|A book section from American protein chemist Scott Neuhaus’ 2005 book Handbook for the Deep Ecologist, with the 2012 upgrade term “chnopsology” overlaid in gray, wherein he discusses how English chemist John Emsley’s 2001 Nature’s Building Blocks, was an inspiration for his CHNOPS chapter, a discussion of the six elements, as Neuhaus says, “most critical to life”. |
● Biochemistry → The study of ‘powered CHNOPS systems’ (Henry Swan, 1974)
The term "chnopsology" is an Hmolpedia-coined term, first suggested as an upgrade replacement for the now-defunct term "biology" (see: defunct theory of life), introduced in a set of June 2012 Hmolpedia forum threads discussions between Belgian psychologist-philosopher David Bossens and Americans civil-ecological engineer Jeff Tuhtan and electrochemical engineer Libb Thims, namely in threads: “maximum entropy and heat death” (Jun 14), “life” (Jun 16), “misrepresentation” (Jun 20), and “animated organisms” (Jun 23). In the "life" thread, post #15, Thims commented in response to a query by Bossens:
"Re: “[we] can[’t] deny that bio/whatever-ology is different from a rock, a table, a chair, glass...”, watch the following chemical party video. The carbon atom is the central entity of your “whatever-ology” subject, i.e. “carbon-ology”, being that carbon is a light-sensitive atom, meaning that it has the property of flexibility and hence animation and as such is very “reactive” or the “life of the part” as the video shows. The argon (Ar) is like the “rock, table, chair, glass”, notice how she is very non-reactive (although, technically, glass is silicon-based; rock can be seen has having a certain amount of reactivity, in the big history geochemical view of earth structure change). More correctly, however, I would say that “CHNOPS-ology” (chnops-ology or chnopsology), is the namesake you are looking for; e.g. Erik Andrulis’ 2012 abstract (panbioism):“This theory is based upon a straightforward and non-mathematical core model and proposes unique yet empirically consistent explanations for major phenomena including, but not limited to, why living systems [animate systems] are predominantly CHNOPS (carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus, and sulfur).”
Notice how the questionable term "living system" easily drops out of the definition, and can easily be rewritten using the updated substitution of "animate systems", a term we all agree upon. I’ve used the CHNOPS mnemonic as well before, back in circa 2003, when I wrote out a memory crick to help memorize the human molecular formula. I’ll start an Hmolpedia CHNOPS article soon, to help with the matter (being that there are numerous CHNOPS articles around [the internet])."
The term "chnopsology" was first used as a dead link on the animate organism page (23 Jun 2012) and used a second time as a dead link on the Gerald Joyce page (24 Jun 2012), upon which the chnopsology Hmolpedia article (this page) was started (24 Jun 2012), for lack of a better term (in replacement of biology); although, to note, the alternative term animate science, used as a dead link on many pages has been also employed as an alternative synonym, themed on the well-established term "animate thermodynamics"; the alternative (animate science), however, in itself, does not seem to exactly capture the essence of what was in old defined as "biology", in the sense that something such as a windmill or a Hero hydrostatic automaton can both be considered "animate", but not necessarily "alive" (olden term) or "chemically reactive" (modern view) in a perceptual desire-directed motion, in the sense that the hydrogen atoms wants to bond with the oxygen atom; although what we call "want" technically is the result of the action of the exchange force acting on the bodies in question.
● Life terminology upgrades
1. (a) Neuhaus, Scott. (2005). Handbook for the Deep Ecologist: What Everyone Should Know About the Self, Environment, and the Planet (§:CHNOPS and the Cycles of Life, pgs. 23-; about the author, pgs. 125-). iUniverse.
(b) Scott J. Neuhaus (about) – ScottNeuhaus.com.
(c) Emsley, John. (2001). Nature’s Building Blocks. Oxford University Press.