,,little ,,blue ,,book ,,no4 #fjh       
,edited by ,e4 ,haldeman-,julius        
,the ,origin and                        
,development of                         
the ,atomic ,theory                     
,maynard ,shipley                       
,,haldeman-,,julius ,,company           
,,girard1 ,,kansas                      
,copyright1 #aibd                       
,haldeman-,julius ,company              
,,printed ,,in ,,the ,,united ,,states  
,,of ,,america                          
,,the ,,origin ,,and ,,development ,,of 
,,the ,,atomic ,,theory                 
,,contents                              
,,page   ,,chapter ,i--,,the            
,,pythagorean ,,atomists                
#e   ,,chapter ,,ii--,,the              
,,materialistic ,,atomists3             
,,leucippus ,,and ,,democritus          
#bb   ,,chapter ,,iii--,,the ,,eleatic  
,,view                             #cg  
,,chapter ,,iv--,,epicurus ,,and        
,,lucretius                        #ea  
,,chapter ,v--,,post-,,classical        

,,atomism                         #ei   
,,the ,,origin ,,and ,,development ,,of 
,,the ,,atomic ,,theory                 
,,chapter ,i                            
,,the ,,pythagorean ,,atomists          
,,the ,,significance ,,of ,,the ,,atomic
 ,,theory      ,it is safe to say that  
there is no more romantic story in the  
history  of science than that of the    
origin and development of the atomic    
theory of matter4 ,dr4 ,robert ,a4      
,millikan has said that the physical    
principles laid down by ,leucippus in   
the fifth century before our era  might1
 with a few modifications and omissions1
 8almost pass muster  today0 78,the     
,electron10 ,page #g74 ,the importance  
to modern students of  sound knowledge  
of the teachings of the ancient         
,atomists was emphasized  by ,sir       
,william ,osler 7#ahbi-aiai71 who even  
went so far as to say that  8the student
 of physics may know ,crookes' tubes and
 their relation to  ,roentgen1 but he   
cannot have a true conception of the    

atomic theory  without a knowledge of   
,democritus2 and the exponent of ,madame
 ,curie and  of ,sir ,j4 ,j4 ,thomson   
will find his happiest illustrations    
from the  writings of ,lucretius0#a--the
 ,roman exponent of ,epicurus 7#cdb-bgj 
,b4  ,c471 who revived the atomic theory
 of ,leucippus and ,democritus1 despite 
the adverse criticisms hurled at this   
doctrine by the great ,aristotle4    ,le
 ,sage observed that 8if ,epicurus had  
had but a part of the  geometrical      
knowledge of his contemporary ,euclid1  
and conceptions of  cosmogony the same  
as many then living1 he might have      
discovered the  laws of universal       
gravity1 and not only the laws1 but1    
what was the  despair of ,newton1 its   
mechanical cause0 78,lucrce ,newtonien10
  ,berlin ,academy1 #aghb74    ,writing 
of the value to science and modern      
thought of the atomic theory  of the    
early ,greek philosophers1 ,professor   
,walter ,t4 ,marvin1 of ,rutgers        
,college1 points out that a theory can  

be significant in at least three  ways1 
namely3--87#a7 by destroying or         
inhibiting other beliefs2 7#b7 by       
arousing interest in new problems and by
 suggesting new methods of              
investigation2 7#c7 by what it itself   
enables us to explain correctly4  ,this 
theory was most significant in          
destroying old beliefs or1 to  adopt a  
much used expression1 in #8enlightening'
 the cultured  ,greeks4 ,a thoughtful   
,greek could hardly believe that the    
universe is  a cloud of atoms moving    
about in accordance with necessary      
mechanical  laws1 and at the same time  
continue to believe the primitive       
traditions  and superstitions of his    
people4 ,the worship of the gods and the
 old  magical rites and ceremonies must 
needs seem to him utterly ineffective   
and useless1 valuable customs no doubt  
for their purely psychological          
influence upon the ignorant and unruly  
masses but of course absurdities  for   
the cultured and disciplined man4 ,hence

 no wonder that the spread  of this and 
the preceding cosmological theories     
would result1 in  a society such as that
 of the ,greek world in the sixth and   
fifth  centuries ,b4 ,c41 in a radical  
enlightenment4 ,no wonder that  their   
spread was opposed by men of            
conservative tendencies4 ,in this  first
 respect early ,greek science and in    
particular the atomic theory  were of   
great historical significance40#b       
,,the ,,atomic ,,theory ,,of ,,the      
,,pythagoreans    ,in the ancient       
,sanskrit literature of ,india 7written 
prior to #ejj ,b4  ,c471 an atomic      
theory of matter is formulated by       
,kanada 7literally  8atom eater0--a term
 of derision71 founder of the ,nyaga    
system of  philosophy1 and said to have 
been a pupil of ,buddha4 ,he states that
 the  atoms are eternal and that the    
ultimate atom is simple4    ,kapila1 the
 leading exponent of the ,sankhya       
philosophy1 speaks of  8five subtle0    
kinds of particles 7atoms71 and a       

substance akin to our  luminiferous     
ether--the five particles being1 no     
doubt1 the 8five  elements0 of the ,laws
 of ,menu2 viz41 earth1 water1 wind     
7air71 fire and  ether--this last the   
parent1 so to speak1 of all the other   
elements1  through a process of         
successive transformations4    ,in the  
8,angutarra ,nikaja10 consciousness     
7mind7 is mentioned as a sixth  element1
 also atomic in structure4    ,in his   
8,history of ,hindu ,chemistry10 ,sir   
,p4 ,c4 ,ray expresses the  opinion that
 the atomic theory of the ancient       
,greeks was derived  directly from the  
more ancient ,hindu doctrine--a view    
upheld by the  great ,german ,sanskrit  
scholar1 ,dr4 ,max ,mller1 as also by   
some ,greek  scholars4    ,the atomic   
theory1 the earliest known to have been 
worked out in  detail1 is that of the   
,greek philosopher ,leucippus1 of       
,miletus1 ,ionia2  though the mantle of 
honor has fallen mostly on the shoulders
 of his  far better known pupil1        

,democritus of ,abdera1 ,thrace4    ,but
 the ,pythagoreans also were exponents  
of a form of atomic theory1  and it     
seems probable that ,pythagoras1 a      
native of the island of ,samos1  was the
 first ,greek to advance the doctrine of
 the discontinuity of  matter4 ,at      
least1 none of his disciples ever       
claimed to have been the  originator of 
this doctrine1 and ,pythagoras was born 
some time between  #ehj and #egj ,b4    
,c41 while the ,atomic ,school of       
,leucippus was not founded  until some  
time after #ejj ,b4 ,c4 ,unfortunately1 
,pythagoras did not  commit his         
doctrines to writing1 though a few of   
the so-called 8,golden  ,sentences0 may 
have been written by him4 ,most of them1
 however1 are  probably no older than   
the fourth century of our era4          
,moreover1 these  throw no light on the 
subject under discussion4    ,the first 
written exposition of the ,pythagorean  
atomic theory was put  forward by       
,philolaus1 a native of ,tarentum1      

,south ,italy4 ,only fragments  of his  
work have survived1 and of those        
ascribed to him some are  undoubtedly   
spurious4 ,but all of them are very old 
and contain valuable  information       
concerning ,pythagorean doctrines4      
,porphyry 7#bcc-cjd8 ,a4 ,d471 a ,syrian
 ,neo-,platonist1 residing for some     
years in ,alexandria1 wrote a 8,life of 
,pythagoras10 and a few years  later    
another 8,life0 of this philosopher     
appeared1 this time from  the pen--or   
stylus--of another ,syrian and          
,neo-,platonist1 ,iamblichus4  ,but     
these works contain much that is wholly 
mythical concerning  ,pythagoras4#c     
,our best sources of information are    
,plato 7,timaeus71 ,aristotle           
7,metaphysica and ,physica1 ,de ,anima  
and ,de ,caelo71 ,diogenes ,laertius    
7,de ,vitis7 and ,stobaeus 7,eclogarum  
physicarum et ethicarum74 ,from  these  
authorities we learn that1 according to 
the ,pythagoreans1 the  cosmos was at a 
certain stage of its 7cyclic7 changes a 

compact1 inert1  spherical mass of      
lifeless matter1 having no              
distinguishable parts4  ,after a long   
period of quiescence the 8void0--i4 e41 
the limitless  outer air--broke in upon 
the world1 entering into 8the heaven    
itself0  as if it--the heaven--were     
breathing4 ,the result of this cosmic   
inhalation was 8a certain separation and
 definition of things that  lie         
together0 7,aristotle1 ,physica1 iv1    
#f7--that is1 a separation of  the      
homogeneous mass into different         
8elements40 ,these fragments were       
eventually ground into an all but       
infinite number of infinitesimal        
particles1 or 8monads10 analogous to the
 8atoms0 of ,leucippus and  ,democritus4
    ,now1 ,philolaus was a famous       
geometrician as well as an eminent      
physician and astronomer4 ,hence he--and
 presumably ,pythagoras before          
him--thought of these particles 7or     
atoms7 not in terms of various          
qualities1 chemically considered1--as   

,anaxagoras 7#ejj-dbh ,b4 ,c471 who  was
 not a ,pythagorean1 had done before    
,philolaus wrote--but in terms  of form 
7shape7 and number4 ,each of the various
 substances known to  the ancient world 
as 8elements0--generally recognized as  
compounds of  the real elements since   
the eighteenth century only--was        
regarded as  made up of particles of a  
certain geometrical configuration4      
,philolaus  explained that the 8element0
 earth was composed of cubical          
particles1  fire of tetrahedra          
7pyramidal forms71 and the 8ether0 was  
identified  with the dodecahedron       
7particles having twelve plane faces1 or
 twelve  regular pentagons74 ,in the    
,timaeus of ,plato we find this         
conception further developed1 bringing  
all the five regular solids into  the   
theory4 ,thus1 the octahedron was now   
assigned to air1 and the  icosahedron 7a
 figure having twenty equilateral       
triangular faces7 to  water4    ,very   
interesting in this connection is the   

fact that the positions of  the         
electrons in atoms 7the real elements7  
are being referred to today  in terms   
similar to those employed by the        
,pythagoreans4 ,take1 for  example1 the 
following passage from ,science         
,progress 7,london71  ,july1 #aibb 7,no4
 #fe71 ,pages #ba-bb3     8,the         
modifications proposed in the           
expressions for electric and   magnetic 
forces allow of the electrons in ,sir   
,j4 ,j4 ,thomson's   model atoms to take
 up positions at rest at the corners of 
certain   well-known polyhedra1 such as 
the tetrahedron1 the cube1 the rhombic  
dodecahedron1 the cubo-octahedron2 and  
so in the sharing of electrons   between
 atoms and the consequent fitting       
together of such models we   have the   
explanation of certain facts of         
crystallography40    ,but we know now   
that 8fire0 is not an 8element0 composed
 of tetrahedral  atoms2 but the         
combustible portion of coal and wood is 
the real element  carbon--and the carbon

 molecule is of tetrahedral form4  7,see
 ,bragg1 ,sir ,w4 ,h4 and ,w4 ,l41      
8,x-,rays and ,crystal ,spectra407      
,on the ,pythagorean theory--as on that 
of ,leucippus1 and on the latest        
theories of today--matter is broken up  
into parts 7atoms7 that are in          
themselves unchangeable--apart from     
radioactivity--but produce by their     
changes of position in relation to one  
another all the substances of  earth and
 of living organisms4    ,to illustrate 
this principle in terms of modern       
science3 ,add four  electrons 7two      
positive and two negative7 to the       
hydrogen atom1 and  you have the element
 lithium2 knock out of the lithium atom 
7composed  of three positive and three  
negative electrons7 one positive and    
one negative electron1 and you have one 
atom of helium 7composed of  two        
positive and two negative electrons47   
,and electrons are all  alike1 except   
that some carry a charge of positive    
electrification  and some a negative    

charge--each kind 7species7 of atom     
having an  equal number of positive and 
negative charges1 thus attaining stable 
equilibrium4 7,see ,soddy1 ,the         
,interpretation of ,radium1 #aibb47     
,until quite recently it was believed   
that atoms could be disrupted  only by  
temperatures higher than those          
obtainable in our physical              
laboratories1 or by bombardment by      
electrons and helium atoms              
spontaneously expelled 7always with     
enormous velocities7 from  radioactive  
substances4 ,but this is now known to be
 an erroneous  assumption4 ,it was      
lately discovered by ,p4 ,m4 ,basset1   
engineer of  the ,sperry ,gyroscope     
,company1 and ,dr4 ,louis ,bell1 that   
when carbon  is brought to a temperature
 of #e1jjj ,c41 in an arc-light used in 
connection with their amazingly powerful
 searchlight1 alpha particles  7helium  
atoms7 are liberated4 ,such discoveries 
may some day lead to  the transmutation 
of 8the baser metals into gold10 thus   

fulfilling the  dream of the alchemists 
of old4    ,quite recently1 ,drs4       
,milliken and ,bowen not only developed 
a method  for 8stripping0 planetary     
7valence7 electrons one by one from     
atoms1  but these investigations also   
proved that ,bohr's 7simple7 theory  of 
electron orbits--which includes the     
statement that the energy  developed    
when an electron jumps from one orbit to
 another is exactly  proportional to the
 frequency 7or wave-length7 emitted--is 
correct4  ,professor ,sommerfeld's      
theory explaining the cause of double   
lines  in the spectrum of hydrogen and  
other elements was also verified        
experimentally4 7,see ,the ,scientific  
,monthly1 ,pages #ffe-ffi1  ,june1      
#aibd74    ,an atom of mercury1 for     
example1 contains #hj positive charges  
7electrons7 on its nucleus1 and #hj     
negative outlying electrons4 ,were  we  
able to expel two of its protons        
7positive electrons71 it  would         
instantly become the metal platinum4 ,if

 a negative 78planetary07  electron were
 also taken from it1 the mercury atom   
would then have  lost two positive      
charges 7electrons7 and one negative2   
that is1 one  positive charge on the    
whole3 and hence it would retain #gi    
positive  charges on the nucleus and #gi
 outlying negative electrons--and thus  
become gold6    ,thus1 one element      
differs from another only in the number 
of electrons  composing its atom4 ,and  
this is only a more precise statement of
 the  essential doctrine of the ancient 
,greek atomists4    ,parmenides1 the    
,eleatic philosopher1 who was at the    
height of his  fame about #dge ,b4 ,c41 
declared that both motion and change of 
substance were illusory--that no        
substances ever transform from one  to  
another4 ,the ,pythagoreans and the     
,school of ,leucippus admitted  that    
there was1 indeed1 an element of        
elements that knew no change1  no       
transformations2 and they declared that 
this primal element was  the stuff that 

all atoms are made of4 ,today we believe
 his  primal element 7atom7 to be       
hydrogen--as was suggested by the       
,english  physician1 ,william ,prout1 in
 #ahae4 ,in other words1 we are being   
forced  by the mathematical and         
experimental data to conclude that all  
of  the #hg known species of atoms 7or  
elements7 are but compounds of the      
original 7simplest7 hydrogen atom1      
consisting of one positively charged    
nuclear electron and one outlying       
negative electron4 ,however1 there  is  
ground for difference of opinion on this
 question1 as shown by ,sir  ,oliver    
,lodge in his recent article1 8,within  
the ,atom10 ,scientific  ,american1     
,november1 #aibc4    8,thought10        
comments ,professor ,alfred ,weber      
78,history of ,philosophy10  ,pages     
#dc-dd71 8discovers in the atomistic    
hypothesis the middle  term that unites 
,parmenides1 who denies the great       
empirical fact of  generation and       
change1 and ,heraclitus1 who sacrifices 

being and its  permanence to            
becoming1--thereby combining the two    
rival systems  into a higher            
synthesis1--and lays the foundation for 
every rational  explanation of the      
process of becoming4 ,henceforth        
philosophy no  longer regards matter as 
a continuous mass1 the essential        
properties  of which are incessantly    
transformed4 ,it breaks them up into    
parts  that are in themselves immutable1
 but which continually change their     
relative positions4 ,as a consequence1  
there can be both perpetual  change in  
the aspects of matter 7bodies7 and      
permanence in the essence  and          
properties of matter4 ,all change is    
reduced to change of place3  mechanism40
                            ,,the       
,,fiery 8,,monads0 7,,atoms7    8,fire10
 with the ,pythagoreans1 as with the    
followers of ,heraclitus of  ,ephesus   
7#ece-dge ,b4 ,c471 is the element par  
excellence2  and1 as previously stated1 
was regarded by them as made up of      

excessively minute particles of         
tetrahedral 7pyramidal7 form            
7,philolaus74 ,this 8subtile element0   
was looked upon as the symbol  of the   
divine principle in nature4 ,they taught
 that this 8fire0 is  concentrated in a 
central sun1 8the hearth of the         
universe10 8mother  of the gods10       
8citadel of ,zeus10 etc41 around which  
revolve the earth  and the other        
heavenly bodies4#d ,the soul of man is a
 portion of the  world-soul1 a spark of 
the celestial fire1 and in this sense   
material4    ,aristotle states 7,de     
,anima1 i1 #b7 that some of the         
,pythagoreans  held the solar corpuscles
 7atoms7 to be souls1 while others      
referred  to that which set them in     
motion as the soul4 ,schlottman's       
reading of  this passage is3 8,the solar
 corpuscles are moved by a soul1 and the
  soul is1 generally speaking1 the      
moving principle40    ,professor ,burnet
 calls attention to the singular power  
exhibited by  the ,pythagoreans in      

adapting their theories to conditions2  
and among  certain radical changes in   
their point of view1 he thinks the most 
remarkable is the way the religious side
 of the doctrine was gradually  dropped4
 8,the effort was made to clear the name
 of ,pythagoras himself  from the       
imputation of mysticism4 ,we have the   
echo of this in the  remains of         
,aristoxenos and ,dikairchos1 but it    
must be older2 for in  their day        
scientific ,pythagoreans had ceased to  
exist4 ,the statement  that ,hippasos of
 ,metapontium was guilty of publishing a
 mystic  discourse #8with the view of   
misrepresenting ,pythagoras' 7,diogenes1
  viii1 #g7 must go back to this        
generation of the school2 for at a later
  date no one would have any interest in
 making it40#e    ,according to         
,stobaeus 7,eclogarum physicarum et     
ethicarum1 i1  #cjh71 ,ecphantus--an    
immediate successor of ,pythagoras1     
according to  ,rth--was the first       
philosopher to explain the ,pythagorean 

monads  7atoms7 as something corporeal4 
,but this view is regarded by most      
authorities as being contrary to the    
doctrine of the ,pythagoreans4  ,while  
,ecphantus is included among the        
disciples of the ,school1 his  doctrine 
of material atoms as the original       
constituents of the  ,pythagorean       
8numbers10 as well as of matter1 cannot1
 according to  ,zeller1 have been       
derived from his reputed master4 ,unlike
 the followers  of ,leucippus1          
,ecphantus believed1 with ,anaxagoras   
7#ejj-dbh ,b4 ,c471  that the movement  
of the atoms 7or monads71 as well as the
 formation  of the universe1 was        
produced by mind or soul4 ,atoms1       
according to  ,ecphantus1 differ among  
themselves in size1 form and force4 ,it 
is interesting to note that this        
philosopher had not only accepted as    
true the affirmation of ,pythagoras that
 the earth is a sphere1 but he  knew    
also that it rotated upon its axis      
7,schiaparelli1 8,i ,precursori  di     

,copernico nell',antichita10 in ,memorie
 del ,reale ,instituto  ,lombardi1 xii74
    ,here1 then1 paradoxically enough1  
we find in the teachings of the         
idealistic ,pythagoreans the roots of   
our modern theories of cosmogony  and   
the atomic theory of matter4 ,their     
8particles0 are qualitatively  all      
alike1 differing only in form4 ,by      
changes in their number and  position   
these qualitatively homogeneous atoms   
form all the various  substances of     
earth1 sea and sky4                     
,,the 8,,seeds0 ,,of ,,anaxagoras       
7#ejj-dbh ,b4 ,c47    ,the 8seeds0 7or  
germs7 of ,anaxagoras must also1 in a   
sense1 be  considered 8atoms40 ,but1 so 
far from being all alike fundamentally1 
for him each substance was supposed to  
be composed of its own peculiar         
particles1 there being as many kinds of 
8seeds0 as there are kinds of           
substances4    ,whence came this more or
 less novel doctrine8 ,was it wholly    
original  with the sage of ,clazomeni8  

,leucippus1 the founder of 8the         
materialistic0 atomic theory1 was a     
contemporary of ,anaxagoras1 and  both  
lived after the time of ,pythagoras1 and
 may have been indebted  either to him  
or to suggestions from ,india for their 
fundamental  physical conceptions1      
finding them1 indeed1 fully accordant   
with  the primary postulates of the     
older ,ionian physicists--,anaximines   
7#ebd-ejh ,b4 ,c471 ,anaximander        
7#faa-edg ,b4 ,c47 and ,thales          
7#fbd8-edh8  ,b4 ,c474 ,all of these    
believed that all elements are but      
compounds or  transformations of one    
primitive element4    ,it is natural to 
inquire here how such 8suggestions from 
,india0 could  have reached ,greece4    
,professor ,gompertz1 while he does not 
discuss  the possible ,indian origin of 
the atomic theory1 would have an answer 
to this question4 ,he admits that the   
,greeks 8owe to the ,orient the         
elements of material civilization0 and  
much of their science1 art and  religion

 to older civilizations4 ,how were these
 transferred to ,greece8  ,this         
question1 he recalls1 brings up a       
striking parallel from the  literary    
history of medival ,europe4             
8,practically the entire fairy-lore  of 
the ,occident is derived from ,india4   
,no one10 he goes on to say1  8disputes 
this assertion today02 yet1 on the other
 hand1 8no one as yet  can give a       
completely clear account of the ways and
 means by which its  journey was        
accomplished0 78,greek ,thinkers10 ,page
 #ie74      ,,footnotes3    ,footnote   
#a3 8,studies in the ,history and       
,method of ,science10 edited by  ,dr4   
,charles ,singer1 ,oxford1 #aiag4       
,footnote #b3 8,the ,history of         
,european ,philosophy10 ,page #aje1 ,new
 ,york1  #aiag4    ,footnote #c3 ,cf4   
,nauck1 ,a41 ,porphyrii ,opusculati     
,selecta1 ed4  #b1 ,leipsic1 #ahhf2 and 
,iamblichi ,de ,vita ,pythagorica       
,liber1 ed4  ,nauck1 ,petrograd1 #ahhd2 
,chaignet1 8,pythagore et la            

,philosophie  ,pythagoricienne10 ,paris1
 #ahgc4 ,see also ,cantor1 8,vorlesungen
  uber die ,geshichte der ,mathematik10 
,i1 #abd ff4    ,footnote #d3 ,thus     
laying the foundation for the true      
heliocentric  theory1 introduced by     
,aristarchus of ,samos about #bhj ,b4   
,c4--a theory  accepted and developed by
 ,seleucus of ,seleucia in ,babylonia1  
but  rejected in the following century  
by the greatest of the ,greek           
astronomers1 ,hipparchus of ,nica1      
discoverer of the 8precession of the    
equinoxes10 and author of a catalogue of
 #ajjj fixed stars4    ,footnote #e3    
,burnet1 ,professor ,john1 8,greek      
,philosophy10 ,vol4 ,i1 #gj1  ,page #hg1
 ,london1 #aiad4 ,see also1 by the same 
author1 8,early ,greek  ,philosophy10 #b
 ed41 #ach sq4                          
,,chapter ,,ii             ,,the        
,,materialistic ,,atomists3 ,,leucippus 
,,and ,,democritus                      
,,sources ,,of ,,our ,,information      
,while the ,atomic ,theory is usually   

identified with the name of             
,democritus1 its real founder was       
,leucippus1 as is attested by both      
,aristotle 7#chd-cbb ,b4 ,c47 and his   
successor1 ,theophrastus4 ,diogenes     
,laertius1 who flourished about #bcj of 
our era1 refers to ,leucippus 7,de      
,vitis1 ix1 #df7 as the author of 8,the 
,great ,diakosmos0 7or 8,the ,great     
,order of the ,universe071 in which were
 set forth the principles upon  which he
 based his atomic theory4 ,a treatise   
8,on the ,mind0 is also  mentioned1     
which appears to have contained in      
outline the psychology of  the          
materialistic ,atomists4    ,of the     
works of ,leucippus there remains but   
one extant fragment1 in  which          
,leucippus lays down in clear terms this
 universal rule3 8,nothing  happens     
without a cause1 but everything with a  
cause and by necessity0  7,aetius1      
,doxographers #cba ,b4 #aj74            
,following in the footsteps of his      
master1 ,democritus also wrote a book   

8,on the ,order of the ,universe10      
adhering1 it would seem1 very closely   
to the views of ,leucippus4 ,the works  
of his master the great ,milesian1  were
 incorporated eventually in the         
collected works of ,democritus4    ,no  
writer1 subsequent to ,theophrastus     
7born at ,lesbos about #cij ,b4  ,c41   
died in #bhf ,b4 ,c471 pupil of and     
successor to ,aristotle as head  of the 
famous ,lyceum at ,athens1 attempted to 
distinguish the teaching  of ,leucippus 
from that of his more brilliant         
disciple4 ,zeller remarks  that 8the    
work and even the name of ,leucippus    
seems to have been pretty  early        
forgotten by most writers in comparison 
with the riper and more  exhaustive     
achievements of his disciple4 ,the      
persistence with which he  is ignored by
 ,epicurus1 the reviver of the          
,atomistic philosophy1 and by  most of  
the ,epicureans1 may have contributed to
 this4#f    ,of the once numerous       
writings of ,democritus himself1 only   

fragments  remain1 but these are highly 
important4 ,the chief collector of the  
extant fragments was ,mullach1#g who    
places ,democritus first on  the list of
 ,greek philosophers for genius and     
knowledge1 and thinks  it probable that 
the great ,aristotle himself may owe    
much of his  reputation for learning to 
diligent perusal of the words of the    
sage of  ,abdera4 ,says he3             
87,democritus71 although in other things
 dissimilar1 in  his equal study of all 
the arts was most like the famous       
,aristotle4 ,and  ,i scarcely know      
whether the ,stagirite did not owe to   
his reading of the  works of ,democritus
 his erudition1 which surpassed that of 
all other  philosophers40    ,aristotle 
and some later historians make frequent 
references to his  teachings1 and       
according to ,zeller1 8with respect40   
,gompertz says that  ,aristotle confers 
8a crown of eulogy0 upon ,democritus 8at
 the expense  of ,plato40    ,professor 
,lange remarks1 however1 that 8he cites 

him1 for the most  part1 only when he   
attacks him1 and this he by no means    
always does  with a fitting objectivity 
and fairness4 ,how often he has borrowed
 from  him without naming him we do not 
know4 ,plato speaks of him nowhere1     
though it is a matter of dispute        
whether1 in some places1 he has not     
controverted his opinion without mention
 of his name0 78,history of             
,materialism10 page #ah74    ,it seems  
to be quite possible that ,plato knew   
little or nothing of  the writing of    
,democritus4 ,at any rate1 they were not
 well known  in ,athens before          
,aristotle's discussion of his theories4
 ,an extant  ,democritean fragment      
states that 8,i went to ,athens and no  
one knew me40  ,professor ,burnet says3 
8,it is not clear that ,plato knew      
anything about  ,democritus1 for the few
 passages in the ,timus and elsewhere   
where he  seems to be reproducing him   
are easily explained by the ,pythagorean
  influences that affected them both4   

,aristotle1 on the other hand1 knows    
,democritus well2 for he too was an     
,ionian from the north4    8,it is      
certain1 nevertheless1 that the         
,democritean corpus 7which  included the
 works of ,leucippus and others as well 
as those of  ,democritus7 continued to  
exist2 for the school maintained itself 
at  ,abdera and ,teos down to           
,hellenistic times4 ,it was therefore   
possible  for ,thrasyllos in the reign  
of ,tiberius to produce an edition of   
the  works of ,democritus arranged in   
tetralogies just like his edition of    
,plato's dialogues4 ,even that did not  
suffice to preserve them40#h    ,besides
 being the favorite pupil of ,leucippus1
 ,democritus 7according  to ,glaubus of 
,rhegion1 a contemporary7 had also      
,pythagoreans for  teachers1 including  
the astronomer1 geometrician and        
physician1  ,philolaus1 who was exiled  
from ,italy in the first half of the    
fifth  century ,b4 ,c4 because of his   
membership in the ,pythagorean ,order4  

,burnet thinks that this accounts not   
only for ,democritus' geometrical       
knowledge but also 8for other features  
of his system40                         
,,the ,,physics ,,of ,,democritus    ,we
 know that both ,leucippus and          
,democritus regarded the atoms composing
  the various substances of the world as
 being homogeneous--i4e41 all  alike    
from a chemical stand-point1 but        
differing from one another in  point of 
size and in rich variety of form4       
,unlike the minute particles            
7homomeries7 of ,anaxagoras1 which were 
assumed to be infinitely  divisible as  
well as qualitatively different for each
 substance1 the  atoms of ,leucippus and
 ,democritus were considered            
indivisible2 hence  the name atoma      
7atoms7 7particles which cannot be cut1 
or  further divided74    ,but while the 
atoms are described as 8indivisible10   
because there is  no vacuum in them1    
this does not mean that they were       
regarded by  ,leucippus and ,democritus 

as mere mathematical points1 like the   
atoms  of ,boscovich#i or the 8point    
charges0 7electrons7 of some modern     
physicists4 ,they were bodies of a      
definite magnitude1 some larger1  others
 smaller1 but never of visible size     
7,sextus1 ,mathematica1  vii1 #aci71    
much less1 as asserted by ,stobus       
7,eclagarum physicarum  et ethicarum1 i1
 #cdh7 8as large as a world40 ,according
 to  ,simplicius 7,physica1 #ah a71     
,democritus taught that the atoms  were 
physically indivisible1 but he did not  
claim that they were  mathematically    
indivisible4    ,the variety of         
substances and organisms seen on every  
hand is due  entirely1 according to     
,democritus--and also to ,leucippus1    
whose views  are expressed by           
,democritus--to the infinite variety of 
the atoms  in form1 size and arrangement
 in space with reference to one         
another--an anticipation of modern      
stereochemistry 7the arrangement  of the
 atoms of a molecule in space7 and the  

work of van't ,hoff  7#aheb-aiaa74aj ,in
 all other respects the atoms are alike1
 and act on  one another only by        
pressure or collision4                  
,,the ,,atomic ,,theory ,,of ,,knowledge
    ,man's sense impressions--color1    
sound1 bitterness1 sweetness1 etc4--are 
merely the effect of the impact of atoms
 upon a particular grouping  or         
arrangement of physically varied but    
essentially 7chemically7  homogeneous   
atoms1 constituting our sense organs4   
,hence these sense  qualities have no   
existence in themselves--are mere       
deceptive  8appearances40 8,only in     
opinion consists sweetness1 bitterness1 
cold1  color2 in truth there is nothing 
but the atoms and empty space10 says    
,democritus4    ,the great ,protagoras  
7born about #ejj ,b4 ,c471 also of      
,abdera1 a  contemporary of ,leucippus  
and ,democritus1 had taught that all    
sensations are equally true for the     
sentient subject--i4e41 if a  substance 
tastes sweet to a given person1 it is   

sweet4 ,for ,democritus  sweetness and  
bitterness did not reside as such in the
 substance  tasted1 but were merely     
subjective effects produced on the      
palate  of the consumer4 ,taste is      
partly dependent upon the shape of the  
atoms composing the food 7they held7 and
 partly upon the particular  taste-sense
 of the individual4 ,thus to the normal 
7or average7 person  honey has a sweet  
taste1 whereas the same honey to a      
jaundiced person  has a bitter taste4   
,parmenides had already declared that   
taste1 colors1 sound and the like  were 
only names1 standing for no objective   
qualities4 ,democritus agreed  that     
sensations represent nothing external to
 ourselves1 though  they are caused by  
something outside us4 ,for example1 what
 we  call pungency1 tartness1           
bitterness1 saltiness1 etc41 were       
impressions  produced on the palate by  
atoms of a certain shape--sharp1 rough1 
pointed or hooked particles of matter   
producing an effect of pungency  or     

acidity4 ,atoms with smooth surfaces    
form substances which ordinarily        
impress the senses agreeably4 ,from this
 we learn the effect upon our  palates  
of certain substances1 but these        
sensations tell us nothing of  the true 
nature of the substances tasted4    8,by
 the senses10 says ,democritus1 8we in  
truth know nothing sure1  but only      
something that changes according to the 
disposition of the  body and of the     
things that enter into it or resist it0 
7,fragment #i74  ,true reality lies     
beyond sense impressions2 8truth is in  
the depths0  7,fragment #aa74 ,our ideas
 represent our impressions1 and are not 
direct  reproductions of the external   
objects themselves1 8the inner essence  
of  which is concealed from us40        
,this ancient theory of the differences 
of taste depending on  differences in   
the shapes--or roughness or             
smoothness--of the particles  composing 
substances prevailed even well into the 
eighteenth century  of our own era2     

dictionaries of the period still        
defining acidity1  for example1 as due  
to sharp1 pointed particles4 ,today we  
still admit  that atoms are             
qualitatively homogeneous--but by       
8atoms0 we now mean  electrons1 the     
constituent electrical charges which    
make up the 8atoms0  of the chemist4    
,differences in the number of electrons 
in atoms confer  upon them qualitative  
7chemical7 differences1 though all atoms
 of any  one element are chemically     
alike--are homogeneous4 ,differences in 
the  number of spatial arrangement of   
these atoms 7in groups or 8molecules07  
constitute both physical and chemical   
differences in substances1 i4e41  in    
compounds4 ,quite different substances  
are produced by combinations  of        
precisely the same kinds of atoms1 but  
in different  proportions4    ,take from
 a molecule of certain substances one   
single atom1 and they  may be changed   
from a compound necessary to life and   
growth into a  deadly poison4           

,phosphorus is an element1 and thus     
contains but one kind  of atoms2 but    
some 7common7 phosphorus is yellow and  
some 7amorphous7  is red1 varying with  
the spatial distribution of the atoms in
 the  molecules composing the           
phosphorus4    ,but the properties 7or  
quality7 of a compound are not merely   
the  sum of the qualities of the        
different kinds of atoms composing  its 
molecules 7a molecule being the smallest
 possible quantity of a  given substance
 or compound74 ,water1 for example1 is  
not merely the  addition of the         
qualities of one atom of oxygen to those
 of two atoms  of hydrogen 7,h,o74 ,it  
is something quite different from either
 of  these two elements4 ,and just so   
the color of blue sulphate of copper  is
 not a mere mixture of the colors of    
sulphuric acid and copper4  ,again1 the 
experiments of ,dr4 ,p4 ,w4 ,bridgman#aa
 showed that while  the application of  
ordinary pressures to ice causes it to  
melt1 the  application of high pressures

 to water causes it to freeze1 and that 
8there are at least five different kinds
 of ice1 only one of which we  are      
ordinarily familiar with0 7,page #aib74 
,paraffin1 under pressures as  high as  
#bj1jjj atmospheres1 8becomes more rigid
 than soft steel0 7,page  #ahh74 ,water1
 heretofore regarded as absolutely      
incompressible1 was  found to decrease  
in volume about twenty per cent with a  
pressure under  #ab1jjj atmospheres4    
,professor ,w4 ,t4 ,marvin could well   
say1 in considering the shortcomings  of
 ancient atomic theories1 that 8even    
with our wealth of physical  information
 we cannot yet explain by a rigorous    
atomistic mechanics  water transforming 
into ice or a stick of wood burning1 not
 to mention  the phenomena of living    
organisms40    ,modern science          
recognizes that not only different      
results  may be obtained under different
 conditions1 but that absolutely  new   
qualities emerge at critical moments1   
both in the domain of  chemistry and in 

the phenomena of biology4 ,we talk now  
of emergent  evolution4 8,we live in a  
world in which there seems to be an     
orderly sequence of events4444 ,but the 
orderly sequence1 historically  viewed1 
appears to present1 from time to time1  
something genuinely  new4444 ,if there  
be only regrouping of pre-existing      
events and nothing  more--then there is 
no emergent evolution40#ab    ,in the   
gradual transition from non-living to   
living matter1 an entirely  new and     
peculiar type of energy--8biotic energy0
 emerges1 which  is not explicable      
merely on the grounds of increasing     
complexity of  atomic structure4 8,we   
call things living because of the energy
  changes they exhibit1 and not because 
they are complex chemically  or         
physically40 ,a dead animal is just as  
complex as a living  organism4 ,what is 
missing is 8biotic energy0--the form of 
energy  which gives rise to the         
distinctive energy-transformations      
8which we  aggregate together under the 

term life40 ,the recognition of  this   
fact1 however1 does not commit us to the
 outworn doctrine of  8vitalism0 or to  
the ,aristotelian 8entelechy40#ac       
,leucippus and ,democritus1 of course1  
were not troubled with the  problems    
raised by such phenomena as we have just
 been considering1  since they knew     
nothing about them4 ,for the founders of
 ,atomism1 a  multiplicity of           
substances1 living matter1 and          
consciousness could  readily be         
accounted for by the varied combination 
of variously formed  atoms1 physically  
considered4 ,what would be their        
astonishment to learn  that tens of     
thousands of different substances are   
actually composed  of only four kinds of
 atoms--viz41 hydrogen1 oxygen1 nitrogen
 and  carbon6 ,yet for them one element1
 qualitatively considered1 was          
sufficient to produce all that          
is--including the 8soul0--provided this 
primal matter existed in an infinite    
number of shapes and sizes of  atomic   

dimensions4                             
,,democritean ,,color ,,theory    8,we  
have no exact information10 says        
,professor ,gompertz1 8as to  which     
bodies in the theory of ,democritus were
 simple and which  were complex10 but he
 adduces evidences to show that 8the    
infinite  multiplicity which ,democritus
 recognized in the sizes and shapes of  
atoms did not arise from his            
incompetence to perceive or to          
conjecture  a complex in an apparently  
simple body40    ,he remarks that the   
,democritean theory of color started    
from the  assumption of four primary    
colors--white1 black1 red and green4    
8,these1  with the exception of green1  
which had taken the place of yellow1    
were  likewise the primary colors in the
 scheme of ,empedocles40 ,but all  other
 colors 8were designated as mixed1 and  
we see that all the  numerous bodies    
which were not equipped with one of the 
four primary  colors must have been of a
 composite nature4 ,that is to say1 they

 must  have included other than merely  
homogenously elementary particles4444   
,the statements about the atomic forms  
underlying the several tastes  give rise
 at first impression 7to the idea that7 
each of the countless  #8juices' or     
materials of taste is composed of       
homogeneous atoms  possessing the size  
and shape required for the purpose4     
8,but this1 we plainly perceive1 was not
 the opinion of ,democritus4  ,his own  
view of the mixed colors cries against  
it4 ,the homogeneity  of the atoms was  
admissible in the case of white salt1   
but it was not  admissible in that of   
yellow-gold honey or of brownish-yellow 
human  bile4 ,it is true that he must   
have referred the sweetness of the one  
and the bitterness of the other to the  
presence of the atomic forms by  which  
these impressions were produced4 ,but   
yellow and brown were mixed  colors in  
his theory1 and he must accordingly have
 inferred that honey  and bile alike    
contained atoms of other forms as well40

    ,professor ,gompertz therefore      
concludes that 8the true meaning of     
those  statements should therefore be   
expressed as follows3 #8,in all         
substance  of mixed colors at least the 
kind of atoms which lends them their    
specific taste is merely the predominant
 and preponderant kind1 and  without    
wasting more words on this subject1     
,theophrastus1 who is our  best         
authority for ,democritus' theory of    
sensation1 relates that this  doctrine  
was expressly taught by him'40#ad       
,,footnotes3    ,footnote #f3 ,zeller1  
,dr4 ,edward1 8,pre-,socratic           
,philosophy10 ,vol ,i4 ,page  #bji1     
,london1 #ahhc4 7,english translation by
 ,s4 ,f4 ,alleyne and ,o4 ,j4           
,reichel47    ,footnote #g3 ,democriti  
,abderitae operum fragmenta1 ,berlin1   
#ahdc4  ,cf4 ,liepmann1 ,hugo ,karl1    
8,die ,mechanik der                     
leucipp-democrit'schen  ,atome10        
,berlin1 #ahhe2 and ,liard1 ,de         
,democrito philosopho1  ,paris1 #ahgc2  

,lassewitz1 8,geschichte der            
,atomistik10 ,hamburg1  #ahij4          
,footnote #h3 8,greek ,philosophy10     
,vol4 ,i1 ,pages #aic-aid1 ,london1     
#aiad4    ,footnote #i3 ,boscoyish1     
,roger ,joseph4 ,theoria ,philosophae   
,naturalis1 etc41 ,vienna1 #ageh4 ,a    
,latin-,english edition of this work    
has been issued from the press of the   
,open ,court ,publishing ,company1      
,chicago1 #aibc4    ,footnote #aj3      
,van't ,hoff was first to explain the   
cause of a known  difference in their   
behavior toward a beam of polarized     
light of  two distinct substances--both 
of which are called amyl alcohol--the   
chemical formation of which is identical
 7i4 e41 composed of the same  number   
and kinds of atoms7--by a difference in 
the order in which  the four different  
groups of molecules are arranged in     
space about  the central carbon atom2   
the arrangements in the two cases being 
such that one molecule has the same     
arrangement as the mirror image  of the 

other--equivalent to the difference     
between a right-hand and  a left-hand   
glove4 ,democritus could1 possibly1 on  
his theory1 have  arrived at such an    
explanation2 whereas ,aristotle1 on his 
theory of  the elements1 could not      
possibly have done so--any more than    
could  ,empedocles 7#die-dcf ,b4 ,c47   
have done so with his 8four elements40  
,as for the primal substance 78air07 of 
,anaximines 7#ehh-ed ,b4 ,c47  and the  
8fire0 of ,heraclitus 7#ece-dge ,b4     
,c471 ,dr4 ,gompertz contends  that     
these were implicitly recognized as     
being composed of 8minute1              
imperceptible particles0 78,greek       
,thinkers01 ,vol4 ,i1 ,page #cbc74      
,footnote #aa3 8,on the ,properties of  
,matter under ,high ,pressure40 ,annual 
,report of the ,smithsonian             
,institution1 #aiah4    ,footnote #ab3  
,morgan1 ,professor ,c4 ,lloyd1         
8,emergent ,evolution10 ,pages  #a-b1   
,london1 #aibc4 ,cf4 ,mill1 ,j4 ,s41    
8,logic10 ,book ,,iii1 ,chapter ,,vi1   

#b2  ,lewes1 ,g4 ,h41 8,problems of     
,life and ,mind10 ,vol4 ,,ii1 ,problem  
,v1 ,chapter  ,,iii1 ,page #dab4        
,footnote #ac3 ,see on this point       
,moore1 ,dr4 ,benjamin1                 
8,biochemistry--,a  ,study of the       
,origin1 ,reactions and ,equilibria of  
,living ,matter10  especially ,chapter  
,,ix1 ,pages #abe-acg1 ,london1 #aiba4  
,footnote #ad3 ,gompertz1 ,opus citum1  
,pages #ccc-ccd4 ,authorized ,english   
translation1 from the ,german edition of
 #ahif1 by ,laurie ,magnus1 ,m4 ,a4     
7,oxon471 ,london1 #aijf4               
,,chapter ,,iii                         
,,the ,,eleatic ,,view      ,one of the 
problems that early perplexed the human 
mind was that of  motion4 ,parmenides1  
of the ,eleatic school1 could not       
conceive of  movement of bodies without 
vacuous space1 and for him there could  
be no  vacuum1 since the universe is a  
plenum--the ,all1 the ,one4 ,hence      
there could be no motion1 movement of   
bodies and physical changes being  mere 

delusive appearances4    ,leucippus     
granted that he1 likewise1 could not    
conceive of the motion  of bodies unless
 there was empty space for them to move 
in4 ,but motion  he recognized as a fact
 of nature1 as a reality4 ,the ,eleatics
 must1  therefore1 he said1 be in error 
in supporting the premise that 8there   
is no vacuum40 ,given empty space1      
motion followed4    ,neither ,parmenides
 nor ,leucippus introduced the          
conception of the  vacuum4 ,it was a    
pre-existing doctrine fervently attacked
 by ,parmenides  and supported on       
logical grounds by ,leucippus4 8,nor10  
says ,professor  ,gompertz of           
,leucippus1 8did he do more than to     
refine and to raise to  the dignity of a
 self-sustained system the atomic theory
 which existed  before him1 though in a 
rude1 rudimentary and imperfect shape40 
,given atoms of various sizes and forms1
 their movement in vacuous  space was   
taken as much for granted as their      
existence4 ,just as matter  itself had  

no beginning1 and can have no ending1 so
 the natural and  original condition of 
atoms was a state of motion4 ,the state 
of rest  was no more 8natural0 to the   
,atomists than was the state of motion4 
,they knew nothing of the doctrine which
 regards matter as an 8inert  mass40    
,matter for them was essentially active 
and non-quiescent1 as it  was centuries 
later for ,bruno1 ,bacon1 ,leibnitz1    
,spinoza1 and as it is  in our own times
 for all physicists4 ,for energy is     
synonymous  with motion1 and matter     
itself is but a collection of energy    
units 7in constant motion74             
,,democritus' ,,theory    ,according to 
,democritus the atoms fall with varying 
degrees of  rapidity1 the heavier       
particles faster1 the lighter with less 
speed1  the heavier overtaking and      
striking against the lighter ones4 ,to  
quote  ,lange's succinct statement3     
8,as the atoms are of various shapes1   
and the collision will not  take place  
in the center of the atoms1 then1 even  

according to the  principles of modern  
mechanical science1 revolutions of the  
atoms  on their axes and lateral motions
 will be set up4 ,when once set up1     
these lateral motions must ever become  
more and more complicated1 and  as the  
collision of constant new atoms with a  
layer of atoms already  in lateral      
motion constantly imparts new forces1 so
 we may suppose  that the motion will   
continually increase4 ,from the lateral 
motions  in connection with the rotation
 of the atoms are then easily produced  
cases of retrogressive movement4 ,if    
now1 in a layer of atoms so  involved1  
the heavier--i4 e41 the larger--atoms   
continually receive a  stronger impetus 
downwards1 they will finally be         
collected below1 while  the light ones  
will form the upper stratum40#ae        
,aristotle said that if there could be  
such a condition as space  devoid of    
substance 7matter71 then in such a      
vacuum all bodies1 light  or heavy1     
would fall with equal velocity1 which he

 considered an  absurdity4 ,for him the 
differences in the speed of falling     
bodies are  entirely dependent upon     
differences in the density of the       
medium--air  or water--through which    
they fall toward the center of the      
earth4  ,epicurus agreed with the       
,stagirite on the point of equal        
velocities in  a non-resisting medium4  
,but ,aristotle not only denied the     
possibility  of the existence of a void 
anywhere1 but asserted that in such a   
void--were a vacuum possible--no motion 
could take place6    ,epicurus believed 
that all atoms1 of whatever weight1     
would fall with  equal velocity in a    
vacuum1 in simple parallel lines4 ,they 
are in  everlasting movement1 originally
 a perpetual1 equable falling through   
the boundless infinity of vacuous space1
 with an incomparably greater  speed    
than that of light-rays2 though he      
believed that these traverse  the       
distance from sun to earth in an        
instant4#af    ,while it is true that in

 infinite space there is neither an 8up0
 nor  a 8down10 the fact remains1 as    
,epicurus in effect observed1 that man  
considers his head 8up0 and his feet    
8down10 and a body as being  relatively 
distant from1 or as near or on or       
within1 the earth4 ,so the  atoms do    
converge at the earth1 falling downwards
 unless met by bodies  which1 by a      
particular movement and weight1 drive   
them to one side or  upwards1 or in a   
spiral or whirling motion--8the         
commencement of the  formation of       
worlds40 ,but if the movement of atoms  
is in straight  parallel lines1 and all 
move in the vacuum with equal velocity1 
how  could one atom drive another 8to   
one side or upwards08    ,just here is  
where the weakness in the atomic theory 
is introduced by  ,epicurus4 ,democritus
 accounted for the collision and rebound
 of atoms  under law1 by a cause1 not by
 chance4 ,epicurus threw away the  cause
 and introduced 8chance collisions40    
,but no atom was ever deviated  from its

 flight in parallel lines by            
8chance0--in this case a wholly         
metaphysical invention4 ,no worlds1 no  
suns or planets could be built up  on   
the theory of particles falling through 
infinite space in parallel  rectilinear 
paths4 ,there must be collision and     
recoil of atoms in order  that the      
lateral and whirling movements1 or      
vortices1 should be set up1  which were 
supposed to cause the atoms to combine  
according to their  shape1 size1 and    
weight1 the heavier forming the denser  
portions of the  earth1 the lighter     
constituting the atmosphere4    ,this   
difficulty did not escape the astute    
mind of ,lucretius4 ,but  in attempting 
to solve what is really an insoluble    
problem--the  development of worlds     
under the conditions stated--the great  
,roman poet  only made bad matters      
worse4 ,for here he introduced the dogma
 of free  will applied to the falling   
atoms4 ,they were made to deviate from  
their parallel lines by a voluntary     

movement6    ,and it appears that this  
was done on the authority of ,epicurus  
himself3  8,in these errors10 says      
,lange1 8,democritus probably had no    
share2  and yet we shall judge them more
 leniently if we reflect that1 even  to 
our own day1 the essence of the doctrine
 of the freedom of the  will1 with      
whatever metaphysical subtlety it is    
elaborated1 consists  simply of the     
uncertainty and perplexity of phenomenal
 appearances40  ,again3 8,whilst1       
therefore1 it is one of the most        
important efforts of  recent materialism
 to deduce the whole mass of voluntary  
movements  from mechanical causes1 we   
find ,epicurus adopting a quite         
incalculable  element into his          
system40#ag    ,for ,democritus a       
8chance0 occurrence would be a causeless
 event1 and  this he could not allow    
under his law of 8necessity40 ,an       
efficient  cause produces always        
appropriate and calculable results under
  given conditions1 and these results   

are always uniform1 predictable         
occurrences1 given knowledge of the     
mechanical factors involved4    ,to the 
earlier ,atomists it seemed clear that  
particles which are alike  in weight and
 in form would 8naturally10 when whirled
 about in a  vortex1 be brought to the  
same location2 and because of their     
peculiar  shape1 become entangled one   
with another4 ,since some atoms were    
supplied with hooks or even with balls  
and sockets1 some with mortice  or      
dovetail1 others with sharp1 rough or   
involuted edges1 what more  8natural0   
than that groups or combinations of     
atoms should be formed1  even to the    
cohesion of some atoms in places not    
suitable to their  nature1 resulting in 
the formation of compound bodies8       
,some atoms1 indeed1 were 8unsociable10 
having no means of mutual  attachment2  
hence their combination was effected by 
enclosing them in  a shell formed by the
 8social0 particles4 ,some atoms had    
means for  attachment at two points1    

which accounts1 in part1 for the greater
 or  less mobility of the various atoms4
 ,the soul consists of the finest  and  
smoothest atoms1 akin to those of fire2 
and since they penetrate  the whole     
body1 their motions give rise to the    
phenomena of life4  ,all objects project
 into space images of themselves1       
composed of  atoms1 which strike against
 the senses1 and are perceived by       
similar  atoms--8like atoms are         
perceived by like40    ,these           
assumptions were wholly unacceptable to 
the critical mind  of ,aristotle1#ah as 
well as to his distinguished disciple1  
,strato  of ,lampsacus1 teacher of      
,ptolemy ,philadelphus4 ,the ,roman     
,stoic1  ,cicero1 regarded the          
,democritean theory of cohesion and     
compounding  of substances as wholly    
fantastic4#ai ,yet the critics of       
,democritus  had no better theory to    
offer in its place1 since they1 like the
  ,atomists themselves1 had no          
conception of the electrical1 chemical  

or  gravitational attraction of bodies  
for each other1 or of the fact that  the
 pressure of the atmosphere causes the  
ascent of fire1 vapor and  heated       
molecules in general4    ,to the        
foregoing objections1 others might be   
offered1 but we add only  that in modern
 terms1 the impact of indivisible and   
indeformable atoms  upon one another    
could not produce the required movement 
of elementary  masses4 ,for 8if the     
atoms are rigid1 transmission of motion 
through  impact is impossible2 if they  
are elastic1 they are then deformable   
and composed of parts1 which is contrary
 to the hypothesis and implies  forces  
of cohesion and elasticity40#bj         
,democritus1 though he was the greatest 
physicist of his age1 could  not1 of    
course1 be expected to anticipate our   
modern objections to his  doctrine--or  
his master's doctrine4 ,the immortal    
,newton 7#afdb-agbg7  himself1 even     
,dalton 7#agff-ahdd71 founder of the    
modern chemical  atomic theory 7as      

distinguished from the physical atomic  
theories of his predecessors71 could not
 anticipate the advances that  have made
 possible the relentless criticism of   
modern physics and  chemistry4 ,newton1 
,boyle and ,huygens had no idea that the
 8atoms0 of  their conceptions were     
occupied mostly by 8empty space0 7using 
this  phrase in its popular             
meaning--modern science recognizing no  
actually  empty space3 for all space    
contains a gravitational 8ether0 if not 
an  electromagnetic field of energy74   
,thus the 8atom0 of the chemist is a    
highly elastic body--highly  resilient4 
,moreover1 thanks to the genius of      
,professor ,frederick ,soddy1  of       
,oxford1 and of ,sir ,f4 ,w4 ,aston1 we 
now know that what we considered  but   
three years ago to be a homogeneous     
element--e4g41 lead1 chlorine1  carbon1 
iron1 etc4--is in many cases--if not in 
all cases excepting  hydrogen and       
helium--a compound body containing      
particles of different  weights 7atomic 

mass74 ,on the other hand1 as previously
 stated1 we are  reverting to the       
,democritean theory that all atoms are  
composed of but  one primitive element1 
the hydrogen atom4 ,and the hydrogen    
atom in  turn is composed of--energy2   
and energy itself is apparently of      
atomic structure4 ,all energy is1 in the
 last analysis1 electrical in  nature1  
the stuff that lightning1 the stars1    
fire1 rocks and metals1  the bodies of  
plants and animals--perhaps the mind of 
man--are all made  of4    ,with these   
facts in mind1 let us return to         
,democritus1 whose  errors--the errors  
of his age--we may now regard with due  
allowances4                             
8,,soul ,,atoms0    ,with ,democritus1  
as with ,pythagoras and ,heraclitus1    
fire had a special  importance1 though  
it was not1 as asserted by some of the  
ancient  writers1 regarded by him as an 
element4 ,the primitive substance1 the  
source of all things1 whether fire1     
earth1 air or water1 was the world  of  

homogeneous atoms1 eternal1             
unchangeable4 ,fire1 composed of minute1
  round1 smooth atoms1 was1 on account  
of its mobility1 the living and  moving 
principle of nature1 though not the     
direct cause of  motion4 ,but because of
 the fiery1 mobile nature of its atoms1 
they  become a secondary cause of       
additional motion1 from their impact    
with  and recoil from less mobile atoms4
 ,sensation and consciousness are       
possible because of the extreme mobility
 of the fiery atoms4 ,they are  the     
8soul atoms10 but sensibility and       
consciousness arise only as the  result 
of relatively large aggregations of     
these excessively minute  bodies4       
8,,effluences0    ,in order to account  
for the mutual action or influence of   
bodies upon  one another1 when separated
 by space1--the void1--the ,atomists had
  recourse to the ,empedoclean theory of
 8effluences10 or emanations1  which    
were supposed to be emitted by all      
bodies 7,aristotle1  ,generatio et      

,corruptio1 i1 #h74 ,penetrating the    
organs of sense1  they excite the       
appropriate sensation1 and1 in the case 
of the brain1  they produce images or   
ideas of things4 ,hence sensation is the
 only  possible source of knowledge1 the
 origin of all thought being the        
passage through the sense organs of     
8effluences0 from external objects  or  
organisms1 acting mechanically1 by      
contact4    ,but while affirming that   
sensation is the source of all          
knowledge1  ,democritus1 nevertheless1  
agrees with the ,pythagoreans and       
,socrates in  rejecting sensation as    
such as a source of knowledge4 ,he      
distinguishes  between a 8bastard0      
7skotie7 knowledge obtained through the 
special senses and a true-born 7gnesie7 
knowledge1 obtained by  direct-contact  
of external atoms with the body's 8soul 
atoms40 ,these  are not concentrated in 
the brain nor are they dependent upon   
the  organs of sense4 ,they are diffused
 throughout the entire organism1 and    

come into direct contact1 without the   
intervention of the deceptive  sense    
organs1 with the reality outside our    
body4    8,poor ,mind10 he makes the    
senses say 7,fragment #abe71 8it is from
 us  thou hast got the proofs to throw  
us with4 ,thy throw is a fall40#ba      
,as ,burnet points out1 the 8true-born  
knowledge is of the same nature  as the 
8bastard10 and 8,democritus refused1    
like ,socrates1 to make an  absolute    
separation between sense and thought10  
the former being1  #8after all1 not     
thought1 but a sort of inner sense1 and 
its objects are  like the #8common      
sensibles' of ,aristotle4' ,in the      
8bastard0 knowledge1  ,democritus       
included sight1 hearing1 smell1 taste1  
touch4 8,true-born0  knowledge was      
obtained directly by the diffused soul  
atoms from the  external objects1 and   
thus made them known as they really are4
 ,all  phenomena of life and mind are   
due to the motion of the mobile fiery   
atoms4 ,even where ,democritus speaks of

 8the ,divine10 he means merely  the    
fiery soul atoms2 not a personal being  
of any kind4    ,where there is a large 
aggregation of the soul atoms1 there    
reason  appears1 itself a physical      
phenomenon4 ,democritus recognized no   
,nous 7,anaxagoras7 or ,world-,soul     
7,plato71 or ,deity 7,aristotle74  ,the 
only motive force of the world is       
gravity1 the soul being a  secondary    
cause of motion only by virtue of the   
fiery atoms' being most  easily moved by
 pressure and contact4 8,spirit0 is     
8only one substance  moving side by side
 with others40#bb    ,every act of the  
individual1 every occurrence in nature1 
has its  efficient cause from which it  
follows by necessity--or1 as we should  
say1 under natural law4 ,all change in  
things must be reduced to an  altered   
combination of atoms--to new forms and  
arrangements in space1  under the law of
 8necessity40    ,the soul is material  
and disappears with the disintegration  
of the  body1 though there exist        

invisible beings all around us in the   
air4  ,but these invisible beings are   
material bodies also1 composed of the   
finest atoms4 ,at times they project    
images of themselves which affect  our  
soul atoms1 rendering these aerial      
beings1 for the time1 visible  bodies4  
,,footnotes3    ,footnote #ae3 ,lange1  
,frederick ,albert4 8,history of        
,materialism10 ,vol4  ,i1 ,page #be1    
,london1 #ahib4    ,footnote #af3 ,that 
#dih seconds1 over eight minutes1 are   
required for  this transmission of light
 is a discovery of the eighteenth       
century4    ,footnote #ag3 ,lange1 ,op4 
cit41 ,page #adb4    ,footnote #ah3 ,de 
,caelo1 iii1 #d2 ,generatio et          
,corruptio1  i1 #ba2 and elsewhere4     
,footnote #ai3 ,academica1 ii1 #ch1     
#aba4    ,footnote #bj3 ,rougier1       
,louis1 8,philosophy and the ,new       
,physics10 ,pages  #g-h1 ,london1 #aibb4
    ,footnote #ba3 ,burnet1 ,dr4 ,john1 
,op4 cit41 ,page #aec2 and ,note #b1    
,page #aac4 ,dr4 ,burnet is ,professor  

of ,greek at ,st4 ,andrews ,university1 
,scotland4    ,footnote #bb3 ,zeller1   
,op4 cit41 ,vol4 ,,ii1 ,page #bec4      
,,chapter ,,iv                          
,,epicurus ,,and ,,lucretius            
,,atoms ,,not ,,infinite ,,in ,,variety 
,epicurus 7#cda-bgj ,b4 ,c47 agreed with
 ,democritus in assuming that the  atoms
 are infinite in number1 but he denied  
that they were infinitely  various in   
shape1 though their variety of form was 
conceded to be  very great1 some smooth 
and round--like the soul atoms and those
 of  fire--some rough and pointed1      
others again branched or hooked4 ,while 
the number of forms is limited1 there is
 an unlimited number of each  form4     
,none of these variously formed atoms   
was ever created1 and none  can ever be 
either created or destroyed4 8,out of   
nothing1 nothing  comes40               
,,many ,,inhabited ,,worlds    ,since   
space is infinite in extent and the     
atoms infinite in number as  well as    
varied in shape and weights1 there must 

also be innumerable  inhabited worlds   
7as asserted by ,democritus71 displaying
 the greatest  diversity2 yet some of   
them may nevertheless be exactly alike1 
since  like causes acting upon like     
bodies or complexes must inevitably     
produce like effects4    ,metrodorus1 of
 ,chios1 declared that 8a single ear of 
corn on a  wide-spreading champaign     
would not be more wonderful than a      
single  cosmos in the infinitude of     
space40                                 
,,man',s ,,greatest ,,enemy    ,study of
 ,democritus convinced ,epicurus that   
the greatest enemy of  mankind is       
superstition1 fear of imaginary gods and
 of punishment  hereafter1 making of man
 a mental slave4 ,epicurus was not a    
lover  of science for science's sake4   
,he regarded its pursuit as having no   
greater justification than that through 
reasoning and observation it  would free
 mankind from the fetters of            
supernaturalism1 thus leaving  an open  
road to peace and happiness4 ,pleasure  

is the highest good1 and  the highest   
form of pleasure is derived from        
cultivation of our mental  faculties4   
8,protected as it was by the emperors1  
the 7,epicurean7 school destroyed  what 
remained of the crumbling edifice of    
polytheism1 and at the same  time       
attacked the new religion and the       
supernatural ,christian40#bc            
,,on ,,the ,,gods    ,in supporting his 
atomic theory of cosmology1 biology and 
ethics1 in  refutation of the           
theological hypotheses of the           
,platonists and the  ,stoics1 based1    
they claimed1 upon 8a study of nature   
and the laws  of logic10 ,epicurus      
offered what he regarded as logical     
evidence  against the doctrine that the 
world was ever created or that it is the
  product of beneficent design4         
,professor ,weber summed up the doctrine
  of ,epicurus1 as derived from the     
writings of the ,poet1 ,lucretius2  the 
biographer1 ,diogenes ,laertius2 and    
other authors of lives of the           

philosophers of ancient ,greece1 in the 
following words 7translated  by ,dr4    
,frank ,thilly1 ,professor of           
,philosophy in the ,university of       
,missouri73    8,the absolute creation  
and absolute destruction of the world   
are  according to both ,democritus and  
,epicurus out of the question4          
,creation in the proper sense of the    
term is impossible4 ,in order to        
convince ourselves that the world is not
 the work of the gods1 we have  simply  
to consider the nature of its alleged   
creators1 on the one  hand1 and its     
imperfections1 on the other4 ,why should
 such perfect and  supremely happy      
beings1 who are self-sufficient and have
 no need of  anything1 burden themselves
 with creating the world8 ,why should   
they  undertake the difficult task of   
governing the universe8    8,let us1    
however1 suppose for a moment that the  
world is their product4  ,if they have  
created it1 they have created it either 
eternally or in  time2 in the former    

case1 the world is eternal2 in the      
latter we have  two possibilities3      
either creation is a condition of divine
 happiness1  and then the gods were not 
supremely happy for an entire eternity1 
inasmuch as they did not create the     
world until after the lapse of an       
eternity of inaction2 or1 it is not1 and
 in that case1 they have acted  contrary
 to their innermost essence4 ,moreover1 
what could have been  their purpose in  
making it8 ,did they desire a           
habitation8 ,that would  be equivalent  
to saying that they had no              
dwelling-place for a whole  eternity1 or
 at least1 none worthy of them4 ,did    
they create it for the  sake of man8 ,if
 they made it for the few sages whom the
 world contains1  their work was not    
worth the trouble2 if they did it in    
order to  create wicked men1 then they  
are cruel beings4 ,hence it is          
absolutely  impossible to hold that     
creation is the work of the gods4       
8,let us examine the matter from the    

stand-point of the world4 ,how can  we  
assume that a world full of evils is the
 creation of the gods8 ,what  have we8  
,barren deserts1 arid mountains1 deadly 
marshes1 uninhabitable  arctic zones1   
regions scorched by the southern sun1   
briars and thorns1  tempests1 hailstones
 and hurricanes1 ferocious beasts1      
diseases1  premature deaths2 do they not
 all prove that the ,deity has no hand  
in the government of things8 ,empty     
space1 atoms and weight1 in short1      
mechanical causes1 suffice to explain   
the world2 and it is not  necessary for 
metaphysics to have recourse to the     
theory of final  causes40#bd    ,just as
 astrologists blame the stars for the   
individual's  short-comings--while at   
the same time holding on to the doctrine
  of free will1 by assuring us that 8the
 stars incline but do not  compel0--and 
credit the astral bodies for his good   
traits and  successes1 exactly so the   
ancient ,greeks placed responsibility   
for man's derelictions and              

misfortunes--as well as for his happy   
achievements--on the gods4 ,minerva's   
influence endowed the individual  with  
intelligence2 ,venus infused the passion
 of love2 ,apollo  dispersed manly      
beauty1 health and happiness2 ,mars     
involved peoples  in wars2 while        
,mercury was the god of mathematics1    
inventions1  business transactions1 etc4
 ,without denying the existence of the  
gods1 ,epicurus1 as we have seen1 did   
seek to show that the ,olympian         
divinities were not in any way concerned
 with terrestrial affairs4#be    ,though
 the gods are dead1 we cannot yet say1  
with ,henley1        ,i am the captain  
of my soul1      ,i am the master of my 
fate4    ,for modern man has within his 
own physiological 8world0 real          
substitutes for the imaginary gods of   
,olympus1 which really 8incline0  if    
they 8do not compel10 8behavior40 ,while
 the gods have been all  but forgotten1 
and the 8fateful0 stars have been       
reduced to vast  incandescent masses of 

helium1 hydrogen1 calcium1 iron1 etc41  
the  endocrine 7ductless7 glands still  
largely control or alter personality2   
though these bodies are but             
constellations of atomic systems1 with  
electrons for sun and planets1 each     
revolving in an all but inscrutable     
cosmos of its own4    ,these still      
mysterious glands are today the real    
8astral  influences0--acting under      
8necessity0--which confer upon us manly 
beauty and intelligence1 or1 perhaps1 a 
dwarfed body and an imbecilic  brain4   
,the pituitary body1 originating tens of
 millions of years ago  in the roof of  
the mouth of some lowly chordate        
7lancelet stage71  in ,cambrian times1  
and now attached to the base of man's   
brain1 has  taken the place of ,minerva 
and ,apollo2 the gonads and the thymus  
have absorbed the functions of ,venus2  
the adrenals1 the combative  8influence0
 of ,mars2 while the thyroid makes of   
us--or 8inclines0 us to  become--poets1 
radicals1 8up-lifters10--or maybe1 mere 

lovers of the  lime light6#bf    ,surely
 this character-building 8by necessity0 
would have delighted the  soul of       
,democritus and brought joy to the heart
 of his great disciple  ,epicurus1 who  
introduced an element of chance into    
,atomism only to  bridge what was to him
 an impassable gulf between the laws of 
mechanics  and observed phenomena4      
,this insistence of the ancient         
,atomists on the necessity of attempting
  to account for all natural phenomena  
as the result of uniform1  immutable1   
universal 8necessity0 or law is one of  
the greatest  conceptions handed down to
 us from antiquity--a monument to the   
human mind equalled only by the attempt 
to correlate all qualitative            
differences of substances 7atoms7 with  
differences of size1 shape and  position
 in space 7with relation to one another7
 and with movement4    ,gompertz does   
not hesitate to declare that this grand 
work of the  ancient ,atomists 8is      
destined to survive all changes of      

opinion and  thought40 ,furthermore1 all
 exact knowledge of nature 8rests       
entirely  on this attempt to reduce     
qualities to quantities1 or1 to speak   
more  precisely1 to establish fixed     
relations between the two4 ,mathematical
  physics was contained there as in a   
germ1 and modern research took  its     
starting-point thence4 ,galileo1        
,descartes1 ,huygens1--they all         
followed the same path4 #8,i do not     
believe1' declared ,galileo1 #8that     
anything else is required than          
magnitudes1 shapes1 quantities1 and slow
  movements or swift1 to produce in us  
tastes1 smell1 sounds4'0#bg             
,,footnotes3    ,footnote #bc3 ,weber1  
,alfred1 8,history of ,philosophy10     
,page #aci4    ,footnote #bd3 ,weber1   
,op4 ,cit41 ,pages #acf-acg4 ,epicurus  
was the  author of about three hundred  
writings1 according to ,diogenes        
,laertius1  but only his ,letters1      
preserved by this historian1 and        
fragments of a  work discovered at      

,herculaneum remain4 ,for the rest we   
are dependent  on the resume presented  
by ,lucretius and the quotations found  
in ,greek authors4 ,as ,weber remarks   
7,page #ace71 8neither polytheism nor   
,christianity had any interest in       
preserving his numerous writings40      
,footnote #be3 ,lange expressed the     
opinion that ,epicurus really believed  
in the existence of the gods1 reverenced
 them for their perfection3  8these     
careless and painless gods did in fact  
represent1 as it were1  an incarnated   
ideal of his philosophy0 7,op4 ,cit41   
,vol4 ,i1 ,page  #aja47    ,footnote    
#bf3 ,see ,berman1 ,dr4 ,louis1 8,the   
,glands ,regulating  ,personality10 ,new
 ,york1 #aibb2 ,cunningham1 ,j4 ,t41    
8,hormones and  ,heredity10 ,london4    
#aibb4    ,footnote #bg3 ,gompertz1 ,op4
 cit41 ,page #cdi4                      
,,chapter ,v                            
,,post-,,classical ,,atomism      ,the  
two principal links in the chain which  
binds the world of the  ancient ,greek  

7and one ,roman7 ,atomists with those of
 our own  times are ,descartes          
7#aeif-afej7 and ,gassendi 7#aeib-afee74
 ,gassendi  revived and ably supported  
the atomic theory of ,epicurus2 while   
,descartes resuscitated the mechanistic 
conceptions of the ,greek  ,atomists on 
the basis of a corpuscular theory of    
matter1 corresponding  in many respects 
to the doctrine of ,democritus4    ,the 
work of ,leucippus connects through     
,descartes and ,gassendi1 ,huygens1     
,boyle and ,newton1 directly with that  
of ,higgins and ,dalton1 founders of    
the modern chemical atomic theory4      
,dalton had already adopted a physical  
atomic theory1 based no doubt on  the   
work of his illustrious predecessors1   
and upon his own thorough  study of the 
gases of the atmosphere1 before he      
formulated his chemical  atomic         
hypothesis4 ,he opposed the prevailing  
belief that the various  gases exist in 
the atmosphere in a state of chemical   
combination1  asserting that the        

atmosphere is a physical mixture4    ,in
 #ahje1 he extended his atomic          
hypothesis to the explanation of        
chemical phenomena4 ,his first postulate
 was1 of course1 that all  matter is    
made up of small particles2 these he    
found possessed the  power of attracting
 7and holding7 other particles4 ,he     
therefore  concluded that these         
invisible particles never subdivide in  
taking part  in chemical changes1 and   
that all atoms of any one element must  
be  alike4 ,but the atoms of the        
different elements vary in weight1 form 
and  combining power4 ,he established   
the rule1 already assumed by ,william   
,higgins 7#aghi71 that different atoms  
tend to combine in the proportion  of   
atom to atom4    ,when a compound was   
composed of two elements only1 it was   
presumed to  be binary2 that is1 since  
water1 for example1 was known to be     
composed  of hydrogen and oxygen1 it was
 supposed by ,dalton that it must       
consist of one atom of each of these    

elements2 as was also assumed in  the   
case of ammonia1 which he knew to be a  
combination of hydrogen and  nitrogen4  
,now we know that one atom of hydrogen  
combined with one atom  of oxygen forms1
 not water1 but oxide of hydrogen2 while
 the combining  of two atoms of hydrogen
 with one atom of oxygen forms water4   
,dalton established the fact that       
elements combine only in definite       
proportions--e4g41 that oxygen and      
hydrogen will combine only in  the      
proportion of #h to #a4 ,had ,dalton    
known that a molecule  of water contains
 two atoms of hydrogen1 and one of      
oxygen1 he would have known that one    
atom of oxygen must weigh  sixteen      
times--instead of eight times--as much  
as one atom of  hydrogen4 ,one part of  
hydrogen by weight does combine  with   
eight parts by weight of oxygen1 but    
this does not prove  that the portion of
 hydrogen in water contains only one    
atom4 ,since  it contains two atoms1    
instead of one1 then1 in order to       

preserve the  relative combining 7or    
8equivalent07 weights of the two        
substances1  we must assume that the    
atomic weight of oxygen is #af1 for  the
 combining weights of elements represent
 the relative 7not  actual7 weights of  
the atoms4 ,and each element has its own
 fixed  combining weight1 ascertained by
 experiment4    ,water1 then1 is not a  
mere mixture or combination of hydrogen 
and  oxygen1 in the sense that a pound  
of hydrogen and eight and a  half pounds
 of oxygen will1 when exploded1 produce 
#i pounds of  water4 ,combination would 
indeed be effected1 but there would be a
  residue in the container of just      
one-half pound of oxygen4 ,the mass of  
oxygen that has combined will weigh     
exactly eight times as much as the      
hydrogen2 and now we know that the water
 formed will contain exactly  twice as  
many atoms of hydrogen as there are     
oxygen atoms present in  the            
combination1 uniting not only 8one by   
one10 but1 in this case1 two  to one4   

,what the law of definite proportions   
proves is that chemical  combinations   
always take place between atoms4    ,but
 there is also a law of multiple        
proportions4 ,it is  found that when one
 element forms more than one compound   
with a  second element1 the quantities  
of the first element which combine  with
 the combining weight of the second     
element are always simple               
multiples--never fractions--of the      
combining weight of the first  element4 
,we have seen that the atomic weight of 
oxygen is #af--;i4e41 #af  times heavier
 than the lightest element1 hydrogen1   
which is therefore  7on the relative    
scale of atomic weights7 #a4 ,but the   
combining  weight of oxygen is          
#h--;i4e41 eight parts of oxygen will   
combine  with so many parts 7combining  
weight7 of some other element4 ,suppose 
we take for example nitrogen4 ,now the  
combining weight of  nitrogen is #ad1   
and its atomic weight is also #ad4      
,fourteen parts  of nitrogen will       

combine therefore with eight parts of   
oxygen4 ,but  fourteen parts of nitrogen
 will also combine with four simple     
multiples  of eight parts of oxygen1    
forming in all five different compound  
substances4 ,for example3     #ad parts 
of nitrogen combine with #af or #bx#h   
parts of oxygen4     #ad parts of       
nitrogen combine with #bd or #cx#h parts
 of oxygen4     #ad parts of nitrogen   
combine with #cb or #dx#h parts of      
oxygen4     #ad parts of nitrogen       
combine with #dj or #ex#h parts of      
oxygen4    ,john ,dalton advanced a     
theory satisfactorily to explain why in 
successive compounds the amount of      
oxygen goes up in jumps1 and why  this  
jump in each case is equivalent to the  
combining weight of oxygen4  ,the       
regular jumps in the case of the five   
nitrogen compounds simply  mean that one
 more atom has entered1 in each         
successive case1 into  combination4     
,these combining weights1 as we have    
seen1 simply represent  the relative    

weights of the various elements4        
8,atomic weight0 is merely  the name    
given by ,dalton to the relative        
combining weights of the  atoms4 ,he had
 no information as to how many atoms    
actually combine in  making a compound1 
much less of the actual weight of the   
single atoms  of the elements4    ,nor  
did he know why atoms combine at all1 in
 any proportions1  but1 being a         
thorough-going ,newtonian1 both his     
physical theory and  his chemical theory
 have a common basis in ,newton's       
doctrine of  mutually repulsive atoms4  
,if an element ,a unites with an element
 ,b1 the  repulsion of the atoms of ,b  
from one another must tend1 he thought1 
to  the formation of a binary compound4 
8,binary compounds must first be        
formed1 then ternary1 and so on1 till   
the repulsion of the atoms of ,b        
refuses to admit any more40#bh    ,while
 we have traveled quite a distance in   
atomic and chemical theory  since the   
days of ,john ,dalton 7#agff-ahdd71 it  

is to the everlasting  credit of this   
7at the time7 obscure and               
poverty-stricken teacher  of mathematics
 and physics that he gave us1 in #ahjh1 
8,a new ,system  of ,chemical           
,philosophy0 which unites the atomic    
theory of modern  science1 first        
advanced by his admirers and            
contemporaries1 ,baron ,j4 ,j4          
,berzelius 7#aggi-ahdh7 and ,sir        
,humphrey ,davy 7#aggh-ahbi74    ,little
 did ,dalton dream that the 8atomic     
weight0 of the elements is  equivalent  
to the number of electrons in each atom 
of a given  substance6#bi ,or that the  
atomic number of an element1 arranged   
7successively7 in the order of their    
atomic weights1 from #a  7hydrogen7 to  
#ib 7uranium71 is an index to the number
 of positive  electrical charges on the 
atomic nucleus1 around which revolve  in
 8planetary orbits0 an equivalent number
 of negatively charged  electrons--the  
real building-stones of the ,universe4  
,,footnotes3    ,footnote #bh3          

,nicholson's ,journal1 #bi1 #adg1 #ahaa4
    ,footnote #bi3 ,on this point1 see  
,lodge1 ,sir ,oliver1 8,within the      
,atom10  ,scientific ,american1         
,november1 #aibc4                       
,,transcriber',s ,,notes      ,simple   
typographical errors have been silently 
corrected2 unbalanced  quotation marks  
were remedied when the change was       
obvious1 and  otherwise left unbalanced4
    ,punctuation1 hyphenation1 spelling 
and ligatures were made consistent  when
 a predominant preference was found in  
the original book2 otherwise  they were 
not changed4    ,the verses of the      
,invictus poem have been left as they   
are in the  printed version4 ,a ,table  
of ,contents has been added4