>he came up with the modern concept now known as energy, which he called vis viva I forgot that, but crediting relativity and nuclear physics to Conservation O

>he came up with the modern concept now known as energy, which he called vis viva I forgot that, but crediting relativity and nuclear physics to Conservation Of Energy still feels like a big stretch to me. Maybe Thermodynamics. >he didn't have a mechanistic view of logic, he invented the concept of possible worlds I'm not sure I understand why those two things contradict each other. He envisioned a machine doing reasoning, that's a "mechanistic view of logic" in my book. How is possible worlds related to that and why are they in tension in your opinion ? >charachteristica universalis and his introduction of binary formalization Fair enough, those two things are fairly radical for his time and very CSy. But neither is original to him, his charachteristica universalis is based on a misunderstanding of chinese ideographs, and there were people contemporary to him like John Wilkins who worked on very similar things ('philosophical languages'), the idea was in the air at the time. The binary numerals were also inspired by certain chinese texts, and some claim[1] that he plagiarised them outright from contemporaries. All said and done though, I don't think binary numbers are that important or fundamental to computers, only the idea that numbers (and abstract ideas in general) can be operated on purely syntactically without the slightest clue as to their meaning, and still yield useful results; This is an idea much older than Leibniz. Also Babbage managed to design a perfectly good computer on base-10, and binary was just one system among many in the 1940s. [1]https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314485403_Who_Discovered_the_Binary_System_and_Arithmetic_Did_Leibniz_Plagiarize_Caramuel https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314485403_Who_Disco...