The Language of Science

Abstract

IT has been said yet once again (NATURE, Feb. 2, p. 161) that 1 and 1 are not always 2. With great respect to Sir Oliver Lodge, I would suggest that there is here some confusion, if not of thought, at least of language. In the common use of our language, when we say 1 and 1 make 2, we imply that each unit suffers no change in being added to, or rather associated with, the other. The usual, that is, not the special physical or chemical or biological, meaning of 1 and 1 is 1 + 1, where + stands for “associated with, but involving no change in either.” Thus 1 (apple or mercury globule or amœba) and 1 (apple or mercury globule or amœba) always make 2 (apples or mercury globules or amœbæ). When, however, in the phrase 1 + 1, the symbol + is distinctly defined to mean (1) reacts physically with, or (2) reacts chemically with, or (3) reacts biologically with, the result, as experience shows, need not be 2. For example, 1 + 1 = 1 when + means (1) and the units are mercury globules; 1 + 1 = 4 when + means (3) and the units are amœbæ. In each of these cases a change has taken place, not a mental or an arithmetical addition.