Boltzmann's gas molecules (1896)
Human gas particle   (diagram)Advanced intelligence perspetive
Left: Austrian physicist Ludwig Boltzmann's 1895 drawing of gas particles in "rest position"; who in 1872 stated that "molecules are like to many individuals". [5] Center: Artistic rendition of the human particle view (or human atom, human atomism, or Daniel Bernoulli "gas particle" view) of human behavior. [6] Right: The "advanced intelligence perspective" or distant or third-party observer view is often employed when using human particle models.
In science, the human particle is the view of systems of people as collections of statistically averaged structural points or entities (or social units), described through the guise of various types of physical particle models, e.g. point atom (Davy, 1813), human atoms, human atomism, human elements, free electrons, among others. [1]

Much of this logic derives from the development of the kinetic theory of gases and statistical thermodynamics between 1850 and 1900 and how analogies were used in comparing societies of people to systems of atoms or molecules.

In the 1975 book the Macroscope: a New Scientific System, to cite one of many examples of this type of reductionist approach, French biochemist Joel de Rosnay states that: [2]

“In relation to society: we are the particles ... our glance must be directed towards the systems which surround the particles in order to better understand their interactive and evolutionary dynamics.”

Likewise, in the 2004 book Critical Mass - How One Things Leads to Another, English chemist and physicist Philip Ball argues that "to develop a physics of society" one must use the model that "particles will become people" to which he uses the term peoploids to designate human particles in computer simulations.

Critical Mass (2004)
human particles (humor)
Left: In social physics the human particle view is often employed, such as depicted above in Philip Ball's 2004 book Critical Mass, to explain mass social phenomena, such as war, revolution, fads, etc., using theories such as critical mass or tipping points [1] Right: 2013 Break.com pic of what seems to be a grade school or high school student giving a possible semi-serious answer to the question of what state—assuming here the question is referring to one of the “states” of the united states—particles, possibly humans or environmental particles, e.g. air, depending, have the most and least movement, a question to which the student answers: California (Avg. Lat: 37°; Avg. Temp: 59°F) and New Jersey (Latitude: 40°; Avg. Temp: 53°F), a guess that, based on average temperature per each state, seems to be correct, in that it adheres to the logic of Boerhaave’s law and the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution.

In human statistical thermodynamics, in general, one can often find analogies on the comparison of people to gas particles. The particle perspective has its uses, when applied correctly. One can, for instance, derive the "orbital perspective" of human movements via this method. [4] Others use the human particle perspective to explain power laws in society, e.g. the distribution of wealth. [1]

Historical references
In 1813, English chemist Humphry Davy described man as a point atom. [3] In 1876, English philosopher Herbert Spencer posed the query:

“Are the attributes of society, considered apart from its living units, in any way like those of a not-living body? Or are they in any way like those of a living body? or are they entirely unlike those of both?”

In 1956, German-American psychologist Erich Fromm defined people as human atoms and argued that the greatest need in life is the desire for interpersonal fusion. In the 1999 book Peopleware, American software consultants Tom DeMarco and Timothy Lister likened occupational human workers with flexible and self-regulated working environments to ‘free electrons’ based on the observation that such loosely-bound employees have a strong role in choosing their own orbits or work orbitals.

In 2007, American physicist Mark Buchanan published the book The Social Atom arguing that "we should think of people as if they were atoms or molecule" if we are to build a rigorous science of social physics.

See also
‚óŹ Human molecule

References
1. (a) Ball, Philip. (2004). Critical Mass - How One Thing Leads to Another, (pg. 58). New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
(b) Buchanan, Mark. (2007). The Social Atom - why the Rich get Richer, Cheaters get Caught, and Your Neighbor Usually Looks Like You, (pgs. x-xi). New York: Bloomsbury.
(c) Thims, Libb. (2007). Human Chemistry (Volume One), (preview), (ch. 7: "Bound State Interactions", section: "Human Particle Maps", pgs. 183-212). Morrisville, NC: LuLu.
2. Rosnay, Joel de. (1975). The Macroscope: a New Scientific System. New York: Harper & Row.
3. Levere, Trevor, H. (1971). Affinity and Matter – Elements of Chemical Philosophy 1800-1865. Great Britain: Oxford University Press.
4. Thims, Libb. (2007). Human Chemistry (Volume One), (preview), (ch. 7: "Bound State Interactions", section: "Human Particle Maps", pgs. 183-212). Morrisville, NC: LuLu.
5. Boltzmann, Ludwig. (1895). Lectures on Gas Theory. Dover.
6. Macrone, Michael and Lulevitch, Tom. (1999). Eureka!: 81 Key Ideas Explained (section: Entropy, pgs. 129-33; image pg. 130). Barnes & Noble Publishing.

TDics icon ns