomenon, which is an implication of heliocentrism rather than geocentrism. Still, no stellar parallax was observed, and Plato, Aristotle, and Ptolemy preferred the geocentric model that was believed throughout the Middle Ages.
Archimedes Plutonium
Part 4: Medieval Logicians
12) Avicenna (980 -1037)-- scientific method
I was curious to see if Avicenna influenced Leonardo? Sure enough he did.
It is the Scientific Method that Avicenna is famous for.
Saint Augustine 354-430 AD was the first report that the forces exerted by rubbed amber and by lodestone are different properties. (source Physics of Atom, Wehr, Richards, Adair)
Avicenna 980-1037: detailed the Scientific Method giving future scientists a method to find the truths of science.
William Gilbert 1540-1603 made the first detailed study of magnetism and also showed that, in addition to amber, many other materials can be electrified. (source Physics of Atom, Wehr, Richards, Adair)
There was a huge lull in activity on Atomic theory from Saint Augustine to William Gilbert and Avicenna filled that gap with the Scientific Method to proceed further.
--- quoting Wikipedia---
Avicenna
Ibn Sinaابن سیناModern portrait of Ibn Sina, National Library of Medicine (1952)
Born
c. 980Afshana, Transoxiana, Samanid Empire
Died
22 June 1037 (aged 56–57)[1]
Monuments
Avicenna Mausoleum
Other namesSharaf al-Mulk (شرف الملك)Hujjat al-Haq (حجة الحق)
al-Sheikh al-Ra'is (الشيخ الرئيس)
Bu Alī Sīnā (بو علی سینا)
Philosophical work
Era
Islamic Golden Age
Region
Middle Eastern philosophy
School
Aristotelianism, Avicennism
Main interests
Notable worksThis article contains special characters.Without proper rendering support, you may see question marks, boxes, or other symbols.
Part of a series on
Avicenna
(Ibn Sīnā)
Works
Thoughts
Pupils
Monuments
.jpg)
_CIPB2067.jpg)
Ibn Sina[a] (c. 980 – 22 June 1037), commonly known in the West as Avicenna (/ˌævɪˈsɛnə, ˌɑːv-/ A(H)V-ih-SEN-ə), was a preeminent philosopher and physician of the Muslim world.[2][3] He was a seminal figure of the Islamic Golden Age, serving in the courts of various Iranian rulers,[4] and was influential to medieval European medical and Scholastic thought.[5]
Often described as the father of early modern medicine,[6][7][8] Avicenna's most famous works are The Book of Healing, a philosophical and scientific encyclopedia, and The Canon of Medicine, a medical encyclopedia[9][10][11] that became a standard medical text at many medieval European universities[12] and remained in use as late as 1650.[13]
Besides philosophy and medicine, Avicenna's corpus includes writings on astronomy, alchemy, geography and geology, psychology, Islamic theology, logic, mathematics, physics, and works of poetry.[14] His philosophy was of the Peripatetic school derived from Aristotelianism,[15] of which he is considered among the greatest proponents within the Muslim world.[5]
Avicenna wrote most of his philosophical and scientific works in Arabic but also wrote several key works in Persian; his poetry was written in both languages. Of the 450 works he is believed to have written, around 240 have survived, including 150 on philosophy and 40 on medicine.[15]
Philosophy of science
In the Al-Burhan (On Demonstration) section of The Book of Healing, Avicenna discussed the philosophy of science and described an early scientific method of inquiry. He discussed Aristotle's Posterior Analytics and significantly diverged from it on several points. Avicenna discussed the issue of a proper methodology for scientific inquiry and the question of "How does one acquire the first principles of a science?" He asked how a scientist would arrive at "the initial axioms or hypotheses of a deductive science without inferring them from some more basic premises?" He explained that the ideal situation is when one grasps that a "relation holds between the terms, which would allow for absolute, universal certainty". Avicenna then added two further methods for arriving at the first principles: the ancient Aristotelian method of induction (istiqra), and the method of examination and experimentation (tajriba). Avicenna criticized Aristotelian induction, arguing that "it does not lead to the absolute, universal, and certain premises that it purports to provide." In its place, he developed a "method of experimentation as a means for scientific inquiry."[92]
Logic
An early formal system of temporal logic was studied by Avicenna.[93] Although he did not develop a real theory of temporal propositions, he did study the relationship between temporalis and the implication.[94] Avicenna's work was further developed by Najm al-Dīn al-Qazwīnī al-Kātibī and became the dominant system of Islamic logic until modern times.[95][96] Avicennian logic also influenced several early European logicians such as Albertus Magnus[97] and William of Ockham.[98][99] Avicenna endorsed the law of non-contradiction proposed by Aristotle, that a fact could not be both true and false at the same time and in the same sense of the terminology used. He stated, "Anyone who denies the law of non-contradiction should be beaten and burned until he admits that to be beaten is not the same as not to be beaten, and to be burned is not the same as not to be burned."[100]
Archimedes Plutonium
13) William of Ockham (1287-1347) -- Ockham's razor
Ockham was under-appreciated as a Logician, yet he likely contributed one of the most greatest Logic law-structure.
Under-appreciated until AP elevates his Occam's razor to the level of being a law-structure.
You see, as Occam stated his razor--- "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity". Which in modern day speak is --- The easiest and most simple explanation for a chain of events is the true explanation.
But under Old Logic Boole and Jevons with their OR truth table being FTTF, they had no partial truth values, everything was all true or all false.
The Truth table representing subtraction or Remove for OR.
New Logic OR (exclusive)
p q p or q
____________
T T F
T dT T
dT T T
F F F
Where the dT represents partial true value.
Old Logic had this for OR.
Old Logic OR (exclusive)
p q p or q
____________
T T F
T F T
F T T
F F F
When you have everything be black and white and no shades in between you end up with a misconception of Occam's Razor that it is just a Rule that works sometimes but not all the times.
And physics supports the idea that Occam's Razor is a universal law-structure with its Least Action Principle, smallest minimum energy and no add ons.
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 6, 2026, 3:21:39 AM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Ockham was under-appreciated as a Logician, yet he likely contributed one of the most greatest Logical law-structures.
Under-appreciated until AP elevates his Occam's razor to the level of being a law-structure.
Born
c. 1287[4]
Died
9/10 April 1347[5]
Education
Education
Greyfriars, London[7]
Alma mater
University of Oxford[8][9]
Philosophical work
Era
Medieval philosophy
Region
Western philosophy
School
Main interests
Notable works
Sum of Logic
Notable ideas
William of Ockham or Occam OFM (/ˈɒkəm/ OK-əm; Latin: Gulielmus Occamus;[11][12] c. 1287 – 9/10 April 1347) was an English Franciscan friar, scholastic philosopher, apologist, and theologian, who was born in Ockham, a small village in Surrey.[13] He is considered to be one of the major figures of medieval thought and was at the centre of the major intellectual and political controversies of the 14th century. He is widely known for Occam's razor, the methodological principle that bears his name, and also produced significant works on logic, physics and theology. Ockham is remembered in the Church of England with a commemoration corresponding to the commonly ascribed date of his death on 10 April.[14]
In scholasticism, William of Ockham advocated reform in both method and content, the aim of which was simplification. Ockham incorporated much of the work of some previous theologians, especially Duns Scotus. From Duns Scotus, Ockham derived his view of divine omnipotence, his view of grace and justification, much of his epistemology and ethical convictions.[25] However, he also reacted to and against Scotus in the areas of predestination, penance, his understanding of universals, his formal distinction ex parte rei (that is, "as applied to created things"), and his view of parsimony which became known as Occam's razor.
One important contribution that he made to modern science and modern intellectual culture was efficient reasoning with the principle of parsimony in explanation and theory building that came to be known as Occam's razor. This maxim, as interpreted by Bertrand Russell,[30] states that if one can explain a phenomenon without assuming this or that hypothetical entity, there is no ground for assuming it, i.e. that one should always opt for an explanation in terms of the fewest possible causes, factors, or variables. He turned this into a concern for ontological parsimony; the principle says that one should not multiply entities beyond necessity—Entia non sunt multiplicanda sine necessitate—although this well-known formulation of the principle is not to be found in any of Ockham's extant writings.[31] He formulates it as: "For nothing ought to be posited without a reason given, unless it is self-evident
Archimedes Plutonium
Religion versus Logic
Ockham was under-appreciated as a Logician, yet he likely contributed one of the most greatest Logic law-structure.
Under-appreciated until AP elevates his Occam's razor to the level of being a law-structure.
As I write the history of Logic, I can easily run amok if I did not talk about other pathways of thought going on, other than the logic way of thinking.
Throughout human history with civilization the mode and path of thinking was mostly Religion this that and whatever. We see it in Ancient Greek times where Science begins but in a civilization where I would say only 1% were aware of science mode of thinking and the rest--- 99% were swimming in religion way of thinking.
I wrote a book defining religion as this.
Religion definition
----------------------------
We seek truth and wisdom via the scientific method to arrive at science explanations. Whenever we do not have a science explanation, we can resort to religion. If science is absent, only then can religion enter.
So why has Logic as a science taken back seat throughout most of human history as asked by me???
It is mostly because religion has occupied that duty and chore for much of human history, and only by the 19th century was Religion going to wholescale give up its vast control of how humans think and act. We see clearly this surrender of control of thinking by the birth of the USA where the Founding Fathers knew their new nation was not going to last long or survive, unless they Separated out completely Religion from politics. But still, even by 2024, religion has vast control on who gets elected.
Science and Logic definition
--------------------------------------------
Science and Logic are sciences obeying the Scientific Method and creating through engineering new technology, while Religion is mostly dogma. This causes often and seemingly endless conflict. Science always wins but often pays a dear price in securing the truth.
The reason that we can look at the 19th century as the Rise of Science and the slow decline of religion is that we have the first greatest engineering technology from science-- the steam engine.
People begin to see the steam engine and science as Truth, and then see religion more as made up fantasy. See religion as only that which science cannot explain.
In any environment where Religion dominates, clear and straight thinking of Logic is suppressed and repressed.
In Ancient Greek times where science is borne, I estimate only 1% of the total population could think logically. By the time of William of Ockham, only 2% of total human population could think logically. By the time of Boole and Jevons with the Steam Engine revolution under way, I would say 10% of total human population could think Logically. By the time humanity took flight with airplanes, I would say of all humans only 20% could think logically. By the time humanity landed on the Moon and is traveling in Space and created the radioactive electric power station, I would say only 30% of humanity could think logically.
When will humanity have the majority of logical thinkers? I would say that 50% of humans who think logically, not religion, will be reached when humanity learns the Sun and stars shine from Faraday law-structure and that we have to make Europa our new home or go extinct and perish into oblivion. For religion simply does not provide truth of the world we live in. Religion is only good when there is no science. Religion has encumbered Logical thought all the way back to Ancient Greek times, and continues to make bad decisions in present.
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 6, 2026, 7:46:56 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Science is hard work. Religion is easy for you just give-in and allow to be brainwashed. Science is demanding, while religion is a giving-up.
Science demands hard work, while religion resorts to faith.
The entire history of human civilizations is a slow climb from science as 1% of thought and religion as 99% of thought into the future where Science ends up as 99% of thought and religion 1% of thought.
Part 5: Modern day Logicians
14) George Boole (1815-1864) and William Jevons (1835-1882) -- logic connectors
Founding Framers of Chemistry Lavoisier and Dalton
Antoine Lavoisier (1734-1794) published a book containing a well-founded concept of chemical elements and the verification of the law of conservation of matter in chemical reactions. (source: Physics of the Atoim, Wehr, Richards, Adair)
John Dalton (1766-1844) published the first of a series of papers introducing atomic weights, establishing the law of multiple proportions, and founding the atomic theory of matter. (source: Physics of the Atom, Wehr, Richards, Adair)
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 6, 2026, 7:56:42 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
When reading the history of Logicians, we should ask also, if they behaved logically throughout their life???
AP writes: Rather sad that Logic has always taken a back seat as far as the sciences are concerned compared to math. Probably because few can think clear and straight in the first place.
The Illustrated London News, 21 January 1865
Born
2 November 1815
Died
8 December 1864 (aged 49)
Known for
Spouse
Awards
- Royal Medal (1844)
- Keith Medal (1855–1857)
- FRS (1857)
Education
Education
Bainbridge's Commercial Academy[1]
Philosophical work
Era
19th-century philosophy
Discipline
Mathematics
Region
Western philosophy
School
British algebraic logic[3]
Institutions
- Lincoln Mechanics' Institute[2]
- Free School Lane, Lincoln
- Queen's University, Cork
Main interests
Mathematics, logic, philosophy of mathematics
George Boole (/buːl/ BOOL; 2 November 1815 – 8 December 1864) was an English autodidact, mathematician, philosopher and logician who served as the first professor of mathematics at Queen's College, Cork in Ireland. He worked in the fields of differential equations and algebraic logic, and is best known as the author of The Laws of Thought (1854), which contains Boolean algebra. Boolean logic, essential to computer programming, is credited with helping to lay the foundations for the Information Age.[4][5][6]
Boole was the son of a shoemaker. He received a primary school education and learned Latin and modern languages through various means. At 16, he began teaching to support his family. He established his own school at 19 and later ran a boarding school in Lincoln. Boole was an active member of local societies and collaborated with fellow mathematicians. In 1849, he was appointed the first professor of mathematics at Queen's College, Cork (now University College Cork) in Ireland, where he met his future wife, Mary Everest. He continued his involvement in social causes and maintained connections with Lincoln. In 1864, Boole died due to fever-induced pleural effusion after developing pneumonia.
Boole published around 50 articles and several separate publications in his lifetime. Some of his key works include a paper on early invariant theory and "The Mathematical Analysis of Logic", which introduced symbolic logic. Boole also wrote two systematic treatises: "Treatise on Differential Equations" and "Treatise on the Calculus of Finite Differences". He contributed to the theory of linear differential equations and the study of the sum of residues of a rational function. In 1847, Boole developed Boolean algebra, a fundamental concept in binary logic, which laid the groundwork for the algebra of logic tradition and forms the foundation of digital circuit design and modern computer science. Boole also attempted to discover a general method in probabilities, focusing on determining the consequent probability of events logically connected to given probabilities.
Boole's work was expanded upon by various scholars, such as Charles Sanders Peirce and William Stanley Jevons. Boole's ideas later gained practical applications when Claude Shannon and Victor Shestakov employed Boolean algebra to optimize the design of electromechanical relay systems, leading to the development of modern electronic digital computers. His contributions to mathematics earned him various honours, including the Royal Society's first gold prize for mathematics, the Keith Medal, and honorary degrees from the Universities of Dublin and Oxford. University College Cork celebrated the 200th anniversary of Boole's birth in 2015, highlighting his significant impact on the digital age.
Archimedes Plutonium
AP writes:: I have a low opinion of Boole's ability to do logic, because he got all 4 of the simple logic connectors all wrong, such as thinking AND was subtraction and OR as addition. And this lack of logic abilities is seen in his behavior in life. He walks to school in a drenching rainstorm without umbrella, then lectures shivering in rain soaked clothes, then to relieve his pneumonia instructs his wife to give him cold water bathes. Not a stitch of logical commonsense to be found.
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 6, 2026, 8:04:41 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
You could say modern Logic started from Boole & Jevons to give impetus to establishing modern true logic for all 4 of their 4 simple connectors were ____wrong___ the AND, OR, Equal-Not, If-->Then. But Boole and Jevons wrote textbooks of logic which would sow the seeds and allow AP in 2025-2026 to correct their mistakes and have a True Logic textbooks.
Around the time of Boole & Jevons a technology was rising which we now know as the "computer". Jevons makes progress with the Logic computer he calls it the mechanical piano to do routine arithmetic problems. And urged both Boole and Jevons to get the Truth Tables of AND, OR, Equal-Not, If-->Then. Unfortunately they got all 4 wrong, especially Add which they thought was OR.
Like the Steam Engine Industrial Revolution spurred science and logic ahead of religion, the burgeoning computer revolution of late 1800s starts to spur logic ahead like never before.
Notes
William Stanley Jevons FRS (/ˈdʒɛvənz/;[2] 1 September 1835 – 13 August 1882) was an English economist and logician.
Irving Fisher described Jevons's book The Theory of Political Economy (1871) as the start of the mathematical method in economics.[3] It made the case that economics, as a science concerned with quantities, is necessarily mathematical.[4] In so doing, it expounded upon the "final" (marginal) utility theory of value. Jevons' work, along with similar discoveries made by Carl Menger in Vienna (1871) and by Léon Walras in Switzerland (1874), marked the opening of a new period in the history of economic thought. Jevons's contribution to the marginal revolution in economics in the late 19th century established his reputation as a leading political economist and logician of the time.
Jevons broke off his studies of the natural sciences in London in 1854 to work as an assayer in Sydney, where he acquired an interest in political economy. Returning to the UK in 1859, he issued a "Notice of a General Mathematical Theory of Political Economy" in 1862, outlining the marginal utility theory of value, and published A Serious Fall in the Value of Gold in 1863. For Jevons, the utility or value to a consumer of an additional unit of a product is inversely related to the number of units of that product he already owns, at least beyond some critical quantity.
Jevons received public recognition for his work on The Coal Question (1865), in which he called attention to the gradual exhaustion of Britain's coal supplies and also put forth the view that increases in energy production efficiency leads to more, not less, consumption.[5]: 7f, 161f This view is known today as the Jevons paradox, named after him. Due to this particular work, Jevons is regarded today as the first economist of some standing to develop an 'ecological' perspective on the economy.[6]: 295f [7]: 147 [5]: 2
The most important of his works on logic and scientific methods is his Principles of Science (1874),[8]as well as The Theory of Political Economy (1871) and The State in Relation to Labour (1882). Among his inventions was the logic piano, a mechanical computer.
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 6, 2026, 8:19:19 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Boole and Jevons gives us the logic of truth tables and statements. But Frege gives us logic in more symbolic format. Arithmetic of mathematics is mostly about handling actual numbers like (3 x 6) + 18 while algebra of mathematics is more about symbols replacing numbers.
Boole & Jevons are like the arithmetic of Logic while Frege is the algebra of Logic.
15) Gottlob Frege (1848-1925)-- symbolic logic
Born
8 November 1848
Died
26 July 1925 (aged 76)
Education
Education
University of Göttingen (PhD, 1873)
University of Jena (Dr. phil. hab., 1874)
Theses
Doctoral advisor
Ernst Christian Julius Schering(PhD advisor)
Other advisors
Alfred Clebsch
Wilhelm Eduard Weber
Eduard Riecke
Hermann Lotze
Philosophical work
Era
19th-/20th-century philosophy
Region
Western philosophy
School
Analytic philosophy
Linguistic turn
Logical realism
Modern Platonism[1]
Logicism
Transcendental idealism[2][3](before 1891)
Metaphysical realism[3] (after 1891)
Foundationalism[4]
Indirect realism[5]
Redundancy theory of truth[6]
Institutions
University of Jena
Notable students
Rudolf Carnap
Main interests
Philosophy of mathematics, mathematical logic, philosophy of language
Notable works
Begriffsschrift (1879)
The Foundations of Arithmetic(1884)
Basic Laws of Arithmetic (1893–1903)
Notable ideas
- Analytic philosophy
- Ancestral relation
- Anti-psychologism
- Basic law V
- Concept and object
- Context principle
- Currying
- Descriptivist theory of names
- Frege's principle
- Frege's puzzles
- Frege's theorem
- Fregean analysis
- Frege–Church ontology
- Frege–Geach problem
- Frege–Russell logic
- Function and Concept
- Law of trichotomy
- Logicism
- Hume's principle
- Mediated reference theory
- Naive set theory
- Named set theory
- Predicate calculus
- Propositional calculus
- Principle of compositionality
- Quantification theory
- Redundancy theory of truth
- Round square copula
- Second-order logic
- Sense and reference
- Set-theoretic definition of natural numbers
- Sortal
- Third realm
Friedrich Ludwig Gottlob Frege (/ˈfreɪɡə/;[7] German:[ˈɡɔtloːp ˈfreːɡə]; 8 November 1848 – 26 July 1925) was a German philosopher, logician, and mathematician. He was a mathematics professor at the University of Jena, and is understood by many to be the father of analytic philosophy, concentrating on the philosophy of language, logic, and mathematics. Though he was largely ignored during his lifetime, Giuseppe Peano(1858–1932), Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), and, to some extent, Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889–1951) introduced his work to later generations of philosophers. Frege is widely considered to be one of the greatest logicians since Aristotle, and one of the most profound philosophers of mathematics ever.[8]
His contributions include the development of modern logic in the Begriffsschrift and work in the foundations of mathematics. His book the Foundations of Arithmeticis the seminal text of the logicist project, and is cited by Michael Dummett as where to pinpoint the linguistic turn. His philosophical papers "On Sense and Reference" and "The Thought" are also widely cited. The former argues for two different types of meaningand descriptivism. In Foundations and "The Thought", Frege argues for Platonism against psychologism or formalism, concerning numbers and propositionsrespectively.
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 6, 2026, 8:31:21 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Most people would see the below list mostly as physicists, not logicians. But I contend, it took the reasoning minds of logical physicists to straighten out Logic itself. For no logician after Frege had a 1/2 marble of logical intelligence to even notice or see that Boole, Jevons, Frege had all 4 of the 4 simple logic connectors all full of error. It is a shame for anyone to call themselves a logician and continue to teach the mindless garbage of AND as subtract with OR as addition. The 1/4 marble intelligence of logicians who think there are 2 distinct types of OR. The 1/5 marble intelligence of Logicians who think F --> T or F --> F in the If-->then connector can lead to a T in the material conditional. The 1/100 marble intelligence of logicians who think Equal and Not should be separated having their own truth tables. No, the history of logic shows nothing but imbeciles of logic after Frege. It takes the careful reasoning of Physicists from Maxwell forward to get a clear, cool, true logic.
Now some will wonder why I did not include Newton (1642-1727)? The magnanimous genius who starts modern physics with his universal law-structure of gravity. I do not include Newton because no outstanding Logic was displayed by him. If Newton had said--- the Universal Law-structure of Gravity is the Universal Law-structure of electrical attraction Coulomb's law 1785, like the Sun attracting Earth in orbit, then I would have to include Newton. But of course, well Coulomb's law-structure was 1785 and Newton was 1727.
But amazingly that after Coulomb showed that the force of electromagnetism was an inverse square law
F_em = constant (q_1 x q_2)/ distance^2
The exact same mathematical form as the law of gravity
F_g = constant (m_1x m_2) / distance^2
That no-one from Coulomb onwards was bright enough to make the Logical connections-- gravity is a form of electromagnetism and needs only multiplied by a constant.
The excuses from Coulomb to AP were that of "repel". Scientists with little logic would trip over the idea that Coulomb is attract and repel, while gravity is attract only. AP solves this riddle by showing the "repel" in coulomb force is not repel at all but is "denial of same space occupancy". When magnets get close to one another, what looks like repel is just a Pauli Exclusion you cannot force the magnets of the same pole to occupy that space. In this manner, all of Coulomb now becomes, like gravity, attract only.
It was not until Maxwell that we begin to see a unification of law-structures, of electricity and magnetism. And with AP in 1990s, a unification of forces, all being a multiple of the Coulomb law-structure.
I picked out the physicists that used abundant Logic in their discoveries.
16) James Maxwell (1831-1879)-- unification of electricity and magnetism
Maxwell leads the modern age of Logic by systematizing electricity with magnetism. Before Maxwell we had many law-structures of physics discovered on electricity and magnetism in the early 1800s, of Oersted of Ampere, of Faraday, and what Maxwell did in the 1860s was put all these law-structures together into one, forming a theory of electromagnetism.
Born
13 June 1831
Died
5 November 1879 (aged 48)
Resting place
Parton, Dumfries and Galloway
55.006693°N 4.039210°WAlma mater
Known for
Spouse
Awards
- Smith's Prize (1854)
- Adams Prize (1857)
- Rumford Medal (1860)
- FRS (1861)
- Bakerian Medal (1866)
- Keith Medal (1869–1871)
Scientific career
Fields
Physics
Mathematics
Institutions
Academic advisors
William Hopkins
Notable students
1st Cavendish Professor of Physics
In office
1871–1879
Succeeded by
Lord Rayleigh
Signature
James Clerk Maxwell FRS FRSE (13 June 1831 – 5 November 1879) was a Scottish physicist and mathematician[1] who was responsible for the classical theory of electromagnetic radiation, which was the first theory to describe electricity, magnetism and light as different manifestations of the same phenomenon. Maxwell's equations for electromagnetism achieved the second great unification in physics,[2] where the first one had been realised by Isaac Newton. Maxwell was also key in the creation of statistical mechanics.
Maxwell graduated from Trinity College, Cambridge, in 1854, where he earned distinction in mathematics and the Smith’s Prize. He remained at Cambridge briefly, publishing early mathematical work and investigations into optics, particularly the principles of colour combination and colour-blindness. He later held the Chair of Natural Philosophy at Marischal College, where he studied the rings of Saturn and correctly proposed that they were composed of numerous small particles,[3] work that earned him the Adams Prize in 1859. During this time he married Katherine Mary Dewar, who assisted him in his laboratory work. From 1860 to 1865, he served as the Professor of Natural Philosophy at King’s College London, where he developed his theory of electromagnetic fields. His publication of "A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field" in 1865 demonstrated that electric and magnetic fieldstravel through space as waves moving at the speed of light, proposing that light is an undulation in the same medium that is the cause of electric and magnetic phenomena.[4] His unification of light and electrical phenomena led to his prediction of the existence of radio waves.
Maxwell was the first to derive the Maxwell–Boltzmann distribution, a statistical means of describing aspects of the kinetic theory of gases, which he worked on sporadically throughout his career.[5] He presented the first durable colour photograph in 1861, and showed that any colour can be produced with a mixture of any three primary colours, those being red, green, and blue, the basis for colour television.[6] He worked on analysing the rigidity of rod-and-joint frameworks (trusses) like those in many bridges. He devised modern dimensional analysis and helped to establish the CGS system of measurement. He was the first to understand chaos, and the first to emphasize the butterfly effect. His 1863 paper On Governors serves as an important foundation for control theory and cybernetics, and was also the earliest mathematical analysis on control systems.[7][8] In 1867, he proposed the thought experiment known as Maxwell's demon, which challenges how information affects entropy in thermodynamics. In his seminal 1867 paper On the Dynamical Theory of Gases he introduced the Maxwell model for describing the behavior of a viscoelastic material and originated the Maxwell-Cattaneo equation for describing the transport of heat in a medium.
In 1871, Maxwell returned to Cambridge as the first Cavendish Professor of Physics, overseeing the construction of the Cavendish Laboratory. As a result of his work he is regarded as a founder of the modern field of electrical engineering.[6] His discoveries helped usher in the era of modern physics, laying the foundations for such fields as relativity, also being the one to introduce the term into physics,[9] and quantum mechanics.[10][11]
Archimedes Plutonium
Earlier in this textbook I gave a revised version of the Maxwell Equations, the AP revision. No point in showing the flawed anti-symmetric Maxwell Equations with the silly Gauss law of no magnetic monopoles. But you still can see in the below the inverses of Ampere law-structure to Faraday law-structure. By that I mean that if you thrust a bar magnet through copper coil you get a flow of electric current in the circuit. And the reverse of that, if you have a current flow in a circuit you produce magnetic lines of force all through the wire.
AP- Equations, there are 6 Equations and those equations tell us the forces and energy among atoms, the domain of atoms.
Since I ended up altering the entire work of Maxwell, so that Old Maxwell Equations are barely recognizable, let me call it the AP theory of EM.
The 6 AP-Electromagnetic Equations and the 7 law-structures of Physics and all sciences.
Domain structure as Atomic Theory-- Periodic Table of Chemical Elements
1) B and E primal unit structures Magnetic Field B = kg / (Ampere*second^2) and Electric field E = kg*m/(Ampere*second^3)
3) V' = (A*B*E)' Capacitor-Transformer law-structure
4) (V/A*E)' = B' Ampere-Maxwell law-structure
5) (V/(B*E))' = A' Faraday law-structure
6) (V/(A*B))' = E' the new structures of Coulomb force law-structure with EM gravity force and DeBroglie pilot-wave structure
V= voltage, A = ampere current, B = magnetic field, E = electric field.
17) Pierre Curie (1859-1906) and Paul Dirac (1902-1984) --symmetry in science of the magnetic monopole existence.
Most people out of science, or even in science, have little awareness of how SYMMETRY plays a huge role in science and logic. Science abhors asymmetry. What kept Pierre Curie and Paul Dirac going adamant about for much of their life, was this abhorrence that the Maxwell Equations were asymmetrical unless the magnetic monopole exists.
It was right under their noses for in 1897, J.J. Thomson found the magnetic monopole--- the 0.5MeV particle. Unfortunately Thomson and all the scientists after Thomson thought it was the electron of Atoms. No, by logic, the Muon is the electron of atoms and the 0.5MeV particle is the Curie-Dirac magnetic monopole.
Born
15 May 1859
Died
19 April 1906 (aged 46)
Resting place
Panthéon, Paris (since 1995)
Alma mater
University of Paris (DSc)
Known for
- Discovery of polonium and radium (with Marie Curie)
- Discovery of piezoelectricity
- Curie's law
- Curie's principle
Spouse
Children
Family
Curie
Awards
- Davy Medal (1903)
- Nobel Prize in Physics (1903)
- Matteucci Medal (1904)
- Elliott Cresson Medal (1909)
Scientific career
Fields
Institutions
- University of Paris (1878–1882, 1895–1906)
- ESPCI Paris (1882–1895)
Thesis
Propriétés magnétiques des corps à diverses températures (1895)
Doctoral advisor
Gabriel Lippmann[1]
Notable students
Signature
Pierre Curie[a] (15 May 1859 – 19 April 1906) was a French physicist and chemist, and a pioneer in crystallography and magnetism. He shared one half of the 1903 Nobel Prize in Physics with his wife, Marie Curie, for their work on radioactivity.[3] With their win, the Curies became the first married couple to win a Nobel Prize, launching the Curie family legacy of five Nobel Prizes.
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 6, 2026, 9:04:10 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
The awesome powerful tool of symmetry in physics and logic. History is not kind to those who accept asymmetry. And although most people regard his Dirac equation as his best achievement, his best achievement in my opinion was to stick to the idea of a magnetic monopole had to exist.
This is the true force of Logic, if logic has a force behind it. The law-structures of Physics, ___cannot be asymmetrical___.
What is asymmetry in Logic????? It is inconsistency and where the body contains a contradiction.
Born
8 August 1902
Died
20 October 1984 (aged 82)
Citizenship
- United Kingdom
- Switzerland (until 1919)
Education
Alma mater
Known for
Spouse
Children
4 in total (2 stepchildren, including Gabriel)
Relatives
Eugene Wigner (brother-in-law)
Awards
- Nobel Prize in Physics (1933)
- Royal Medal (1939)
- Copley Medal (1952)
- Max Planck Medal (1952)
- J. Robert Oppenheimer Memorial Prize (1969)
Scientific career
Fields
Institutions
- University of Cambridge
- Florida State University
Thesis
Quantum Mechanics (1926)
Doctoral advisor
Ralph Fowler
Doctoral students
- C. J. Eliezer (1946)[1]
- Harish-Chandra (1947)[1]
- Richard J. Eden (1951)[1]
- Behram Kurşunoğlu (1952)[2]
- Dennis Sciama (1953)[1]
- John Polkinghorne (1955)
Other notable students
Paul Adrien Maurice Dirac (/dɪˈræk/ dih-RAK;[3] 8 August 1902 – 20 October 1984) was a British theoretical physicist who is considered to be one of the founders of quantum mechanics.[4][5] Dirac laid the foundations for both quantum electrodynamics and quantum field theory, coining the former term.[6][7][8][9] He was the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at the University of Cambridge from 1932 to 1969, and a professor of physics at Florida State University from 1970 to 1984. Dirac shared the 1933 Nobel Prize in Physicswith Erwin Schrödinger "for the discovery of new productive forms of atomic theory."[10]
Dirac graduated from the University of Bristol with a First Class HonoursBachelor of Science degree in electrical engineering in 1921, and a first class honours Bachelor of Arts degree in mathematics in 1923.[11] Dirac then graduated from St John's College, Cambridge, with a Ph.D. in physics in 1926, writing the first ever thesis on quantum mechanics.[12]
He formulated the Dirac equation, one of the most important results in physics, in 1928.[7] It connected special relativity and quantum mechanics and predicted the existence of antimatter.[13] He wrote a famous paper in 1931,[14]which further predicted the existence of antimatter.[15][16][13] Dirac also contributed greatly to the reconciliation of general relativity with quantum mechanics. He contributed to Fermi–Dirac statistics, which describes the behaviour of fermions, particles with half-integer spin. His 1930 monograph, The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, is one of the most influential texts on the subject.[17] He and Schrödinger tied for eighth in a Physics World poll of the greatest physicists of all time.[18]
In 1987, Abdus Salam declared that "Dirac was undoubtedly one of the greatest physicists of this or any century ... No man except Einstein has had such a decisive influence, in so short a time, on the course of physics in this century."[19] In 1995, Stephen Hawking stated that "Dirac has done more than anyone this century, with the exception of Einstein, to advance physics and change our picture of the universe"[20] while Stanley Deser remarked that "We all stand on Dirac's shoulders."[21]
Dirac was born on 8 August 1902 at his parents' home in Bristol, England,[22]and grew up in the Bishopston area of the city.[23][24] His father, Charles Adrien Ladislas Dirac, was an immigrant from Saint-Maurice, Switzerland, of French descent,[25] who worked in Bristol as a French teacher. His mother, Florence Hannah Holten, was born to a Cornish Methodist family in Liskeard, Cornwall.[26][27] She was named after Florence Nightingale by her father, a ship's captain, who had met Nightingale while he was a soldier during the Crimean War.[28] His mother moved to Bristol as a young woman, where she worked as a librarian at the Bristol Central Library; despite this she still considered her identity to be Cornish rather than English.[29] Paul had a younger sister, Béatrice Isabelle Marguerite, known as Betty, and an older brother, Reginald Charles Félix, known as Felix,[30][31] who died by suicide in March 1925.[32] Dirac later recalled: "My parents were terribly distressed. I didn't know they cared so much ... I never knew that parents were supposed to care for their children, but from then on I knew."[33]
Charles and the children were officially Swiss nationals until they became naturalised on 22 October 1919.[34] Dirac's father was strict and authoritarian, although he disapproved of corporal punishment.[35] Dirac had a strained relationship with his father, so much so that after his father's death, Dirac wrote, "I feel much freer now, and I am my own man." Charles forced his children to speak to him only in French so that they might learn the language. When Dirac found that he could not express what he wanted to say in French, he chose to remain silent.[36][37]
Archimedes Plutonium
So now what is the deal with Symmetry in physics and science overall and in Logic?
It is extremely important and instead of calling it Symmetry, logic would have a different name for it; calling it Consistency.
You see, Maxwell in 1860s was logical in unification of electricity and magnetism in his equations, but Maxwell was __not consistent__ in his unification and left Asymmetry in his equations. His Gauss's law of no magnetic monopoles, spoils his overall unification-systematizing, for then you have a electricity in possession of monopoles, but you have no monopoles for magnetism. This is what so motivated Curie and Dirac to find the magnetic monopole.
Maxwell Equations show us how we convert electricity into magnetism in the Ampere law-structure and how to convert magnetism into electricity in the Faraday law-structure. This is symmetry.
So why would Gauss be a logical fool with no magnetic monopole, and then Maxwell be a logical fool with no magnetic monopole making his equations asymmetrical? And everyone in physics except Curie and Dirac logical fools??? I believe the answer to that question is because in 1897, J.J.Thomson found a particle of 0.5MeV and thought it was the electron of atoms when in reality, he found the magnetic monopole of atoms. The true electron of Atoms would not be discovered until 2016-17 when AP noted that the proton and neutron rest mass were respectively 938 and 940 MeV which is 945 in Sigma Error; to best measure and muon was 105 MeV. I am a mathematician and can easily see that 9 x 105 = 945. Meaning that the proton is actually 840MeV with a muon inside doing the Faraday law-structure.
You need a Logical mind to first detect that Asymmetry is not allowed in science for it is inconsistency of logic. You then need that logical mind to fix the asymmetry.
18) John Bell (1928-1990) --superdeterminism
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 6, 2026, 9:11:03 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
A history book just does not feel like history unless it has pictures of the past.
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 6, 2026, 11:15:22 PM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Rarely do you find a physicist that has a command of logic. John Bell was one of them. Not only did he devise a means of testing Quantum Mechanics over Classical Physics, but he also came up with a marvelous idea called Superdeterminism that anticipates the Plutonium Atom Totality Universe. Other than the Ancient Greek geniuses, I would say John Bell had the finest logical physics mind. I say that, for he made use of data before him. John Bell had that inspiration of deducing "superdeterminism". The only thing John Bell did not have is a cosmic structure to pin his superdeterminism upon. And, in my estimation, if John Bell had not discovered superdeterminism, and I came along with a Plutonium Atom Totality, I am thinking, in my mind--- I would not have discovered "superdeterminism" as complex and complicated as it is. I hand it to John Bell, to have discovered this massive concept, for I do not think I could have. It would have been hard for me to recognize a Universe without any amount of free-will. In past years, I thought I may have come close with the idea that "prayer to the Atom Totality was the only free-will". But in true superdeterminism, there are no exceptions.
Keep in mind, it is extremely difficult to convince anyone that the world has ---- no free will----. And that every thought, every action is fated to happen, beforehand.
And yet John Bell did not have a Plutonium Atom Totality Universe to give support to his Superdeterminism. He died a month before AP discovered the Plutonium Atom Totality Universe in late 1990.
You see, a Atom Totality would be the cosmic mechanism that causes Superdeterminism. This is logic, at its finest.
AP writes: John Bell was in a class by himself with Logic. And it is instructive for me to see he also favored the Pilot-wave theory.
Curious question for me, is whether John Bell took Logic while he was in college????
.png)
Born
28 July 1928
Died
1 October 1990 (aged 62)
Alma mater
Queen's University of Belfast(BSc)
University of Birmingham(PhD)
Known for
Bell's theorem
Bell state
Bell's spaceship paradox
Bell–Kochen–Specker theorem
Chiral anomaly
CPT symmetry
Superdeterminism
Quantum entanglement
Awards
Heineman Prize (1989)
Hughes Medal (1989)
Paul Dirac Medal and Prize(1988)
Scientific career
Institutions
Atomic Energy Research Establishment
CERN, Stanford University
Thesis
Contribution to field theory (i. Time reversal in field theory, ii. Some functional methods in field theory.) (1956)
Doctoral advisor
Rudolph E. Peierls
Other academic advisors
Paul Taunton Matthews[1]: 137
John Stewart Bell FRS[2] (28 July 1928 – 1 October 1990)[3] was a physicistfrom Northern Ireland and the originator of Bell's theorem, an important theorem in quantum physics regarding hidden-variable theories.[4][5][6][7][8]
In 2022, the Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Alain Aspect, John Clauser, and Anton Zeilinger for work on Bell inequalities and the experimental validation of Bell's theorem.[9]
Bell was born in Belfast, Northern Ireland to a working class family. Due to financial hardship, neither parent and none of his three older siblings completed high school, typically dropping out of school by age 14 to work.[10]When he was 11 years old, he decided to be a scientist, and encouraged by his mother, at 16 he graduated from Belfast Technical High School.[10] Then in an exceptionally rare occurrence for someone of his background, Bell attended the Queen's University of Belfast, where, in 1948, he obtained a bachelor's degree in experimental physics and, a year later, a bachelor's degree in mathematical physics.[10] He went on to complete a PhD in physics at the University of Birmingham in 1956, specialising in nuclear physics and quantum field theory. In 1954, he married Mary Ross, also a physicist, whom he had met while working on accelerator physics at Malvern, UK.[11]: 139 Bell became a vegetarian in his teen years.[12] According to his wife, Bell was an atheist.[13]
Bell's career began with the UK Atomic Energy Research Establishment, near Harwell, Oxfordshire, known as AERE or Harwell Laboratory. In 1960, he moved to work for the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN, Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire), in Geneva, Switzerland.[14]There he worked almost exclusively on theoretical particle physics and on accelerator design, but found time to pursue a major avocation, investigating the foundations of quantum theory. He was elected a Foreign Honorary Member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1987.[15] Also of significance during his career, Bell, together with John Bradbury Sykes, M. J. Kearsley, and W. H. Reid, translated several volumes of the ten-volume Course of Theoretical Physics of Lev Landau and Evgeny Lifshitz, making these works available to an English-speaking audience in translation, all of which remain in print.
Bell was a proponent of pilot wave theory.[16] In 1987, inspired by Ghirardi–Rimini–Weber theory, he also advocated collapse theories.[17] He said about the interpretation of quantum mechanics: "Well, you see, I don't really know. For me it's not something where I have a solution to sell!"[18]
Archimedes Plutonium
19) Archimedes Plutonium (1950 - present)-- systematizes Logic by paralleling logic to mathematics-physics
----------------------------------------------------------------
What do I mean by paralleling Logic to math and to physics?? I mean that numbers in math have 6 operators and that Logic has 6 connectors, and both subjects are sort of the same, one deals with numbers the other with "ideas". That means I can better wrestle and understand logic by constantly seeing how math does it.
Math has not only numbers and operators, but has geometry figures. And so by comparing geometry to logic as ideas as pictures, helps me to understand Logic.
Using physics for the truth of statements is a immense help and using the Scientific Method of Physics helps to understand what is logic. I sort of box in logic with physics at top and with math next to logic and that gives me immense help in understanding and unraveling what logic is.
Special Note of Attention: I could not fail to observe that the great scientists of Logic were famous for either Systematizing a science subject or in noticing a asymmetry and pursuing the symmetry form. Maxwell was famous for unification and systematizing while Curie-Dirac were famous for Symmetry. In a sense, AP is famous for symmetry and for unification of saying that the Atomic Theory is not complete unless the whole universe is one single atom of the 114 known atoms.
Is Unification and Systematizing the same as Symmetry?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am going to have to think some more on this. But already, I know the Light-photon is the smallest physical unit in physics science and each photon is a closed-loop-circuit, meaning that 1/2 of the circuit is symmetrical to the other 1/2. The Uncertainty Principle is bogus because it did not realize Light-photons are circuits, but thought they were single rays. And a single ray has no symmetry but a closed loop circuit has symmetry. I shall take up this research in Advanced Logic.
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 7, 2026, 1:38:07 AM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Reflections on Logic opposed to Religion and how, in the future, the two will merge into One.
On Friday, March 6, 2026 at 7:34:09 PM UTC-6 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Religion versus Logic
I wrote a book defining religion as this.
Religion definition
----------------------------
We seek truth and wisdom via the scientific method to arrive at science explanations. Whenever we do not have a science explanation, we can resort to religion. If science is absent, only then can religion enter.
The reason that we can look at the 19th century as the Rise of Science and the slow decline of religion is that we have the first greatest engineering technology from science-- the steam engine. And then we have electricity, making life modern and easy.
People begin to see the steam engine and electricity and science as Truth, and then see religion more as made up fantasy. See religion as only that which science cannot explain.
In any environment where Religion dominates, clear and straight thinking of Logic is suppressed and repressed.
Yes, I would estimate that figure, that people worldwide as of March 2026, that only 30% of people can think logically and the rest are religion thinkers.
When will humanity have the majority of logical thinkers? I would say the 50% of humans who think logically, not religion, will be reached when humanity learns the Sun and stars shine from Faraday law-structure and that we have to make Europa our new home or go extinct and perish into oblivion. For religion simply does not provide truth of the world we live in. Religion is only good when there is no science. Religion has encumbered Logical thought all the way back to Ancient Greek times, and continues to make bad decisions in present.
Now Science, Logic do not have to be diametrically opposed to Religion
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There will come a moment in the future, where it is recognized that the Plutonium Atom Totality itself is God, and where religion and science no longer have to fight and battle each other.
But in that recognition, it will be admitted, that the best bibles in the world are the best physics textbooks and biology textbooks in the world. Going to church will be seen as going to College and studying science and logic.
No longer will one group terrorize the other group.
What will force this to happen???? I believe in the near future we will come to see that the Sun shines from Faraday Law-structure and has already gone Red Giant Phase, where every year the Sun gets hotter and hotter. Forcing humanity under the most severe pressure ever--- either go extinct and into oblivion, or to colonize Europa in the next 1,000 years as we prepare Europa as our new home.
In this task, all is on the line, or go extinct and into oblivion. It will take Science and Engineering at its topmost best. Through it all, 99% of humans will realize Science and Logic is the world of truth, while religion has the minor role of explaining where science cannot explain.
Sort of reminds me of a past famous philosopher who made the wise comment---- "Gods and goddesses come and go, but the Atom endures."
The Plutonium Atom Totality Theory offers a reconciliation between science and religion, that the Atom Totality is God.
Atom
Archimedes Plutonium Mar 7, 2026, 3:45:00 AM to Plutonium Atom Universe newsgroup.
Alright, I am finished with this book and going to make a published write up.
I end with the chapter of Archimedes Plutonium.
If not for my skills in Logic, I would be almost a complete unknown in life. But because I am skilled in Logic, almost every human in the future will have heard of me.
Without Logic I could never have discovered the Plutonium Atom Totality Universe in 1990. Nor discovered the true electron of Atoms is the muon, not the 0.5MeV particle in 2016-2017.
My advice to anyone in college or university for you to potentially reach you maximum capacity of handling ideas--- please take 2 years of college logic, of the New Logic, for it helps you think straight and think clearly. And, after-all, is that not the main purpose of going to college and university in the first place--- to think straight and clear and better????
And I am getting old here at age 76 in 2026, and following my own advice, I will spend the remaining years of life experimenting with grafting a elm or blackberry to pine or spruce rootstock to help prove Reincarnation. For shortly I will pass into the beyond and yonder.
Thank you, the science of Logic.
AP
zzzzzzzzzz
plutonium dot archimedes at gmail dot com. Looking for a College or University press to hardcover publish all 371+ AP books of science, likely to become 500-600 maybe even 700 books by the time I die. E-books are too prone to unbalanced-unhinged censor-editors, who can easily make your books vanish by pulling a switch. Science should never have gatekeepers, who thwart access to true science.
| /
| /
|/______ hardcover or paperback
PAU newsgroup is this.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Investigate this idea further in Advanced Logic textbook. I could not help but notice that fame in logic by scientists was mostly for unification-systematization of a science subject and that symmetry played a key role. So I want to further investigate to what extent that unification is the same as symmetry. And I have some leading ideas-- that the Light-photon is a symmetrical entity as a closed loop circuit and is the very smallest unit in all of physics, even smaller than the Atom for Atoms produce photons. So can we also say that the Atom is a quantum dual of Light-photon? The best quantum dual I know of so far is electricity to magnetism. Perhaps a new dual for me, now, is Atom to Light-photon.
Is Unification and Systematizing the same as Symmetry?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I do not have many pictures of myself and so will have to make generous use of the ones I saved. I refuse to have a picture when I am old, represent my life, and will only use pictures of me at the time I discovered the Plutonium Atom Totality when I was 40 years old. this picture below was circa 1993 when I was 43 years old and had just found the Usenet of sci.physics, sci.math and posting my science work.