There exist another area, in which limited number of units - only differing in size and shape - construct a diverse reality: letters put together create a wor(l)d with meaning! The atomist argued that the atoms were like letters: if they were put together in a specific way, they would make a molecule (Epicures) which was another substance - This suggests that they might have know something about chemical reactions. The atomists used a beautiful metaphor to explain that mystery. But it was still a miracle how the atoms could be responsible for the diversity of the world, if they were all made of the same stuff. Therefore, division has to stop somewhere on something indivisible - a-tomos.Īccording to the atomists, atoms were invisible and made of the same stuff, but they differed in size and shape. Infinite division is taking away the form, i.e., the essence of the physical object, which is impossible. He reasoned that it is impossible to divide a physical object infinitely, because infinite division would create 'cosmic mush, formless and ultimately nonexistent.' The infinite divided stuff, being formless, would be unable to reconstitute itself. He also wanted to answer the question of the inner structure of matter. However, this theory was soon challenged, and one century later Democritus formulated another theory, which can be called the first atomic theory. Now if the form or the shape of a thing is that what really matters and we want to think of what that form actually is, then we could think of a substance that is flexible and able to take all possible shapes: Water!

The distinction between form (eidos, idea, essence!) and matter (body, Christian contempt for the body as the inessential) is the distinction between that what is essential and that what is accidental. The choice was not random or absurd, and one could give several reason why he made this choice.

The other holds that the world is made up from many different stuffs, matter that in its simplest state retains the distinct qualities that produce all the varied substances we encounter in the ordinary world of experience.īefore Berzelius made in his 'Transaction of Physics, Chemistry & Mineralogy' of 1818 the choice for the latter, a long history of speculation and research on the matter had shaped many intuitions and conflicting concepts.Īs early as the 6th century BD, Thales of Milete had answered the question about the inner structure of matter according to the first option: Everything is Water.

The one says that the world is all of a piece, formed from the same stuff, a single kind of matter than can be rearranged to build all the variety that we see.

There had been roughly two answers, as Levenson points out:

The questions that were answered were, however, from a much older date.įrom the early Greek period on, there had been speculations about the internal structure of matter.

The early figures of the science that called itself chemistry - Lavoisier, Dalton Berzelius, and Avogadro - all lived in the period roughly from the second half of the 18th century till the first half of the 19th century. The History of Chemistry: the Hunt for the AtomĬhemistry has had only a short history on its own. Levenson, T., 1994, Measure for measure: a musical history of science, New York: Simon & Schuster. G., 1973, Introduction to Concepts and Theories in Physical Science, 2nd ed., Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company,

Lavoisier atomic theory