3 ms·

"If, in some cataclysm, all of scientific knowledge were to be destroyed, and only one sentence passed on to the next generation of creatures, what statement wo

"If, in some cataclysm, all of scientific knowledge were to be destroyed, and only one sentence passed on to the next generation of creatures, what statement would contain the most information in the fewest words? I believe it is the atomic hypothesis that all things are made of atoms — little particles that move around in perpetual motion, attracting each other when they are a little distance apart, but repelling upon being squeezed into one another. In that one sentence, you will see, there is an enormous amount of information about the world, if just a little imagination and thinking are applied." --Richard Feynman

Koshkin 5y ago
What's interesting is that the Ancient Greeks "knew" this but it took two thousand years to actually prove it. Now the question is: how long can it take to confirm one of the quantum gravity theories? (Quantum gravity remains the biggest unsolved problem in fundamental physics today.)
- mannykannot 5y ago
  You are right to put "knew" in quotes, as Democritus' speculation had no more support than Thales' "all is water", the four elements, the bodily humors or the celestial spheres. Knowledge lies at least as much in the justification of a fact as it does in the proposition itself.
- ithinkso 5y ago
  This is survivorship bias. They 'knew' it only retrospectively, they also 'knew' a lot of different incorrect theories. In some sense one could argue that Aristotle halted the progress of physics for about a thousand years (not related to atoms, but a general comment of what the Ancient Greek 'knew')
  - mannykannot 5y ago
    If the progress in physics really was halted for a millennium (actual physics was not moving that fast beforehand), any blame must rest with the intellectuals of that time.
    - ithinkso 5y ago
      I fully agree, I'm not blaming him. It is interesting though that maths was taught for a 1000 years from Euclid's Elements, Euclid living approximately at the same time as Aristotle, and it is still as valid today as it was 2000 years ago but physics was taught from Aristotle's teaching and it was just bonkers. Took 1000 years for someone to finally say 'wait, something's not right'

Koshkin 5y ago

What's interesting is that the Ancient Greeks "knew" this but it took two thousand years to actually prove it. Now the question is: how long can it take to confirm one of the quantum gravity theories? (Quantum gravity remains the biggest unsolved problem in fundamental physics today.)

mannykannot 5y ago
You are right to put "knew" in quotes, as Democritus' speculation had no more support than Thales' "all is water", the four elements, the bodily humors or the celestial spheres. Knowledge lies at least as much in the justification of a fact as it does in the proposition itself.
ithinkso 5y ago
This is survivorship bias. They 'knew' it only retrospectively, they also 'knew' a lot of different incorrect theories. In some sense one could argue that Aristotle halted the progress of physics for about a thousand years (not related to atoms, but a general comment of what the Ancient Greek 'knew')
- mannykannot 5y ago
  If the progress in physics really was halted for a millennium (actual physics was not moving that fast beforehand), any blame must rest with the intellectuals of that time.
  - ithinkso 5y ago
    I fully agree, I'm not blaming him. It is interesting though that maths was taught for a 1000 years from Euclid's Elements, Euclid living approximately at the same time as Aristotle, and it is still as valid today as it was 2000 years ago but physics was taught from Aristotle's teaching and it was just bonkers. Took 1000 years for someone to finally say 'wait, something's not right'