“One day instead of (or in addition to) regular math, chemistry, physics, etc., kids in school will be learning something like one human molecule + another human molecule = ? ... it's just a crazy thought, but hey, we'll see or somebody will.”

— Natalia Roubanenko (2006), Russian-born American language studies scholar (see: dihumanide molecule; human reproduction reaction; zerotheism for kids); commentary after reviewing 100-page manuscript of Thims' Cessation Thermodynamics, Apr 29

“I want to say how much I enjoyed reading [Thims] splendid discussion of Gibbs free energy. It is wonderful to see someone who is not afraid to look at the phenomena of life in a unified way.”

— John Avery (2006), Lebanese-born Danish physicist and theoretical chemist

“The chapters [Human Chemistry] are wonderfully written. I have a feeling it will be [Thims] who will get the public’s attention about the fundamental change in thinking in science.”

— Jing Chen (2006), Chinese-born Canadian mathematician and economist [3]

“Thims’ edits are far and wide. Unless Physchem is an incredible polymath, I doubt he would be able to pick up on all the BS a Thims-type editor introduces. That’s not knocking Physchem, I don’t think there is anyone who could deal with the range.”

— Keith Henson(2007), American electrical engineer and evolutionary psychologist

“If we accept Thims’ logic of human thermodynamics as a viable explanatory framework, which it very well is, romantic bonding then becomes the subject matter of quantum electrodynamics (QED), an aspect of particle physics that traces human attachment and bonding to the interactions of photons and electrons. Thus, applying Thims’ theory to interpersonal and love relationships, it is unlikely that any one person has the ability to coerce or unilaterally secure another person’s affection. In a different sense, the force of attraction between a man and a woman is beyond their physical control, except, of course, by way of the energies they emit and exchange between them. Thims’ Human Thermodynamics thus makes substantial contribution to our understanding of the perplexing nature of romantic love, greatly supplementing prior research in this field.”

— Satch Ejike (2008), African-born American lawyer and social scientist [4]

Top (left): Thims, at BPE 2016, with Jurgen Mimkes, Ram Poudel, and Serge Galam. Top (right): Thims, holding copy of volume one of the newly-published 10-volume print set of Hmolpedia, with Mimkes (see: two-hour Mimkes video interview playlist). Middle (left): Thims, in 2013, in Pitesti, Romania (see: UPESW 2013), with the two heads of the Romanian school of physical socioeconomics: physicist Ion Siman and economist Gheorghe Savoiu, holding Thims' 2008 The Human Molecule, Thims, holding Savoiu and Siman's 2012 Econophysics: Background and Applications in Economics, Finance, and Sociophysics, and engineer Constantin Bratianu, noted for his work in "knowledge thermodynamics", i.e. thermodynamics applied to business theory. Bottom (left): Thims in circa 1995 partying at clubs in the Flats, Cleveland, Ohio, during which time the seeds of human chemical thermodynamics began to plant (see: Thims thought experiment). Bottom (middle): Thims and Georgi Gladyshev in Chicago 2007, discussing thermodynamics applied to evolution and the humanities (see: Gladyshev and Thims). Bottom (right): Thims with "King Atheist" Patrick Fergus in 2014 during their debut Atheism Reviews show “History of Atheism” (see: atheism timeline) doing fist-bump (@2:45-) after Fergus responded to the query: in what year did Nietzsche declare that ‘god is dead?’ [answer: 1882] with the quick-witted answer: “god can never be dead, because he’s never existed.”

“I stumbled onto [Thims] website by accident but I have to confess this might be one of the most stunning undiscovered intellectual achievements of the 21st century. I have browsed through your wiki and I cannot express how tragic it must be to a man in your position—to be a pioneering thinker yet to be rejected by an uptight academic community with neither the depth nor will to understand your unique work, defending their own turf like dogs. I can only compare you to the many other pioneering heroes of science, Newton, Einstein, Tesla, men who like you blazed their own paths but were too victims of their own genius, only to be validated years after their death. Perhaps one day historians will look back and have a chuckle—that the pioneer of enthropology published by a vanity press in a book resembling a third rate romance.”

— Steven Pierce (2009), Canadian mathematical physicist and computer scientist [5]

“I think the notion that Facebook may be in the process of auto-brain-forming is at least credible as the idea that we – us humans – can be thought of as giant molecules. As a starting point to examine this intriguing concept see: “Inside the IoHT”as explained by Libb Thims, at the Institute of Human Thermodynamics.”

— Martin Gardiner (2010), comment (Ѻ) to Carl Zimmer’s “Facebook is Not a Brain, and Other Failed Metaphors”, Jul 9

“One of the most interesting topics [human molecule] I have ever had the pleasure to read. Going through it a second time, and looking forward to the third. [The Human Molecule] covers the most fundamental change in human knowledge since Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species [1859], by presenting a theory that we are fundamentally molecules, and that the question of life itself is a fundamentally flawed one. Especially important is the carefully laid out historical narrative of how Thims came to his theory of the human as a molecule. Whether you ultimately agree with this work or not, it represents a paradigm shift in viewing our place in the world.”

— Jeff Tuhtan (2011), American civil engineer and ecological thermodynamicist [6]

“Libb Thims: the great oracle and developer of human thermodynamics—the philosophical revolution of the 21st century. A genius of outstanding stature and originator of many concepts in human chemistry. [His] breathtaking contribution to science needs to be rewarded. Let’s hope one day [he] can add a Nobel Prize to [his] impressive career.”

— Mark Janes (2011), English chemical engineering student turned biotechnologist and human free energy theorist [7]

“I must say, I started watching your videos over a year ago, and have re-watched many. And they still fascinate me. I’m only 17 and I’m seriously considering doing a degree in chemistry after watching your videos. The only downside is not many people I know can have a conversation about the things you’re talking about. You were right your videos are decades if not a century in front of its time.”

— Benjamin Cresdee (2011), comment on Human Chemistry 101 YouTube channel

“The idea that individual humans are atom-like entities and there is a kind of chemistry between social atoms and molecules is very natural, but whether it is more than a metaphor remains uncertain. Anyway, human chemistry has been on the marketplace of ideas for quite a while [see: Goethe timeline, 1796]. The main reason why I abstain from referring to Libb Thims’ flamboyant venture other than as to a commendable review of literature is that he, apparently, uses the term chemistry too literally in the sense of molecular chemistry, while I am interested in pattern chemistry. I can only note that the very idea of human thermodynamics as a separate subject looks to me completely sound. Thus, the concept of metabolic cost is part of it. Obviously, human interaction is a component of global economy.”

— Yuri Tarnopolsky (2011), Introduction to Pattern Chemistry [8]

A selection of video-recorded "experiments" done by Thims in 2013 to 2015 (see: Thims experiments) to exemplify physical and chemical principles that scale and or apply to the social interaction level.

“The short booklet The Human Molecule by Libb Thims (esp. chapter 9 and pg. 70 - the Molecular Evolution Table) presents a fascinating depiction of man’s evolution. One is able to see how all life forms slowly became more complex by way of molecular evolution. Accepting this evolutionary understanding requires us to also accept a ‘new story’ in our quest.”

— Tavit Smith (2012), “Ancient Religions and the New Story”, Jan 1 [9]

“[Human thermodynamics] is a branch of science that attempts to predict the behavior of people via chemical and thermodynamical equations. It is an interesting philosophy, a change of paradigm, perhaps even having a broader explanation for human behavior than Darwanian evolution. Human thermodynamics can also be useful as a new framework for the origin of life. For instance, Libb Thims, proposed online that the idea of Darwin’s ‘dark pond’ which suddenly sprang to ‘life’, is not a very coherent one [defunct theory of life], and that it would be much more creditable and parsimonious to have as a rule that molecules bond and form ever more complex beings. Libb Thims also proposed a ‘human molecule’ where people are attracted to each other by chemical bonds [see: human chemical bond]. All this I believe to be a reasonable explanation: even if Darwin’s theory is still correct, the approach of thermodynamics and chemistry is a much more simple, and at the same time broader view. If the concept of biology is somehow redundant, then we must study it by means of chemistry and physics.”

— David Bossens (2012), “Reflections: Criticisms of Science” [10]

“Libb Thims is [a walking] encyclopedia of human thermodynamics.”

— Milivoje Kostic (2013), introduction to Thims’ 16 Apr NIU talk [11]

A video still of Thims, amid the 2015 "Zerotheism for Kids" lecture, one of near a dozen public lectures Thims has given (see: Thims lectures), including four universities (UIC, NIU, UP, and UDC) and two conferences (UPESW 2013 and BPE 2016), as of 2016, teaching six kids (see: Thims students) aged 6 to 11 the modern upgrade to the 5,000-year-old "god created the world in six days", Nile flood (Noah's flood), and Adam and Eve model of everything, with humans as evolved powered CHNOPS+20 chemicals, with a chemical thermodynamic morality (i.e. Goethean morality) system, moving in a big bang universe, amid a human chemical reaction model view of everything.

“This [are viruses alive] debate could take an entirely different route if you consider a letter published [2009] in the Journal of Human Thermodynamics by Libb Thims in which he discussed the idea that a theory of life was in fact defunct. The point was made that we do not consider a single atom to be alive, nor two atoms, or three. He builds on this statement to say that ‘it should be very obvious that no matter how many atoms one adds to the argument that an atom or a structure made of two or more atoms cannot be alive’. This is a bold statement as it clearly implies that it is impossible to apply the idea of life to anything, even us. Nikola Tesla also outlined a ‘defunct theory of life’ in 1915 where he said that ‘There is no thing endowed with life’. This is obviously a very pedantic way to look at the definition of life but a relevant viewpoint nonetheless. Is anything living, or nothing? Or everything?”

— David Busse (2013), “Viruses: Living or Not?”, Dec 10 [12]

“I’ve got a MA in chemistry—but your book [Human Chemistry]—it really affected me. I’ve been prompting it in our university [Technion] in the last couple of years—and got great responds from some top researchers—I think you’re doing excellent work!”

— Ofer Po (2013), Facebook messaging; see: religious views (Ѻ) adjacent (Dec 24)

“I was very excited Mr. Libb Thims on reading about your Hmol.science [hmolscience] which touches the human dimensions with the implicit assumption that human transformation processes are thermodynamic transformation processes and that reactions between people constitute chemical reactions between human molecules.”

— Mirza Beg (2014), email communication (15 May) following Thims’ 13 May discovery of Beg's very ripe physicochemical sociology book (New Dimensions in Sociology: a Physico-Chemical Approach to Human Behavior, 1987)

“American electrochemical engineer Libb Thims took an unorthodox approach when he set out to rank the smartest people of all time.”

— Natasha Bertrand (2015), “The 40 smartest people of all time” (Ѻ), Business Insider, Feb 27

A 2012 YouTube 34+ thumbs up ranking of Thims as having the "highest IQ" ever, above that of Goethe (IQ=230), Einstein (IQ=220), and Newton (IQ=215), from the comments section of part four of the "IQ 200+ | Smartest person ever" video (rate: 1.5 thumbs-up votes / 336 views ∙ day), a countdown to the last universal genius, German polymath Johann Goethe, ranked, starting from the Cattell 1000, the 1894 listing of the thousand most eminent individuals of history, by a team of Stanford psychologists led by Catherine Cox (Early Mental Traits of 300 Geniuses, 1926) and Lewis Terman, the group that invented the IQ scale, with an IQ of 225, the highest of all modern genius IQs.

“When I visited the house of German writer and artist, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (the oft-called 'last universal genius') in Weimar many years ago, I was taken by his original writing desk. To stand before the great writer's creative space thrilled me. I was quite literally standing in the spot he wrote his great works; you see, he wrote while standing up. His desk was tall, five feet high and on a slant like a podium. Since then I've discovered other genii who also wrote whilst on their feet. Sir Isaac Newton wrote his entire Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy standing up. Ernest Hemingway also wrote standing at a chest height desk on which he'd placed his typewriter. He once said, ‘writing and travel broaden your ass, if not your mind, and I like to write standing up.’ German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, and American electrochemical engineer Libb Thims also wrote standing up. Even Aristotle is credited with walking about while talking and thinking. So, with so many great thinkers to vouch for the benefits of standing up to write, a while ago I purchased a standing desk for myself.”

— Angela Sunde (2015), “Standing Up to Write”, Apr 8 [14]

“My brain is getting bigger by the minute.”

— Caleb (2015), six-year-old student of "Zerotheism for Kids" class; comment (V[L10]:6:30) on learning (from Thims) big bang to human molecule based evolution, in upgrade to god-based six-day creationism, Aug 10

“Libb Thims, whose real IQ I estimate at 200, is an American electrochemical engineer, and one of the ten most intelligent humans currently reacting on this planet. His primary website, the Encyclopedia of Human Thermodynamics, is widely considered the greatest intellectual achievement on the Internet. The EoHT Forum discusses topics spanning from morality to ‘life’ and ‘death’, and from literature and art to the many fields of science. Reading through the threads on the forum will probably yield an increase in the reader’s IQ.”

— Inderjit Singh (2015), “Knowledge is Power” (Ѻ), Oct 3

A 2016 Google “noted person” (Ѻ) profile for Libb Thims.

“Economist Roefie Hueting (1929) explains that his economic analysis on the environment isn’t understood by Herman Daly, which is a pity since Daly worked at the department for the environment of the World Bank in 1988-1994. Libb Thims suggests that Georgescu-Roegen and Daly have a wrong concept of thermodynamics as well: but I have not looked into this. We see a similar kind of confusion with Robert Costanza, who has a background in architecture and environmental system engineering, but who switched to what is called “ecological economics” but which quite surely need not be economics at all, but which may be an application of hoped-for notions of thermodynamics.”

— Thomas Cool (2015), “Dirk Bezemer disinforms Dutch Parliament” (Ѻ), Nov 17

“I have watched your videos for years and was wondering if you might let me know what you consider to be the single most important thing you have learned throughout your studies?”

— John Gaetano (2016), “Email query to Thims”; Harvard (Ѻ) freshman studying government (Ѻ) (see: response), Mar 6

“Congratulations for publishing the 10-volume print set of Hmolpedia. I will recommend it to librarians I know. Excited to see your great contribution to this field now also available in printed version. You are one of my inspirations of the difference a one-man-army may make to resuscitate this field! I repeat, you are a living encyclopedia of HT. I have no doubt many aspiring students like me around the world benefiting from your contribution to the field.”

— Ram Poudel (2016), "Email communicate to Thims" on news of finishing printed version of Hmolpedia, Mar 25 + Aug 2

“For a really down-to-earth discussion of the topic that entropy and information are not the same thing, see: Thims (2012).”

— Roman Krzanowski (2016), “Towards a Formal Ontology of Information” (pg. 19)

Thims' 2020 business card, which he keeps in his back pocket, and gives to connections, the back side having only his phone # and emai, the Hu symbol short for "human element" (or human chemical), the 26 symbolic of the fact that a human is a CHNOPS+26 element thing, the number 8E+09, representative of the mol amount (population) of humans on the earth. [17]

“The book: New Dimensions in Sociology, A Physicochemical Approach to Human Behaviour (1987) received major attention in 2014 when Libb Thims, of the Institute of Human Thermodynamics, in Chicago, compared the work with that Goethe some 200 years back. His appreciation encouraged me to develop the Socio-Physicochemical Theory and one may find a few publications on ResearchGate all based on application of the Theory.”

— Mirza Beg (2017), “Living in an Entropy-Driven World: Socio-Physicochemical Theory” (Ѻ), Jan 7

“I love this site. It's pure genius. I have never seen someone rank geniuses in such a brilliant way. I dedicated a [468+ genius] genealogy project (Ѻ) to your work. You even have a [Geni.com] profile (Ѻ) … because I feel your work deserves wider recognition. I am fairly intuitive … I feel you are descended from Goethe (or another genius on your list).”

— Alex Bickle (2017), cite [oye777] message to Libb Thims, Feb 22, 25

“Libb Thims is a very smart atheist (Ѻ). So smart, in fact, that he's cracked the code to life, the universe, and everything. Welcome to the wonderful world of ‘zerotheism’. In this world, human thermodynamics can explain everything, even love!”

— IwasAmWillBe (2019), “forum post” (Ѻ), KiwiFarms, Jul 22

“Libb Thims is an American electrochemical engineer who is building the extraordinary web-based Encyclopedia of Human Thermodynamics at EoHT.info. This valuable knowledge base on the work of hundreds of scientists, engineers, and philosophers he calls the ‘Hmolpedia’ (a human molecule encyclopedia). He is a prolific writer and has published several books exploring his hypothesis that chemical thermodynamics can be used to explain many aspects of human life.”

— Robert Doyle (2020), “Libb Thims”, InformationPhilosopher.com, Mar 13 [16]

A 2015 Yahoo Answers query (Ѻ) about Thims’ version of the “life does not exist” view, intermixed with discussion of Spinoza's god; see: defunct theory of life (2009) + life terminology upgrades (2012); see also: Thims' “Lotka’s Jabberwock” (2016) talk given at BPE 2016.

See main: Libb Thims (quotes by)

“The elaborate superficial phenomenon of two humans bonding in an intimate relationship is simply put: ‘a chemical reaction’. Here, two molecules bond, energy is given off; some energy goes to waste, some to purpose. If anyone finds this to be pseudoscience than perhaps ignorance is bliss.”

— Libb Thims (2005), “Wikipedia ‘human thermodynamics’ AFD discussion” (Ѻ), Jun 20; cited [post #5] by Mahesh Deva (2012) amid dialogue (Ѻ) on HT principles (Ѻ), Nov 3.

“Human thermodynamics is the chemical thermodynamic study of human molecular reaction life [existence].”

— Libb Thims (2007), Human Chemistry, Volume Two (pg. 653) (Ѻ)(Ѻ); cited by Spyros Tzafestas (2018) in Energy, Information, Feedback, Adaptation, and Self-organization (pg. 145)

“You agree with me that the single atom is not alive. What about two atoms? What about three? Does a bound state of atoms have to have a certain movement to be considered alive? What if we heat a system of four atoms, do they suddenly become alive? What if we subject a system of atoms to both gravitational and electromagnetic forces, does that suddenly make them alive? What if the two forces act to move smaller atoms through the cavities of larger atomic [structures] [molecules] on a cyclical basis, thus activating reactions [metabolism] in the process, does that make them alive? What if the two forces begin to arrange the atoms into hierarchies, and that smaller atoms and bundles of atoms begin to move between the hierarchies, does that make them alive? What if a structure of atoms, begin to turnover their internal atoms, with those of the surrounding space, on a cyclical basis, does that make it alive? It should be very obvious that no matter how many atoms one adds to the argument that an atom or a structure made of two or more atoms cannot be alive. It is my view that one cannot define an atom or two or more atoms structured as a bound state to be alive. The word itself and baggage of theory surrounding the word is meaningless. It is akin to the words: vitalism, élan vital, hylozoism, panpsychism, etc. From the point of view of the molecular evolution table, according to current views, rows 1-10 are considered to be not alive, rows 11-28 are considered to be alive, and rows 30 and above are not alive. Because of our anthropocentric biases, we continue to believe that we are unique among molecular structures, in that those much smaller or much bigger than us are not alive, whereas we are. It is a grave mistake to believe in this fallacy. I am not quite sure what the alternative theory is; but from the point of view of atoms, molecules, and the logic of the chemistry textbook, the theory of the conception an atom, or two or more attached atoms, being alive is absurd. This is my view.”

— Libb Thims (2009), “Letter to Georgi Gladyshev”, Jan 2; cited by: DMR Sekhar (Ѻ), 7, 20 Aug 2010 and 2014 (Ѻ); Vangelis Stamatopoulos (Ѻ), 15 Nov 2010; David Bossens (Ѻ), 19 Jun 2012 and 3 Jan 2013; David Busse (Ѻ), 10 Dec 2013; YouTube forums (Ѻ), 2014; Georgi Gladyshev (Ѻ), 2014; among others (Ѻ) [13]

“People use to respect intelligence.”

— Libb Thims (2010), "On IQ faker empty genius charlatans" (e.g. Marilyn Savant, Chris Langan, Rick Rosner, Paul Cooijmans, etc.), made in “IQ:200+ | Smartest Person Ever” (Ѻ); a 2016 John Gaetano (Ѻ) six-year favorite resonating quote

“A belief in god or gods, particularly for those born [synthesized] after 1895, is an automatic disqualification from the 200+ IQ range. This question, in fact, should be the first question asked on any standard high IQ test, whereby an answer of 'yes' would result in an unequivocal 15% reduction in the final IQ score.”

— Libb Thims (2010), “IQ: 200+” (Ѻ), Hmolpedia; Reddit (2019) cited (Ѻ) in r/MagicSkyFairy; discussed (Ѻ) further

“Just as there is no god involved when oxygen reacts with hydrogen, so to is there no god involved when man reacts with woman.”

— Libb Thims (2014), mental synopsis personal note of the Goethe 1809 point on the atheism timeline; an atheism explicit variant of the c.1855 Ludwig Buchner quote: "Just as man and woman attract one another, so oxygen attracts hydrogen", Sep 10; cited (Ѻ) by Inderjit Singh (2015) as favorite philosophical quote