"I haven't found any problems with the math, at least so far. His gadgets are also very good. There are still a lot of phenomena that are difficult to explain, just in terms of waves," Laplace said, "such as the properties that the Ether must have to transmit fluctuations as fast as light. And he explains light as a transverse wave, so why is there no longitudinal wave in the Ether?

"Ah, my friend, you have so many questions, and none of them are going to be answered in a short period, not even, I think, in our lifetimes. Lavoisier said, "This is indeed a big problem in terms of fluctuations. The Ether is so unique, it's almost as uncanny as God. It can transmit light incredibly fast - I mean, if light were a wave - which means it's very hard, many times harder than Adamantite. It fills the entire universe and is so hard, yet it doesn't impede anything in the universe, it doesn't block the movement of even the tiniest speck of dust we can't find any resistance from the 'Ether' right now. This is a real head-scratcher ．．．．．． Ah, my friend, I suggest that for the time being, we do not think about the question of the damned "Ether". Our current knowledge and means are too far away from it. To study it now is like a newly weaned kitten studying how to catch a whale.

"Mr. Lavoisier, a whale is not a fish." Laplace laughed.

"Of course, I know that." Lavoisier laughed too, "But ．．．．．． But he doesn't know.

"Yeah, he doesn't know." We're not a kitten either," Laplace said. We don't know either."

"So I have always believed that experimentation comes first. All theories must be tested by experiment, at least his calculations, which 'Bonaparte spot' tested well. As for the 'Ether', or the 'Bonaparte spot', the 'double-slit interference' and the 'Newtonian ring', whether there are other explanations from the particle point of view, depends on others. But even if he is ultimately wrong on this issue, the error itself has value," Lavoisier said.

"I agree with that," Laplace said. I agree," Laplace said. Then he looked down at the paper and said, "I will come up with a new explanation. But for now, please allow me to finish my verification of this paper. Then we can show it to Monge, Cullen, and Condorcet together. ．．．．．．"

．．．．．．

However, with Monge and Cullen, the situation changed.

"The mathematical gadgets in this paper are interesting, and there are some more interesting things in the back. It would have been nice if this paper had been an honest discussion of mathematics. Then it would have been a worthwhile paper," Monge said with a frown, "but he used it to prove such a ridiculous point, which is ．．．．．．"

"If only he had been willing to revise the paper," Cullen echoed. Cullen echoed.

"We should ask him to come and talk about it and let him revise it, and then we can give him the prize money. Laplace glanced at Lavoisier and added, "After all, the gadgets alone are worth six hundred francs.

"It's not a question of six hundred francs." It's not a question of six hundred francs," Monge said, "but of his strange claim that light is a wave, and that the Ether that transmits it should have smashed us to pieces! We'd be laughing if such a ridiculous thing won a prize! Unless he revises the paper a bit and removes the unnecessary stuff, I object to awarding him the prize.

"I don't think it's prudent to give out the award now, because it's not conclusive evidence, but there should be other, better explanations for the two experiments. I think we should be more cautious on this issue ．．．．．．" Cullen said.

"Come on, Cullen! Do you have a better explanation? Or have you found a hole in his argument?" Condorcet glared, "It's true that there are many problems with fluctuations that can't be solved, such as the one you mentioned about the Ether. But is there no problem with particle theory? Other than that, how can particle theory explain double-slit interference and Bonaparte's spot? One of the meanings of science is to discover the unknown and to ask questions. Asking questions, especially valuable questions, is sometimes even more important than concluding! Since the birth of science, we have seen how many times old ideas and insights have been overturned, but can we say that those ideas and insights that have been overturned today are worthless? Even if the ideas in this paper turn out to be completely fallacious, and even if tomorrow morning Cullen comes up with a new explanation that completely overturns his ideas, doesn't this fallacy itself inspire thinking and reveal the truth? So, even if it is a fallacy, it has value. And what's more, it doesn't have to be a fallacy! --Is Sir Isaac Newton unquestionable? Is this still the spirit of science? It would be a disgrace to the Academy of Sciences if such a paper did not win the prize!

When it comes to eloquence, there are really few people in the Academy of Science who can compare with Condorcet, and Cullen is no exception. Knowing that he could not argue with Condorcet, Cullen simply shut up and did not say anything.

When Kulun stopped talking, Condorcet turned to Mengri: "Mengri, what do you think?

Monge's status at the Academy was not as influential as Condorcet's, and his language skills were far inferior. But Monge was a very stubborn man, and when he heard Condorcet's question, he replied, "I can't agree to give him the prize until I talk to him face to face.

Then he shut his mouth and said nothing. Condorcet knew Monge's character and knew that this was the biggest concession he could make, so he said nothing more and turned to Laplace, "What about you, Laplace? What do you think?

Laplace looked at Condorcet, and then at Monge and Cullen, and then said, "I think ．．．．．． With those mathematical tools, this paper could have won the prize ．．．．．． But I also think that he is not rigorous enough, and I also think we should invite him to talk.

Condorcet looked at Laplace and shook his head. There is no doubt about Laplace's talent, but his character is a bit weak and fickle.

"So be it. We'll invite this Mr. Bonaparte to come here. We'll talk to him, and then we'll give him the prize. Condorcet said, pausing briefly and adding, "Does anyone else think that someone who can write an essay like this is not qualified for such an award?

Everyone was silent. The company's main goal is to provide the best possible service to its customers.

．．．．．．

Although the Academy of Sciences was located in the city of Paris, the efficiency of the postal service in this era was quite low, and it was not until three days later that Joseph received the invitation. But in fact, he had gotten the news from Amand two days ago.

Now that he had received the invitation, Joseph prepared himself, took the invitation, changed into a formal suit that he did not wear once a year, got into a public carriage, and, mainly to avoid getting too much dust on his shoes, headed for the Louvre.

Located on the north bank of the Seine, the Louvre was built in the 12th century and is one of the oldest royal palaces in France. During the time of Louis XIII, Richelieu founded the Royal Academy of Sciences, which was then housed in the Louvre. In the later years of Louis XIV's reign, when fāshēngbàodòng was common in Paris, Louis XIV expanded the Palace of Versailles outside the city and moved there. Since then, the King of France no longer lived in the Louvre, but the Ecole des Sciences has remained here.

When he arrived at the entrance of the Louvre, Joseph got out of the car, arranged his clothes, and walked toward the gates of the Louvre. This is not the first time Joseph came to the Louvre, in his previous life, as a tourist, Joseph also visited here. At that time, the Louvre is one of the four major museums in the world, with a variety of precious artifacts. The Louvre at this time, however, was only a palace, and of the three treasures of the Louvre, only the Mona Lisa is now in the collection.

Joseph walked to the door of the palace - in later times, the door of the Louvre was the post-modern-style glass pyramid. But at this time, such a thing still did not exist. The doors of the Louvre were still regular, ordinary doors.

Joseph walked up to the door and showed an invitation to the janitor. The janitor put on his glasses, looked down at the invitation, didn't look up, just looked at Joseph through the gap in the frame of his glasses, and then said, "Mr. Bonaparte, please wait here for a little while. I need to verify the situation.

Joseph nodded and waited outside the door for a moment before a waiter in a red coat and wig came and opened the door and said to Joseph, "Is that Mr. Bonaparte? Please come with me."

Joseph then followed the attendant into the Louvre. The attendant led Joseph through hall after hall, and finally, he stopped in front of a small parlor.

"Monsieur Bonaparte," said the waiter, turning to Joseph and bowing, "Monsieur Condorcet, Monsieur Lavoisier and the others are waiting for you inside.

After saying this, he pulled open the door of the calfskin-covered room and indicated that Joseph could go in by himself.

Joseph then walked in, and once he entered, he saw that three people were sitting in the room. One of them, a relatively thin middle-aged man with a high forehead, said, "Is this Mr. Joseph Bonaparte? I am Ravasi. This is my friend Mr. Condorcet, who is a member of the Academy of Sciences, and this is my friend Laplace.

Joseph then greeted these people one by one. Condorcet was a little stronger than Lavoisier, and his face was a little wider. He smiled gently at Joseph and seemed to have a gentler personality. Another younger man with a slightly hawkish nose was Laplace, a mathematician who had frightened Joseph in his previous life.