Jon, List: You are right, of course. I was well aware of this usage, I can’t imagine what I was thinking of.
Thanks for correcting my lapse of memory. Nevertheless, the basic fact remains unchanged, this term is a CSP special usage in linguistics, logic, and chemistry, is it not? Or, am I in error on this point also? Cheers Jerry Sent from my iPad > On Mar 30, 2019, at 7:23 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Jerry C., List: > > The phrase is of Peirce's construction, on multiple occasions. > > CSP: In a chemical molecule, each loose end of one atom is joined to a loose > end, which it is assumed must belong to some other atom, although in the > vapor of mercury, in argon, etc., two loose ends of the same atom would seem > to be joined; and why pronounce such hermaphroditism impossible? Thus the > chemical molecule is a medad, like a complete proposition. (CP 3.469; 1897) > > CSP: It will be convenient to begin with a little a priori chemistry. An > atom of helion, neon, argon, xenon, crypton, appears to be a medad (if I may > be allowed to form a patronymic from μηδέν). Argon gives us, with its zero > valency, the one single type A. (CP 4.309; 1902) > > CSP: ... witness the chemical elements, of which the "groups," or vertical > columns of Mendeléeff's table, are universally and justly recognized as ever > so much more important than the "series," or horizontal ranks in the same > table. Those columns are characterized by their several valencies, thus: He, > Ne, A, Kr, X are medads ... (CP 1.289; 1906) > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman > www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > >> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 7:02 PM Jerry LR Chandler >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> List, Gary: >>> On Mar 30, 2019, at 2:21 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>> >>> In chemistry, a medad is an atom of valency zero, >> >> As far as I am aware, the term “medad” is not now used in the chemical >> sciences and I can not recall ever seeing this term in the technical >> literature of the chemical sciences. >> >> Gary, is this phrase of your personal construction? >> >> Cheers >> >> Jerry > > ----------------------------- > PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON > PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] > . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] > with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at > http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm . > > > >
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
