
A rendition of William Wheeler's circa 1935 view that a "few super-Einsteins" will be needed to unify the main branches of knowledge: chemistry, physics, biology, and sociology, as it is presently diversified; someone able to wield the intellect equivalent to 6 to 8 degrees, according to the polymathy degree problem standard.

A rendition of William Wheeler's circa 1935 view that a "few super-Einsteins" will be needed to unify the main branches of knowledge: chemistry, physics, biology, and sociology, as it is presently diversified; someone able to wield the intellect equivalent to 6 to 8 degrees, according to the polymathy degree problem standard.

In terminology, few super-Einsteins, similar to “another Newton” (Henry Adams, 1910) or “new Aristotle” (Raymond Fosdick, 1924), refers to American entomologist William Wheeler’s circa 1935 reference to future great intellect able to rectify the physicochemical, organismal, mental, social, and biological into one unifying framework; someone able to wield the intellect equivalent to 6 to 8 degrees, according to the polymathy degree problem benchmark; aspects of which he seemed to have sensed in the mind of Vilfredo Pareto (1912) and in the synthesis work of Lawrence Henderson’s 1932 efforts to unify evolution, sociology, economics, business, physiology all under the guise of Gibbs-based physical chemistry and thermodynamics, intermixed with the historical precursory work of Pareto.

See also
● Existive social Newton
● Polymathy degree problem
● Social Newton

Quotes
The following are related quotes:

“… emergence, the physicochemical, the organismal, the mental and the social. Hence, it till the advent of a few super-Einsteins, theoretical biology must stand as a combination of oppositions—a compositio oppositorum.”
— William Wheeler (c.1935), “Essay” [1]

“Where will the next Einstein lead scientific thinking?”
— Chris Quigg (2004), “Physics of the Large Hadron Collider Workshop” (Ѻ)

“The physics of the point that existed 13.7 billion years ago is mostly beyond our imaginations, not to mention our conceptual tools. Gravity, electromagnetism—all the forces at work around us did not have an independent existence. Matter as we know it didn’t exist. With everything that would become the universe packed so tightly in one spot, there was an enormous amount of energy. In such a universe, the physics of small particles, quantum mechanics, and that of large bodies, general relativity, were somehow part of a single, overarching, and still unknown theory. Just what that theory is awaits the next Einstein.”
— Neil Shubin (2013), The Universe Within [2]

References
1. (a) Wheeler, William M. (c.1935). “Essay”, in: Essays in Philosophical Biology (pg. 208). Cambridge, 1939.
(b) Smocovitis, Vassiliki B. (1997). Unifying Biology (pg. 109). Princeton University Press.
(c) Smocovitis, Vassiliki B. (2001). “The Unifying Vision: Julian Huxley, Evolutionary Humanism, and the Evolutionary Synthesis” (Ѻ), read at the Unifying Nature, Past and Present conference, Gainesville, Florida.
2. Shubin, Neil. (2013). The Universe Within: Discovering the Common History of Rocks, Planets, and People (pg. 25). Random House.

External links
● Zwillich, Todd, Green, Brian (guest). (2015). “Will There Ever Be Another Einstein?” (Ѻ), Aug 17.