In human chemistry, the human molecule is the atomic or chemical definition of a person. [1] Said another way, from the perspective of chemical reactions between people, e.g. a couple forming reaction:

A + B → AB (combination reaction)

The reactants (A + B) and products (AB) in the reaction are technically "molecules" no different than any other molecule in the universe. A molecule, by definition, is a structure comprised of two or more atoms. [14] The human structure is no exemption. The term human molecule was coined in December of 1869 by French historian Hippolyte Taine. [16]

Human chemistry, according to this perspective, is the study of human molecules and the structures they form. As such, the "human molecule" is the central subject of study in human chemistry.

In human thermodynamics, sets of interactive human molecules confined to energetically-regulated boundaried systems constitute thermodynamic systems, i.e. working bodies, according to which the laws and principles of chemical thermodynamics apply. The first calculations for the empirical molecular formula for the human being were made independently in April of 2000 by American limnologists Robert Sterner and James Elser and in September of 2002 by American chemical engineer Libb Thims. [12] In modern atomic detail, according to mass composition estimates, the human being is a twenty-six element molecule, as shown above.

History
The earliest views of what the "human being" is include French philosopher Rene Decartes' 1637 animal machine hypothesis, the human motor view in the 18th century, German polymath Johann von Goethe's view (see: Goethe's human chemistry) of people as a type of reactive chemical species, and English chemist Humphry Davy's 1813 point atom view of man. [6] To complicate matter, in 1869 Russian chemist Dmitri Mendeleyev had famously arranged the total 66-known elements at the time into a periodic table, listed in order of atomic weights, in such a manner that their properties repeated in a series of periodic intervals. [3] Following this point in history, it was beginning to become apparent that the human being may be a type of molecule.

In 1869, in the preface to the book On Intelligence, French historian Hippolyte Taine stated ‘it is now admitted that the laws which rule formation, nutrition, locomotion, for bird or reptile, are but one example and application of more general laws which rule the formation, nutrition, locomotion, of every animal.’ He continues ‘in the same way we begin to admit that the laws which rule the development of religious conceptions, literary creations, scientific discoveries, in a nation, are only an application and example of laws that rule this same development at every moment and with all men.’ In other terms, Taine states, ‘the historian studies psychology in its application, and the psychologist studies history in its general forms.’ On this logic, Taine reasons: [16]

"He first notes and follows the general transformations presented by a certain human molecule, or a certain peculiar group of human molecules; and, to explain these transformations, he writes the psychology of the molecule or its group."

In sum to the preface of his book, he states that ‘for the last fifteen years I have contributed to these special psychologies’. Moreover, ‘I now attempt a general psychology.’ He notes, however, that ‘to embrace this subject completely, this theory of the Intelligence (faculty of knowing) needs a theory of the will added to it.

It soon became apparent that a human being may have a molecular formula in relation to these elements. The first to state this explicitly was American physician George Carey, who in his 1919 book Chemistry of Human Life, stated that "man's body is a chemical formula in operation." [5]

Walras and Pareto
In about 1872, in efforts to establish a generalized economic theory of human equilibriums, French economist Léon Walras began to speak of people as "economic molecules". Building on this logic, towards the end of the 19th century, Walras’ protégé French-Italian mathematical engineer Vilfredo Pareto began to define a person explicitly as a ‘human molecule’ and to further outline a sociological theory based on human molecular interactions. In his in his 1896 Cours d’Economie Politique, for instance, Pareto states:

"First we separate the study of ophelimity (economic satisfaction) from the diverse forms of utility, then we direct our attention to man himself; stripping him of a large number of his attributes, leaving out the passions, good or bad, reducing him to a kind of molecule that only acts in response to the forces of ophelimity."

This was outlined further in his 1916 Treatise on General Sociology, wherein his goal was to construct a system of sociology analogous in its essential features to the generalized physico-chemical thermodynamics system as outlined in American mathematical physicist Willard Gibbs’ 1876 On the Equilibrium of Heterogeneous Substance, the founding paper of chemical thermodynamics.

Adams' human molecules
The term "human molecule" was used in 1910 by American historian Henry Adams, who in his A Letter to American Teachers of History, a bivalent discussion on paradoxical relationship between Lord Kelvin's 1852 take on the second law as a universal tendency towards the dissipation of energy and Charles Darwin's 1859 take on evolution as a universal tendency towards the elevation of mental energy. Specifically, Adams reasoned that "the laws of thermodynamics must embrace human history in its past as well as in its early phase" and that from the point of view of a physicist, to explain the fall of potential, as embodied in the first and second law of thermodynamics, in relation to "Darwin's law of elevation", he must:

"begin with his favorite figure of gaseous nebula, and may offer to treat primitive humanity as a volume of human molecules of unequal intensities, tending to dissipate energy, and to correct the loss by concentrating mankind into a single, dense like sun."

History, then, according to Adams, "would then become a record of successive phases of contraction, divided by periods of explosion, tending always towards an ultimate equilibrium in the form of a volume of human molecules of equal intensity, without coordination." In human chemistry terms, Adams was attempting to reconcile the second law, i.e. that all natural systems are irreversible and tend to dissipate energy in their work cycles, by postulating that human systems compensate or create new energy by the act of contraction of people in the formation of cities and and world powers, similar to how the sun continuously releases energy by the gravitational contraction of mass. In modern terms, Adams' human molecule social contraction theory can be interpreted through the release of energy in the formation of new human chemical bonds in coupled coordination with the dissolution of bonds old.

Teilhard's human molecules
Another to correctly conceive of people as molecules was French philosopher Pierre Teilhard. In the years 1916 to 1955, Teilhard outlines a theory of evolution from atom to man, the latter of which he considers as a complex molecule or "human molecule" a term that he uses throughout his writings. In the article L’Energie Humaine (Human Energy), a collection of essays on morality and love, written between 1931 and 1939, for instance, he conceives of man as a “human molecule” (1936). Similarly, in his follow-up essay "Activation Energy", he theorizes that the concept of human reaction activation energy, i.e. the barrier to transition, applies to human interactions.

In his 1947 essay “The Formation of the Noosphere”, he outlines the global view that due to the growing interconnectiveness of human molecules, they are forming a layer of the mind "noo-" over the biosphere. In particular, he states “no one can deny that a network (a world network) of economic and psychic affiliations is being woven at ever increasing speed which envelops and constantly penetrates more deeply within each one of us. With every day that passes it becomes a little more impossible for us to act or think other wise than collectively.” In relation to the individual person, he concludes “the scope of each human molecule, in terms of movement, information and influence, is becoming rapidly coextensive with the whole surface of the globe” [3] In other words, according to Teilhard, human molecules are forming a connective sheath or skin around the globe of the earth.

Darwin's human molecules
The conception of a set of people as a collection of "human molecules" who interact according to the laws of physics, particularly statistical thermodynamics, whose history and future was determined by the laws of thermodynamics was first stated by American physicist Charles Galton Darwin, the great grandson of Charles Darwin, in his 1952 book The Next Million years. [4]

Müller's human molecules
In the 1998 article "Human Societies: A Curious Application of Thermodynamics", Venezuelan chemical engineer Erich Müller defined humans to be analogous to molecules (human molecules), then quantified inter human molecular love and hate in terms of basic thermodynamic pair bonds, and quantified social forces as a type of van der Waals dispersion force. [9] In 2006, Müller was interviewed by journalist Laura Gallagher, with Reporter magazine, for his popularity for his invigorating thermodynamic lectures in which he draws analogies between molecules and people. [10]

Empirical molecular formula
The first calculations of the empirical molecular formula for the human being were made, independently, in April of 2000 by American limnologists Robert Sterner and James Elser and in September of 2002 by American chemical engineer Libb Thims. [15] Sterner and Elser published there results in the 2002 book Ecological Stoichiometry: the Biology of Elements from Molecules to the Biosphere and Thims published his results in the 2002 manuscript Human Thermodynamics (Volume One), in the 2005 IoHT Molecular Evolution Table (online), and in the 2007 book Human Chemistry (Volume One). [12]

Sterner and Elser state, in chapter one, that “from the information on the quantities of individual elements, we can calculate the stoichiometric formula for a living human being to be”, taking cobalt (Co) as unity: [11]

H375,000,000 O132,000,000 C85,700,000 N6,430,000 Ca1,500,000 P1,020,000 S206,000 Na183,000 K177,000

Cl127,000 Mg40,000 Si38,600 Fe2,680 Zn2,110 Cu76 I14 Mn13 F13 Cr7 Se4 Mo3 Co1

This amounts to a 22-element human empirical molecular formula. They concludes “this formula combines all compounds in a human being into a single abstract ‘molecule’”. They continue, “our main purpose in introducing this formula for the ‘human molecule’ is to stimulate you to begin to think about how every human being represents the coming together of atoms in proportions that are, if not constant, at least bounded and obeying some rules”.

Thims states, on page 190 (in the 2002 manuscript), as based on a mass percent table of the 26-elements found to have function in the human body, that at approximately 200,000 years ago, "the universe had expanded/reacted enough ... to form a molecule made of these specific elements that we now define as homo sapien" as can be represented by the following "crude empirical formula for the molecular human", taking vanadium (V) as unity: [13]


This amounts to be a 26-element human empirical molecular formula. Thims concludes "by describing the existence of a human being in this form we are by no means making attempts to degrade our existence, we are only trying to help elucidate our understanding of this existence."

Thims' human molecules
The first book on the subject of the "human molecule" was the 2008 The Human Molecule by American chemical engineer Libb Thims. [20] The need or drive for Thims to calculate the molecular formula originated from the need in a short chapter in newly forming manuscript (2001-2004) Human Thermodynamics, called "What Happens to a Person When They Die" (a precursor to science of cessation thermodynamics), to define exactly, from a fundamental particle point of view, what exactly is a "human being". In other words, what fundamental particles constitute the totality of a person at the moment of death, in both bodily structure form and bond structure form, i.e. if these quantities are to be conserved according to the law of energy-matter conservation? [8] Subsequently, from a chemical point of view or first law of thermodynamics point of view, the composition of a person technically is a 26-element molecule combined with its substrate materials (personal wealth) and consortium of interpersonal human chemical bonds.

Human chemical reactions
The dynamic evolving attachment of human molecules together into structures, e.g. A≡B, such as marriage pairs, friendships, family units, etc., actuates according to the function of human chemical bonds. The rearrangement of bonds, the formation of new bonds, or the dissolution of old bonds, defines the process of a human chemical reaction, such as shown below:

A + B → AB (combination reaction)

AB → A + B (dissolution reaction)

Human thermodynamics
In human thermodynamics, a set of human molecules partitioned off by an "energetic boundary", i.e. a quantitative spatial demarcation, such as a town boarder, a social barrier, state lines, corporate boundaries, occupational orbitals, social circles, family boundaries, etc., comprise a closed thermodynamic system of working molecules, i.e. a working body in the words of Clausius, according to which first and second law energy balances apply in the production of system external work W due to the action of cyclical solar heat input Qin.

Recent views
In the 2007 economic thermodynamics book Money: Virtual Energy - Economy through the Prism of Thermodynamics, Russian bioelectrochemist Octavian Ksenzhek states that: "the economy of mankind is a very large and extremely complicated system ... people are the 'molecules' of which it consists", and that "various associations of people constitute its structural components." [23]

Objections to
Since the 1809 publication of Goethe's Elective Affinities, wherein the characters are said to mirror the activities and behaviors of the chemicals, there has been a never-ending stream of criticism regarding the chemical nature of the human being. [21] In 1810, for instance, Goethe's fellow author and neighbor Christoph Wieland sent a letter (which he suggested should be burned after it is read) to his close friend German philologist and archeologist Karl Böttiger stating that: [22]


In modern terms, the debate still continues. According to recent Internet polls, about 57% of people agree that they are a giant molecule. [17] Likewise, according to standard molecular evolution tables, it is visually-obvious that humans are evolved molecules. In spite of these known perspectives, many maintain that humans are in some way different than molecules, particularly when it comes to choice and free will. In 1996, for instance, Austrian-born American theoretical physicist Fritjof Capra stated incorrectly that "human beings can choose whether and how to obey a social rule; molecules cannot choose whether or not they should interact." [18] Likewise, in 2007 Canadian chemist Stephen Lower considered the following statement:

"Human chemistry is the study of reactions between individuals who are viewed as chemical species and with the energy, entropy, and work that quantify these processes. In modern human chemistry, people are viewed as chemical species, or specifically human molecules, A or B, and processes such as marriage or divorce are viewed as chemical reactions between individuals..."

to be "crackpot", meaning it is something akin to an eccentric or lunatic notion, and listed it among a grouping of pseudoscience subjects. [19]

See also

• Human particle

References
1. (a) Thims, Libb. (2007). Human Chemistry (Volume One), (preview), (ch. 2: "The Human Molecule", pgs. 15-35). Morrisville, NC: LuLu.
(b) Thims, Libb. (2008). The Human Molecule, (preview). Morrisville, NC: LuLu.
(c) Sterner, Robert W. and Elser, James J. (2002). Ecological Stoichiometry: the Biology of Elements from Molecules to the Biosphere, (chapter one), (pg. 3, 47, 135). Date: Oct. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
2. Molecular Evolution Table - Institute of Human Thermodynamics
3. Strathern, Paul. (2000). Mendeleyev’s Dream – the Quest for the Elements. New York: Berkley Book.
4. Darwin, Charles G. (1952). The Next Million Years (pg. 26). London: Rupert Hart-Davis.
5. Carey, George W. (1919). The Chemistry of Human Life. Los Angeles:The Chemistry of Life Co.
6. Rabinbach, A. (1990). The Human Motor – Energy, Fatigue, and the Origins of Modernity. Berkeley: University of California Press.
7. Adams, Henry. (1910). A Letter to American Teachers of History. Google Books, Scanned PDF. Washington.
8. Thims, Libb. (2002). Human Thermodynamics (Volume One). Chicago: Institute of Human Thermodynamics.
9. Müller , Erich. A. (1998). “Human Societies: a Curious Application of Thermodynamics.” Chemical Engineering Education, Vol. 1, No. 3, Summer.
10. Gallagher, Laura. (2006). “A Thermodynamic Personality: Interview with Erich Müller”, Reporter, Issue 162, 24 February.
11. Sterner, Robert W. and Elser, James J. (2002). Ecological Stoichiometry: the Biology of Elements from Molecules to the Biosphere, (chapter one), (pg. 3, 47, 135). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
12. (a) Thims, Libb. (2002). Human Thermodynamics (Volume One), Date: Sept. Chicago: Institute of Human Thermodynamics.
(b) Sterner, Robert W. and Elser, James J. (2002). Ecological Stoichiometry: the Biology of Elements from Molecules to the Biosphere, (chapter one), (pg. 3, 47, 135). Date: Oct. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
(c) Note: Thims only became aware of Sterner's calculation on February 17, 2008 after doing a Google book search on keywords "human molecule thermodynamics"; Thims then emailed Sterner within the hour.
13. The formula shown is the more accurate 2005-version (as found in the IoHT's molecular evolution table, ref. #2 above). The 2002 calculation was based on less-accurate mass percent data sets, taking nickel as unit.
14. Molecule (definition): “a molecule may be thought of either as a structure built of atoms bound together by chemical forces or as a structure in which two or more nuclei are maintained in some geometrical configuration by attractive forces from a surrounding swarm of negative electrons.” Source: Licker, Mark D. (2002). McGraw-Hill Concise Encyclopedia of Chemistry. New York: McGraw-Hill.
15. Source for Sterner date: "I have attached the spreadsheet used to construct that formula for a human molecule in our book. My copy of the spreadsheet is dated April 18, 2000. I cannot say exactly when we made the calculations. That date might have to do with some modification of the figure or some other edit. At any rate, it gives an indication." (email communicate from Robert Sterner to Libb Thims on February 20, 2008).
16. Taine, Hippolyte. (1870). De l’Intelligence (On Intelligence), (Part I, Part II), (pg. xi-xii), London: L. Reeve and Co.
17. Running Poll: "Are You A Giant Molecule?" (by English physicist Jim Eadon) - 2001-2008+.
18. Capra, Fritjof. (1996). The Web of Life - a New Scientific Understanding of Living Systems, (pg. 212). New York: Anchor Books.
19. Lower, Stephen. (2007). “List of Flim-flam, Pseudoscience, and Nonsense”, Online listings.
20. Thims, Libb. (2008). The Human Molecule, (preview). Morrisville, NC: LuLu.
21. Tantillo, Astrida O. (2001). Goethe's Elective Affinities and the Critics. New York: Camden House.
22. Wieland, Christoph Martin. (1810). "Letter to Karl August Böttiger" July 16. Weimar. Quoted from Tantillo 2001, pg. 9-10.
23. Ksenzhek, Octavian S. (2007). Money: Virtual Energy - Economy through the Prism of Thermodynamics, (pgs. 162). Universal Publishers.

Further reading

• Humans resemble molecules? , Pravda, 24 May 2004
• Fuller, Steve. (2004). "I am not a molecule", New Scientist, Issue 2502, June 4th.

External links

• The Human Molecule - HumanMolecule.net
• Human molecule - Institute of Human Thermodynamics (Glossary)
• Human molecules - WikiSocial, a Wikia wiki