Frases de Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier

“Nada más grande ni más sublime ha salido de las manos del hombre que el sistema métrico decimal.”

Fuente: Poirier, Jean Pierre. Lavoisier, chemist, biologist, economist. University of Pennsylvania Press, 1996. ISBN 0-8122-3365-4, pág. 311.

“En una reacción química ordinaria la masa permanece constante, es decir, la masa consumida de los reactivos es igual a la masa obtenida de los productos.”

“No debemos confiar en nada más que hechos.”

Ley de Lavoisier o ley de conservación de la masa en las reacciones químicas.

Esta traducción está esperando su revisión. ¿Es correcto?

“Un terrateniente rico no puede cultivar y mejorar su granja sin extender la comodidad y el bienestar a su alrededor. Los cultivos ricos y abundantes, con una población numerosa y un paisaje rural próspero son las recompensas por sus esfuerzos.”

“We must trust to nothing but facts”

Fuente: Poirier, Jean-Pierre y Rebecca Balinski. Lavoisier: Chemist, Biologist, Economist http://books.google.es/books?id=uFLwcEZMrOcC&pg=PA124. University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998. ISBN 0-8122-1649-0, pág. 124.

Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier: Frases en inglés

“When I began the following Work, my only object was to extend and explain more fully the Memoir which I read at the public meeting of the Academy of Sciences in the month of April 1787, on the necessity of reforming and completing the Nomenclature of Chemistry. While engaged in this employment, I perceived, better than I had ever done before, the justice of the following maxims of the Abbé de Condillac, in his System of Logic, and some other of his works. "We think only through the medium of words.—Languages are true analytical methods.—Algebra, which is adapted to its purpose in every species of expression, in the most simple, most exact, and best manner possible, is at the same time a language and an analytical method.—The art of reasoning is nothing more than a language well arranged."”

Fuente: Elements of Chemistry (1790), pp. xviii
Contexto: 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.

“We may lay it down as an incontestible axiom, that, in all the operations of art and nature, nothing is created; an equal quantity of matter exists both before and after the experiment; the quality and quantity of the elements remain precisely the same; and nothing takes place beyond changes and modifications in the combination of these elements. Upon this principle the whole art of performing chemical experiments depends: We must always suppose an exact equality between the elements of the body examined and those of the products of its analysis.”

Fuente: Elements of Chemistry (1790), p.xiii

“Thus, while I thought myself employed only in forming a Nomenclature, and while I proposed to myself nothing more than to improve the chemical language, my work transformed itself by degrees, without my being able to prevent it, into a treatise upon the Elements of Chemistry.”

Fuente: Elements of Chemistry (1790), p. 226

“The art of concluding from experience and observation consists in evaluating probabilities, in estimating if they are high or numerous enough to constitute proof. This type of calculation is more complicated and more difficult than one might think. It demands a great sagacity generally above the power of common people. The success of charlatans, sorcerors, and alchemists—and all those who abuse public credulity—is founded on errors in this type of calculation.”

Fuente: Elements of Chemistry (1790), p.xiv

“Here, then: a revolution [in science and chemistry] has taken place in an important part of human knowledge since your departure from Europe… I will consider this revolution to be well advanced and even completely accomplished if you range yourself with us. …After having brought you up to date on what is happening in chemistry, it would be well to speak to you about our political revolution. We regard it as done and without any possibility of return to the old order.”

Antoine Lavoisier and Benjamin Franklin, Rapport des commissaires chargés par le roi de l'examen du magnétisme animal (Imprimerie royale, 1784), trans. Stephen Jay Gould, "The Chain of Reason versus the Chain of Thumbs", Bully for Brontosaurus (W.W. Norton, 1991), p. 195

“We are… bound to attach the greatest importance to the preliminary step taken by Lavoisier, who is even more justly called the father of modern chemistry than Kepler is called the father of modern astronomy. The exact claims of Lavoisier to this important place in the history of chemistry have been variously stated: …since his time, and greatly through his labours, the quantitative method has been established as the ultimate test of chemical facts; the principle of this method being the rule that in all changes of combination and reaction, the total weight of the various ingredients—be they elementary bodies or compounds—remains unchanged. The science of chemistry was thus established upon an exact, a mathematical basis. By means of this method Lavoisier, utilising and analysing the results gained by himself and others before him, notably those of Priestley, Cavendish, and Black, succeeded in destroying the older theory of combustion, the so-called phlogistic theory.”

Letter to Benjamin Franklin (Feb 2, 1790) as quoted by I. Bernard Cohen, Revolution in Science (1985)