After a long time, an old man broke the silence and asked, "What do you think?" ”

"It sounds plausible, but it's mostly speculation. Pen | fun | pavilion www. ｂｉｑｕｇｅ。 info can be self-explanatory, but there are many things that have other explanations. For example, why should the same volume of gas have the same number of particles? This is just a guess, and our eyes see small particles that are not so small, so there is no way to verify them. Even if it seems plausible, it is just speculation...... As the young man said, bold assumptions. ”

A person thought about it for a long time and gave such an assessment.

It's hard to say, and a lot of what I've found before is speculation based on existing facts, but most of it has been verified.

Although it now seems that, according to the method of inductive deduction and experimental comparison written by this young man today, many of the previous conclusions are not so perfect and there are flaws.

However, these speculations seen today are completely unverifiable, and there is no chance to verify them at all: this is a subversion of the original foundation and a new interpretation, rather than a logical deduction based on the existing foundation. It's like redefining what a straight line is and what is a circle, rather than knowing what a circle is and drawing new conclusions based on everything you have.

Whose eyes can see these tiny particles? Who can see the atoms and molecules that are guessed in the article?

Moreover, the assumptions behind this series of articles are too large, and they form a perfect system on the basis of the original, giving a perfect explanation for the conclusions reached through observation. At least for now, this explanation sounds reasonable, but people still dare not jump to conclusions.

The old man who was the first to ask what everyone thought looked at the frowning and thinking people, and said with a wry smile: "In this way, let's calm down and re-examine all the assumptions of this young man, and see if there is anything that can be completely overturned." ”

This may be the only viable solution, and if there is a situation that is so unreasonable that the facts are completely contrary to the speculation, it turns out that either the facts are wrong or the speculation is wrong. If they do, then re-examine those existing facts according to the methods of perfect experiments in these articles to see if they are facts or not, or if speculation is unscientific.

It was late at night, but everyone was not sleepy, and they all buried their heads in the paper to find some loopholes that could be easily overturned.

After a while, one person said: "Assuming this young man's speculation is reasonable, then the same volume of hydrogen and Yang contain the same particles, and two volumes of hydrogen contain twice as many particles as Yang Qi." So here's the problem...... Two volumes of hydrogen and one volume of yang gas, producing two volumes of water vapor...... Although there is an effect of mercury vapor, it is largely proven. ”

"In that case, wouldn't a hydrogen atom and half a yang atom make a water? Otherwise, how could it be exactly two volumes? Then he also assumes that atoms are indivisible, that is, there is no half of the yang atom in the world, so this point is contradictory and cannot be explained. ”

Raising the paper in his hand, the speaker was a little lost. When he first saw the logic of inductive deduction, he was the first to be excited and recognize the value of it. When he saw the final hypothesis about the particles that made up the world, he was also very excited, because in this way, chemistry that relied entirely on observation finally became a real system: a logically self-consistent system.

But the more excited, the more cautious I became, and after careful scrutiny, I finally found that the whole system seemed to be inconsistent, and this excitement instantly turned into a disappointment.

However, after saying these words, someone immediately shook his head and said, "This young man obviously thought of what you said, so he proposed the difference between molecules and atoms. In this article, he talks about this problem. ”

It was he who produced a new indivisible thing, called phosphorus. It says that if you isolate the air to heat phosphorus, it will turn into a red phosphorus. Since the air is isolated, it is clear that there is no rest of the matter involved in the reaction, only a change in phosphorus itself. ”

"But white phosphorus is highly toxic, but red phosphorus is not poisonous. Therefore, he said, the properties of new molecules composed of the same kind of atoms are also different. Since this is the case with phosphorus, then so will the gases of yang and hydrogen, so he speculated that hydrogen and yang are both molecules composed of two atoms as the smallest particles. In this way, the problem of hydrogen and yang gas producing water is solved, which he says is like twins holding hands. Come to think of it, it makes sense. Maybe it's the smallest particle made up of a single hydrogen atom, or maybe it's the smallest particle made up of three hydrogens, but we just haven't found it. ”

"Yang energy consisting of two atoms is different from a molecule composed of a single or three yang energy. It's like the difference between red phosphorus and white phosphorus. This experiment has been revalidated by Lao Mu, and it is true, so it can be explained. ”

Everyone imagined the situation, and it sounded easy to understand, and it was easy to understand what it meant. And according to this hypothesis, it can indeed be justified.

Of course, there is another explanation: the number of gas particles of the same volume under the same conditions is different, so the effect of the previous effect will be produced when they are combined. It is easy to explain this problem if the lighter the gas contains fewer particles, and the heavier gas contains more particles. For example, water is actually a model of hydrogen and oxygen, but because hydrogen is lighter, two volumes of hydrogen and one volume of oxygen contain the same particles.

But this model does not quite fit the philosophical view of the people who studied the problem at this time, and from the beginning most of them believed that the world was perfect rather than disordered, and that there was a rule in it. Therefore, it is more acceptable to them that the seemingly discordant and disorderly view of the difference in the number of gas particles in the same volume is still more acceptable.

After the question was explained, the first skeptic regained his excitement, and he had accepted the hypothesis in his heart, and thought about the whole system behind it, and liked it more and more.

The rest of the people looked at it for a long time, continuing to look for loopholes in the hypothesis's own logic.

After a while, someone said: "According to this young man's hypothesis, some substances are extremely positive, and some substances are extremely negative. According to his hypothesis, it does make sense, and it can also explain some problems, such as the matter of iron and alum. ”

"But how do you explain caustic soda, salt, lime?"

"It is now accepted that quicklime produced by calcining limestone is an indivisible substance, and according to this young man it is an atom, but is it masculine or feminine?"

"If it's positive, compare it with iron, and if the quicklime is positive than iron, then throwing quicklime into the iron juice of gallium should be able to swap out iron. If it is not as strong as iron, then it is possible to replace the born lime by putting iron into lime water. ”

Although there is the concept of calcium at this time, the calcium in their hearts is not a metal, in fact, the calcium in the mainstream view at this time is actually calcium oxide.

In the same way, sodium and potassium are too active and there are no natural elements in nature, but there have been chemical experiments very early, so people think that calcium, sodium, and potassium are not a metal, but a non-metallic substance like quicklime: this fashion and think that quicklime is an indivisible thing.

They used oxide as a new element to speculate on the properties of this substance, and thus came to a conclusion that did not fit with Jian Chen's article.

So the problem is magnified even more.

"In the same way, if something like calcium is what this young man calls negative, then it should be able to react with iron to produce something like chlorine. But in fact, we found that quicklime is more willing to react with acid than with iron and charcoal. ”

But if this thing is what it calls inertia that is neither yin nor yang, it is difficult to understand why this thing can react easily with water. It's just that when it reacts with water, it doesn't release hydrogen......"

Originally, this was not a very difficult question to understand, because no one thought that there was a rule behind these chemies that could explain the reactions, and therefore all the observations and conclusions did not need to be supported by a whole set of theories behind them.

But now this set of theories seems to be trying to tie all these questions together, and if it can be done, it would be good, and to link all the observed results in a way as to why they are the same.

It is precisely because of this that the last speculation made everyone cautious to the extent that they did not dare to express their opinions. Once accepted, it is necessary to explain some facts that now seem completely contradictory.

Either the known facts are wrong, or the speculation is wrong.

Faced with this question, the middle-aged man who first questioned it used the content of the article to refute it, and he had already begun to unconsciously defend this speculation in his heart.

"Young people think that some of the things that we think are indivisible now are not really indivisible."

"Why?"

"It doesn't match his inference."

"Is that a reason? Is his inference true? ”

So this young man stubbornly believes that some of the facts that we already think are facts are not real facts. He's right, but some of the facts we think are wrong. For example, he thinks that if we use an electric stack to electrolyze saline, we actually get a stronger positive metal, but this metal is too positive, so it quickly reacts with the water, causing us to not notice the existence of that metal at all. ”

"Arrogance!"

Hearing this, someone finally became angry and rebuked, but then the middle-aged man said: "But according to the absolute perfect experiment proposed by the young man, it is not right for us to conclude that the experiment as a fact is in itself. We electrolyze salt water...... It's not just salt. From the point of view of an absolutely perfect experiment, we are indeed wrong. ”

"If we agree with his words about inductive deduction and experimental methods, we have to admit that some of the facts we have arrived at are themselves wrong."

……

This controversy continued from the shock until at last, when someone finally decided: "To put it mildly, this young man's first essay on inductive deduction and experimentation is excellent, and this can be used not only in our own disciplines, but in many disciplines." ”

"This article is definitely worth publishing. Even if it is the first part of the first book of the new year, there is no problem. I don't think anyone disagrees with that. ”

"But the rest ...... It's all an inference, and a lot of inferences sound plausible and even explain things perfectly, but after all, it's an inference or a guess. ”

"Guessing, it's okay and it's allowed. Just guessing whether it should be taken so seriously? ”

"My personal opinion is through all the articles of this young man. But first published his first article on inductive deduction and experimentation, the rest ...... The rest is only speculation after all, and it can be sent out in the last article of the booklet every month, and it must be noted that it is a speculation. ”

"As for the discovery of a new inseparable substance called phosphorus, and the fact that it has been proved by experiments that bones contain phosphorus and calcium, it is also very important, and it can be ranked in the first article of the next issue."

"Even if this is the case, this is a great honor for a young man, and it can be regarded as an explanation to Lao Mu."

After some discussion, the crowd accepted the final proposal.