Lavoisier Quotes

Dans la nature rien ne se crée, rien ne se perd, tout change. In nature nothing is created, nothing is lost, everything changes.

{Comment to Delambre on chemist Antoine Lavoisier's execution during the French Revolution} Only a moment to cut off that head and a hundred years may not give us another like it.

The result of these cumulative efforts to investigate the cell—to investigate life at the molecular level—is a loud, clear, piercing cry of “design!” The result is so unambiguous and so significant that it must be ranked as one of the greatest achievements in the history of science. The discovery rivals those of Newton and Einstein, Lavoisier and Schrödinger, Pasteur, and Darwin.

76. David Hume – Treatise on Human Nature; Essays Moral and Political; An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding 77. Jean-Jacques Rousseau – On the Origin of Inequality; On the Political Economy; Emile – or, On Education, The Social Contract 78. Laurence Sterne – Tristram Shandy; A Sentimental Journey through France and Italy 79. Adam Smith – The Theory of Moral Sentiments; The Wealth of Nations 80. Immanuel Kant – Critique of Pure Reason; Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals; Critique of Practical Reason; The Science of Right; Critique of Judgment; Perpetual Peace 81. Edward Gibbon – The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire; Autobiography 82. James Boswell – Journal; Life of Samuel Johnson, Ll.D. 83. Antoine Laurent Lavoisier – Traité Élémentaire de Chimie (Elements of Chemistry) 84. Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison – Federalist Papers 85. Jeremy Bentham – Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation; Theory of Fictions 86. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe – Faust; Poetry and Truth 87. Jean Baptiste Joseph Fourier – Analytical Theory of Heat 88. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel – Phenomenology of Spirit; Philosophy of Right; Lectures on the Philosophy of History 89. William Wordsworth – Poems 90. Samuel Taylor Coleridge – Poems; Biographia Literaria 91. Jane Austen – Pride and Prejudice; Emma 92. Carl von Clausewitz – On War 93. Stendhal – The Red and the Black; The Charterhouse of Parma; On Love 94. Lord Byron – Don Juan 95. Arthur Schopenhauer – Studies in Pessimism 96. Michael Faraday – Chemical History of a Candle; Experimental Researches in Electricity 97. Charles Lyell – Principles of Geology 98. Auguste Comte – The Positive Philosophy 99. Honoré de Balzac – Père Goriot; Eugenie Grandet 100. Ralph Waldo Emerson – Representative Men; Essays; Journal 101. Nathaniel Hawthorne – The Scarlet Letter 102. Alexis de Tocqueville – Democracy in America 103. John Stuart Mill – A System of Logic; On Liberty; Representative Government; Utilitarianism; The Subjection of Women; Autobiography 104. Charles Darwin – The Origin of Species; The Descent of Man; Autobiography 105. Charles Dickens – Pickwick Papers; David Copperfield; Hard Times 106. Claude Bernard – Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine 107. Henry David Thoreau – Civil Disobedience; Walden 108. Karl Marx – Capital; Communist Manifesto 109. George Eliot – Adam Bede; Middlemarch 110. Herman Melville – Moby-Dick; Billy Budd 111. Fyodor Dostoevsky – Crime and Punishment; The Idiot; The Brothers Karamazov 112. Gustave Flaubert – Madame Bovary; Three Stories 113. Henrik Ibsen – Plays 114. Leo Tolstoy – War and Peace; Anna Karenina; What is Art?; Twenty-Three Tales 115. Mark Twain – The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn; The Mysterious Stranger 116. William James – The Principles of Psychology; The Varieties of Religious Experience; Pragmatism; Essays in Radical Empiricism 117. Henry James – The American; The Ambassadors 118. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche – Thus Spoke Zarathustra; Beyond Good and Evil; The Genealogy of Morals;The Will to Power 119. Jules Henri Poincaré – Science and Hypothesis; Science and Method 120. Sigmund Freud – The Interpretation of Dreams; Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis; Civilization and Its Discontents; New Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis 121. George Bernard Shaw – Plays and Prefaces

Life is a chemical process.

We must trust to nothing but facts: These are presented to us by Nature, and cannot deceive. We ought, in every instance, to submit our reasoning to the test of experiment, and never to search for truth but by the natural road of experiment and observation.

Nothing is born, nothing dies.

Reflexão de Lavoisier ao descobrir que lhe haviam roubado a carteira: nada se perde, tudo muda de dono.

The human mind adjusts itself to a certain point of view, and those who have regarded nature from one angle, during a portion of their life, can adopt new ideas only with difficulty.

Lavoisier's wife's, let us repeat, translated a s***load of science books into another language just so her husband, audience of one, could understand what they said.

A hundred years after his death, a statue of Lavoisier was erected in Paris and much admired until someone pointed out that it looked nothing like him. Under questioning the sculptor admitted that he had used the head of the mathematician and philosopher the Marquis de Condorcet—apparently he had a spare—in the hope that no one would notice or, having noticed, would care.

The science of genetics is in a transition period, becoming an exact science just as the chemistry in the times of Lavoisier, who made the balance an indispensable implement in chemical research.

This theory [the oxygen theory] is not as I have heard it described, that of the French chemists, it is mine (elle est la mienne); it is a property which I claim from my contemporaries and from posterity.

The attempt of Lavoisier to reform chemical nomenclature is premature. One single experiment may destroy the whole filiation of his terms; and his string of sulphates, sulphites, and sulphures, may have served no end than to have retarded the progress of science by a jargon, from the confusion of which time will be requisite to extricate us.

Rien ne se cree, rien ne se perd

You have heard of the new chemical nomenclature endeavored to be introduced by Lavoisier, Fourcroy, &c. Other chemists of this country, of equal note, reject it, and prove in my opinion that it is premature, insufficient and false. These latter are joined by the British chemists; and upon the whole, I think the new nomenclature will be rejected, after doing more harm than good. There are some good publications in it, which must be translated into the ordinary chemical language before they will be useful.

We all teach ... the chemistry of Lavoisier and Gay-Lussac.

Science would not be what it is if there had not been a Galileo, a Newton or a Lavoisier, any more than music would be what it is if Bach, Beethoven and Wagner had never lived. The world as we know it is the product of its geniuses—and there may be evil as well as beneficent genius—and to deny that fact, is to stultify all history, whether it be that of the intellectual or the economic world.

the groundbreakers in many sciences were devout believers. Witness the accomplishments of Nicolaus Copernicus (a priest) in astronomy, Blaise Pascal (a lay apologist) in mathematics, Gregor Mendel (a monk) in genetics, Louis Pasteur in biology, Antoine Lavoisier in chemistry, John von Neumann in computer science, and Enrico Fermi and Erwin Schrodinger in physics. That’s a short list, and it includes only Roman Catholics; a long list could continue for pages. A roster that included other believers—Protestants, Jews, and unconventional theists like Albert Einstein, Fred Hoyle, and Paul Davies—could fill a book.

A revolution is more than the destruction of a political system. It implies the awakening of human intelligence, the increasing of the inventive spirit tenfold, a hundredfold; it is the dawn of a new, science — the science of men like Laplace, Lamarck, Lavoisier. It is a revolution in the minds of men, more than in their institutions.

The result, therefore, of our present inquiry is, that we find no vestige of a beginning - no prospect of an end.

{Recalling Professor Ira Remsen's remarks (1895) to a group of his graduate students about to go out with their degrees into the world beyond the university:} He talked to us for an hour on what was ahead of us; cautioned us against giving up the desire to push ahead by continued study and work. He warned us against allowing our present accomplishments to be the high spot in our lives. He urged us not to wait for a brilliant idea before beginning independent research, and emphasized the fact the Lavoisier's first contribution to chemistry was the analysis of a sample of gypsum. He told us that the fields in which the great masters had worked were still fruitful; the ground had only been scratched and the gleaner could be sure of ample reward.

About eight days ago I discovered that sulfur in burning, far from losing weight, on the contrary, gains it; it is the same with phosphorus; this increase of weight arises from a prodigious quantity of air that is fixed during combustion and combines with the vapors. This discovery, which I have established by experiments, that I regard as decisive, has led me to think that what is observed in the combustion of sulfur and phosphorus may well take place in the case of all substances that gain in weight by combustion and calcination; and I am persuaded that the increase in weight of metallic calyxes is due to the same cause... This discovery seems to me one of the most interesting that has been made since Stahl and since it is difficult not to disclose something inadvertently in conversation with friends that could lead to the truth I have thought it necessary to make the present deposit to the Secretary of the Academy to await the time I make my experiments public.

In Carnot’s day, however, there was still no knowledge of the particles of the matter; Atomic theory was way in the future; also, the prevailing belief was that heat was some form of primeval liquid that, when absorbed by any material, caused it to be hot (somewhat the way an alcoholic beverage causes a warm sensation in our throats). This liquid was called caloric (by Antoine Lavoisier, in 1787).

When the fermentation is over and the troubling parts subsided, the wine will be fine and good, and cheer the hearts of those that drink it.”41 Franklin was wrong, sadly wrong, about the French Revolution, though he would not live long enough to learn it. Le Veillard would soon lose his life to the guillotine. So would Lavoisier the chemist, who had worked with him on the Mesmer investigation. Condorcet, the economist who had accompanied

Antoine and Marie-Anne de Lavoisier held out for Lamanon the prospect of something he had not even known he was missing till that day in May—not so much marriage between equals, although that did seem true of them, or even marriage based on love, although that was obviously the case as well, but the happy union of science and humanity within an individual, and the joy that was possible when one person, so self-integrated, encountered another such person.

A hundred years after his death, a statue of Lavoisier was erected in Paris and much admired until someone pointed out that it looked nothing like him. Under questioning the sculptor admitted that he had used the head of the mathematician and philosopher the Marquis de Condorcet—apparently he had a spare—in the hope that no one would notice or, having noticed, would care. In the second regard he was correct. The statue of Lavoisier-cum- Condorcet was allowed to remain in place for another half century until the Second World War when, one morning, it was taken away and melted down for scrap.

Unfortunately, it coincided with another type of revolution—the French one—and for this one Lavoisier was entirely on the wrong side. Not only was he a member of the hated Ferme Générale, but he had enthusiastically built the wall that enclosed Paris—an edifice so loathed that it was the first thing attacked by the rebellious citizens. Capitalizing on this, in 1791 Marat, now a leading voice in the National Assembly, denounced Lavoisier and suggested that it was well past time for his hanging. Soon afterward the Ferme Générale was shut down. Not long after this Marat was murdered in his bath by an aggrieved young woman named Charlotte Corday, but by this time it was too late for Lavoisier. In

Nothing is lost, nothing is created, everything is transformed.

Actually it is hard to find “martyrs for science.” Though one can find examples under materialist, atheistic systems as, for example, during the French Revolution, the Academy of Sciences was closed for a year. And revolutionists did guillotine the groundbreaking chemist, Antoine Lavoisier. But Lavoisier was also an aristocrat, a Catholic and a tax collector, not correct affiliations to have during the Revolution.

But Mr. Davy would not become a doctor, for a copy of Lavoisier's Elements of Chemistry fell into his hands. Soon enough, Davy was discharged from Dr. Borlase's service because of his habit of performing explosive experiments.

Nothing is born, nothing dies. ― Antoine Lavoisier Everything is born, and everything dies; before birth, there is no death. ― Ehsan Sehgal

Combining the French passions for snails and beheadings, Lavoisier conducted a series of experiments in 1768 that proved that certain species of snails would regrow their heads after they were chopped off.

In 1794, Lavoisier was arrested with the rest of the association and quickly sentenced to death. Ever the dedicated scientist, he requested time to complete some of his research so that it would be available to posterity. To that the presiding judge famously replied, “The republic has no need of scientists.

In the sixteenth century the Reformation introduced a new idea. This was the notion that knowledge is not simply the province of ecclesiastical institutions but that, especially when it comes to matters of conscience, each man should decide for himself. The “priesthood of the individual believer” was an immensely powerful notion because it rejected the papal hierarchy, and by implication all institutional hierarchy as well. Ultimately it was a charter of independent thought, carried out not by institutions but by individuals. The early Protestants didn’t know it, but they were introducing new theological concepts that would give new vitality to the emerging scientific culture of Europe. Here is a partial list of leading scientists who were Christian: Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Brahe, Descartes, Boyle, Newton, Leibniz, Gassendi, Pascal, Mersenne, Cuvier, Harvey, Dalton, Faraday, Herschel, Joule, Lyell, Lavoisier, Priestley, Kelvin, Ohm, Ampere, Steno, Pasteur, Maxwell, Planck, Mendel. A good number of these scientists were clergymen. Gassendi and Mersenne were priests. So was Georges Lemaitre, the Belgian astronomer who first proposed the “big bang” theory for the origin of the universe. Mendel, whose discovery of the principles of heredity would provide vital support for the theory of evolution, spent his entire adult life as a monk in an Augustinian monastery. Where would modern science be without these men? Some were Protestant and some were Catholic, but all saw their scientific vocation in distinctively Christian terms.

Cuando Lavoisier subió a la, guillotina, Lagrange expresó su indignación por la estupidez de la ejecución. "Bastará sólo un momento para que su cabeza caiga, y quizá sea necesario un centenar de años, para que se produzca otra igual".

Facile a dirsi per chi non conosce le logiche del paese. No, sarebbe stata fatica sprecata. Perché in paese nessuno avrebbe detto niente, nessuno avrebbe fiatato. In paese la vita vive sotto la cenere e lì resta. Degno corollario del principio di Lavoisier (niente si crea e niente si distrugge): in paese tutto si conserva e tutto si tace.

—Quiero ser científica —confesó. —¿Científica? —Sí. Una de verdad. El otro día estuve leyendo sobre Lavoisier. ¿Lo conoces? —Descubrió el oxígeno —respondí—. Con Priestley. —Bien, y era francés. Era un aristócrata, un marqués. Fue guillotinado en la Revolución francesa, y se dice que siguió parpadeando con la cabeza cortada mientras conservó la conciencia. Parpadeó diecisiete veces. Eso es un científico —concluyó Gill. Es rara. Pero me gusta.    

En Italia, Napoleón, había trabado una buena amistad con el matemático francés Gaspard Monge, padre de la geometría descriptiva. También con el insigne químico Claude Louis Berthollet, quien, junto a Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier, concebiría el método de nomenclatura química, base del sistema moderno de denominación de los compuestos químicos. Ambos científicos habían sido destacados como comisarios de Francia en la búsqueda de objetos de utilidad para la ciencia y obras de arte en la campaña de Italia. Tanta amistad alcanzaron con Bonaparte, siempre ávido de buenas ideas y de información relevante, que este les encargó

En la naturaleza nada se crea, nada se pierde, todo se transforma" Lavoisier (1743 - 1794) Antoine

Say," I said, "do you guys cross picket lines?" The ChronoGuard agents looked at each other, then at the chronographs on their wrists, then at Lavoisier. The taller of the two was the first to speak. "She's right, Mr. Lavoisier, sir. I don't mind bullying and killing innocents, and I'll follow you beyond the crunch normally, but - " "But what?" asked Lavoisier angrily. "-but I am a loyal TimeGuild member. I don't cross picket lines.

Lavoisier did not begin as a chemist, however. He first studied to be a lawyer, just like his father. But someone persuaded him to sit in on a very popular chemistry course, and young Lavoisier never thought of being a lawyer again.

20 ANTOINE LAURENT LAVOISIER 1743-1794

This hypothesis had been promoted as far back as the 1780s, by the great French chemist Antoine Lavoisier, who pictured the lungs as a torpid fireplace where food burned: “Respiration is then a combustion, admittedly very slow, but nevertheless completely analogous to that of charcoal.” Food, in other words, was fuel that animals burned in oxygen and, in so doing, generated heat with carbon dioxide as the waste product.

Lavoisier's wife surely could have used a barf emoji, had she ever looked up the origin of 'helpmeet' and shared it with Charlotte Corday. Lavoisier's wife's text: Can you even f**king believe this s**t? (Barf emoji here) Lavoisier's wife's text back from bff Corday: OMG OF COURSE GENESIS, WTF

Now up to the end of the eighteenth century, notably in the work of chemists, heat was treated as a substance, named caloric by the great French chemist Antoine Laurent Lavoisier (1743–1794), who made the first attempt to introduce the methods and concepts of physics laid down by Galileo and Newton into chemistry.