Chemistry, Physics, Combination

Aristotle is generally interpreted as having devoted little attention to Chemistry. However, though the relevant passages are not nearly as prominent as are his works on Physics, Psychology, Astronomy, and Biology, in On Generation and Corruption, he does examine a pattern that is characteristic of Chemistic events--combination, which entails simultaneous reciprocity.  In other words, on that analysis, if A and B 'combine', they simultaneously act upon one another.  But, then, what remains unclear is as which of the four Causes of Physics such combination can be classified, i. e. simultaneous reciprocity seems to be a characteristic of none of them.  In the absence of further clarification, Chemistry seems to elude a reduction to his Physics.

Philosophy and Chemistry

Modern Philosophy seems to accept the popular genealogy of Chemistry as a refinement of Alchemy.  Even after its stoichiometric systematization by Lavoisier, Kant's characterization of Chemistry as a haphazard "art"  remains seemingly unchallenged, e. g. Whitehead's studies of 'Science' barely acknowledge it.  Perhaps the philosophical status of Chemistry is epitomized by how its most significant contribution to Modern Philosophy--Locke's Boyle-inspired Primary Qualities--becomes a mere footnote to the rising dominance of Secondary Qualities, i. e. of Phenomenalism.  Nevertheless, Philosophy is born as Chemistry, i. e. in the notion that perceivable reality is constituted by permutations of often hidden substrata, e. g. of Water, Fire, Air, Atoms, etc., an ancestry that becomes obscured by the non-'materialist' doctrines of, notably, Pythagoras and Parmenides.  Even the neo-pre-Socratisms of Nietzsche and Heidegger fail to appreciate that lineage.

Causality, Chemistry, Catalyst

Kant's main variation on Hume's concept of Causality--that 'constant conjunction' is, more accurately, 'ordered succession'--accepts the Atomism of the latter, i. e. that such a succession, too, is a relation between two representations.  Now, while that Atomism might be suitable to Newtonian Mechanistic Physics, it seems inadequate to another Natural Science, namely Chemistry, which studies changes that ensue from the compresence  of several factors, e. g. of two elements and heat.  Accordingly, non-Atomistic patterns, such as Concrescence or Emergence, seem to better interpret 'chemical changes' than does Atomistic Causality.  Indeed, the event usually characterized as 'Gravity causing an apple to fall on Newton', can also be interpreted as the compresence of an apple-bearing tree, Newton, and gravitational pull, into which a gust of wind enters.  In those terms, the decisive factor is the gust of wind functioning as a 'catalyst'.

Acceleration and Quantification

As is clearly expressed in 'go faster than', and in 'increase speed', the concept of Acceleration is essentially indefinite, i. e. once initiated, acceleration is, in itself, undelimited.  In contrast, to quantify is to delimit.  Hence, 'd/t-squared', in which both d and t are finite, is an inadequate definition of A.  No exception to that judgment is either when t is instantaneous, or when it 'approaches Infinity'--in the former, an instant is a special case of an interval, while in the latter, 'Infinity' is the product of an hypostatization of the modifier 'indefinite', and, thus, entails a surreptitious introduction of delimitation into the definition.

Acceleration, Ratio. Quotient

Though ratios are mathematically represented as quotients, there are important distinctions between the two relations.  First, 'is proportionate to', but not 'divided by', is a symmetrical relation.  Second, a ratio, unlike a quotient, does not reduce to a single numerical value, which means that a quotient with a ratio as either divisor or dividend is ill-formed.  Nevertheless, the standard Physics representation of Acceleration suppresses both these distinctions, beginning with its representation, as a quotient, Velocity, which, fundamentally is a ratio between measured Distance and measured Time, the symmetry of which is plain from the experiential equivalence of 'take less time' and 'cover more ground' as meanings of 'go faster'.  The representation of that ratio as a quotient, in turn, facilitates the further representation of it as part of a second quotient, i. e. in Velocity/Time.  So, that 'go faster' is easily comprehensible as an experiential concept only underscores that 'A = d/t-squared' is more contrived abstraction than insight.

Acceleration, Uniformity, Velocity

Galileo's determination that Gravity is constant means not only that its effects on distinct objects are the same, but that its effects on a single object in the course of a single event is uniform.  So, insofar as Acceleration is defined as 'increase in Velocity', uniform Acceleration means uniform change in Velocity.  On the other hand, Velocity is defined as 'change of Distance in a Time-interval'.  Hence, it is conceived as an average, and, hence, as uniform in an interval.  Therefore, the notion of Velocity is problematic, if not contradictory, in a gravitational event, as well as in any another in which Acceleration is uniform.  So, the infinitesimal analysis that reduces an interval to instantaneity concomitantly minimizes the discrepancy between Velocity qua uniformly changing, and Velocity qua constant.  In such cases, mathematical precision can also be evasive abstraction.

The Mathematics of Acceleration

By means of Quotients, distinct unequal concrete motions, i. e. distinguished by an increase in Velocity, can be represented by the formula 'Acceleration = Distance/(Time-Unit)-squared'.  Furthermore, by means of Infinitesimals, that Time-Unit, which originally represents an interval, can be conceived as approaching instantaneity, in order to satisfy proportionality to Force, which, can, in principle, be exercised in an instant.  So, insofar as the Mathematization of Physics introduces precision into the representation of Nature, i. e. beginning with the formula 'F = ma', it does so only as abstract interpretation.  On the other hand, its representation of human artifaction, i. e. of Technology, can be not merely descriptive, but prescriptive.