During the Elizabethan Age in England, a metaphysical bridge, of which many remained unaware, was beginning to form and take influence in a variety of areas. This connection was highlighted when the contemporary literature began to imitate the microscopic interactions that always have and always will take place. Alchemy as an axiomatic backdrop has been shown to be a dominant theme in every discipline of study. The reactions that take place at the molecular level are similar of the macro-interactions which can be seen in everyday life. In the works of William Shakespeare, both tragic and comedic, the character interplay is a resonant example of this metaphysical link. As a playwright, Shakespeare was a manifestation of the contemporary scientific beliefs and his works were representative of the metaphysical bridge between the reactions of the insurmountably small and the social intercourse of human beings.

The most basic organic compound is the alkane, which is comprised solely of carbon atoms that have single bonds to hydrogen atoms. Because it is completely surrounded by hydrogens, it can be said that the alkane is hydrated. The alkene, the dehydrated brother of the alkane, has the same basic structure except that double bonds may exist as well.  Below are some examples of alkanes and alkenes.

CH₃ – CH₂ – CH₂ – CH₂ – CH₃                                 CH₃ – CH = CH – CH₂ – CH₃

Pentane, C₅H₁₂                                                          2-Pentene, C₅H₁₀

The significance of the double bond in alkenes is the fact that an excess of electrons allows for increased bonding potential. Conversely, this means that the alkanes are fairly nonreactive, owing to the fact that no double bonds exist. Knowing this, it seems reasonable to deduce that Shakespeare may have treated Jaques the same way that modern chemists treat alkanes. The most important fact about analyzing chemicals from a literary standpoint is that both reactive and nonreactive compounds exist. Shakespeare realized that the small imitates the large and was thusly able to construct highly complex plot structures in many plays. (McMurry, 2003)

Reactivity and the double bond play a significant role in many of Shakespeare’s works, most notably As You Like It. Many of the characters are dealt the role of the catalytic electron attached to the double-bonded carbon pair. Touchstone, for instance, is often provocative in his claims and is commonly seen as a social “whetstone.” Through exemplary digressive stories and capriciously interesting claims, Shakespeare uses Touchstone to communicate certain isomorphisms between the microscopic and the macroscopic world. By way of context and social interactions, it becomes clear that he is also a symbol of the human condition, a vividly characterized avatar of Shakespeare’s metaphysical meanderings, and a manifestation of the curious wandering that has driven mankind to where it is today.

In addition to the physical representation of reactivity, there is a more abstract side to the coin. In As You Like It, the idea of desire drives the plot from beginning to end. The reactivity that results from desire causes Duke Frederick to usurp the throne from his brother, Duke Senior, and it causes Oliver to hold the inheritance over the head of Orlando. While all these types of desire stem from the seed of greed, there is also the desire that stems from the seed of love and lust. For example, the reactivity of lusty desire leads Rosalind to develop an impulsive crush on Orlando, Silvius to fall victim to the harsh Phebe, and Touchstone to grow to love Audrey.

In more thematic terms, hydration and dehydration often play large roles in the development of characters. Isomorphically, or in terms of information-preserving comparisons, this means that characters commonly undergo changes between states of reactivity and dormancy. Although Oliver is a highly reactive and volatile character in the beginning of As You Like It, he changes into a more dormant character that wants to settle down by the end of the play. This change is caused by a reaction that he undergoes with another reactive character, Orlando, who also gives up some of his catalytic potential by eliminating the divisive tension between himself and his brother. By this comparison, both characters are portrayed as metaphysical alkenes that react and yield products which are far different from their origins.

The aromatic ring is another atomic formation which has a particular metaphysical representation in Elizabethan literature. An example of a basic aromatic ring is benzene, a stack-based network that exists in the graphite of the pencil used to sign the pledge on this paper. The metaphysical representation of benzene and other aromatic compounds might be discovered upon considering both the structure and functionality of the unit. Below are diagrams of benzene.

                                                                     C – C

                                                                 //             

                                                            C                     C

                                                                               /

                                                                   C = C

            Benzene, C₆H₆                                 C = C

                                                               /                

                                                            C                     C

                                                                               //

                                                                   C – C

In considering the significance of the structure of benzene and its relation to Shakespeare’s works, it becomes clear that the circular nature of aromatic compounds is similar to the connected nature of all social interactions. The reactions that take place between Duke Frederick and Duke Senior become increasingly connected to the reactions that take place between Rosalind and Duke Frederick, and as well as those between Rosalind and Celia. Different functional groups, such as alcohols, ketones, or carboxylic acids, may attach to different bonding sites on the benzene ring to change the basic nature of the molecule. In this same manner, a variety of social interactions may take place Shakespeare’s works, and for that matter in reality, and their results may change the entire picture in terms of the friends and family of the reactants. (McMurry, 2003)

In addition to considering the significance of metaphysical isomorphisms, it is important to take into account the contemporary scientific beliefs, because they may have shaped Shakespeare’s works just as much as the aforementioned alchemical connections. Shakespeare lived at the end of the 16^th century, which means that the revolution in astronomy may have greatly affected his work. The heliocentric beliefs of Copernicus may have inspired Shakespeare in the same way that quantum mechanics inspires the budding minds of pseudo-scientists today. Evidence of this connection might be found in the egocentric personality of Hamlet, and his reactions with Ophelia. Additionally, Galileo was developing the telescope and proving heliocentrism in the same period that Shakespeare was writing his greatest works. The macroscopic revelations that were striking Europe at the end of the 16^th century had a strong influence in Shakespeare’s works. (Viault, 1990)

Concurrent with the revolution in astronomy was the development of the scientific method. Francis Bacon’s work emphasized the process of collecting data to interpret broader generalizations. Shakespeare adopted this as a theme by forcing the reader or audience of his plays to interpret the complex actions of the characters. Without gathering evidence from different areas of the plot, the audience is unable to comprehend the overall themes and messages in many of Shakespeare’s works. In 1600, William Gilbert completed his work titled De magnete, which was a geological study of magnetism in nature. This could have influenced the theme of reactivity which Shakespeare commonly utilized in his plays.  In fact, Robert Mayhew, a Shakespearian scholar from the Royal Geographic Society, asserted that Shakespeare utilized a great deal of information from the developing field of geography in his works. In the opening lines of Measure for Measure, Shakespeare seems to believe in the solidity of contemporary science when the Duke says

“Since I am put to know that your own science exceeds, in that, the lists of all advice my strength can give you.” (Act I, Scene 1, Lines 5-7)

Additionally, in Henry V, Shakespeare communicates the promise that science offers when the Duke of Burgundy says

“Even so our houses and ourselves and children have lost, or do not learn for want of time, the sciences that should become our country.” (Act V, Scene 2, Lines 56-58)

It is important to realize that Shakespeare did not solely draw inspiration from contemporary literary critics and writers; he fused interdisciplinary themes together in his plays in order to draw in people from all walks of life and create a universal feeling of monistic optimism. (Mayhew, 1998; Viault, 1990)

In 1869, long after the bones of Shakespeare had decomposed in the ground, been eaten a furry caterpillar, broken down by amylase enzymes, and redistributed into the natural world, a Russian chemist named Vladimir Markovnikov developed a theory regarding atomic bonding. This theory, called Markovnikov’s rule, stated that when a molecule with a hydrogen atom attached bonds with an alkene, the hydrogen atom bonds to the carbon with the greatest amount of hydrogen atoms and the rest of the molecule bonds to the other carbon. For instance, in the reaction of 2-Methyl-1-propene with hydrogen bromide (shown below), the hydrogen atom will bond with the rightmost carbon, because it has two other hydrogen atoms attached to it, while the double-bonded carbon on the left has no hydrogen atoms attached to it. (McMurry, 2003)

            H₃C                                                                                                   CH₃   H

                                                                                                                       l       l   

                           C = CH₂                     +   HBr             à                 CH₃ – C – CH₂          

                        /                                                                                               l      

            H₃C                                                                                                    Br                                

 2-Methyl-1-propene, C₄H₈     Hydrogen bromide, HBr     2-Bromo-2-Methylpropane, C₄H₉Br     

Although Markovnikov lived and developed his theory roughly two hundred years after Shakespeare, the influence of reactivity as a theme is clear. Markovnikov might have been no more eloquent than the Jonas Brothers, but his fundamental ideas regarding molecular reactions were similar to Shakespeare’s fundamental ideas regarding human interactions. “What does it metaphysically mean that the hydrogen ion, the smallest of all positive and perfect things, goes to the carbon that already has so many?” One interpretation is the idea of elitism and the foundation for the political right. By already being so wealthy with hydrogen atoms, the semi-hydrated carbon becomes the ideal candidate for additional hydration. In many of Shakespeare’s works, the wealthy get wealthier and the poor get poorer. In As You Like It, Oliver secures his fortune by driving Orlando away to the Forest of Arden, which supports elitist themes. Conversely, Celia and Rosalind’s dialogue regarding Fortune and Nature supports the idea that the virtues and skills dealt to one at birth are not related to the hand that is dealt over the course of one’s life. Cyril Bryner argued that the Slavs misinterpreted Shakespeare’s works based on their prejudices, which may be the case in this sociopolitical scenario, but it is nevertheless true that the interdisciplinary contradictions that exist in Shakespeare’s works drive the plots and are evidence of the metaphysical plus and minus that exist on both the atomic and visual levels. (McMurry, 2003)

In simple terms, an atom is composed of a nucleus with electrons orbiting around it. In every level of study, the Bohr model, which can be recognized by a dot in the middle of a series of expanding circles, is utilized to create a clearer picture of the structure of an atom. While this may be ideal from an anatomical standpoint, it is not correct. The electron does not exist as an orbiting entity, but rather as a probability field of where it may exist. There a four different orbitals, or probability fields, which are called s, p, d, and f. An s-orbital is essentially a sphere, the p-orbital is like two balloons connected at a node, and the other two are more complicated. The oddity of the p-orbital is that the electron can never be observed in the node, only in the two balloons. Electrons in the p-orbitals jump from one balloon to the other without crossing through the node. This then begs the question: “What is the metaphysical representation of this on the visual level?”

Shakespeare portrays many of his characters as electrons, orbiting around the town, flirtatiously interacting with everyone they meet. For instance, in Troilus and Cressida, Shakespeare draws a metaphysical parallel between the interactions of men and the interactions of butterflies when Achilles says

“For men, like butterflies, shew not their mealy wings but to the summer.” (Act III, Scene 3, Lines 81-82)

 This may seem simple, but there is also a deeper significance to the probability field and the wave nature of matter. Shakespeare often portrays love in the same way that electrons randomly jump from one balloon of the p-orbital to the other. In Romeo and Juliet, love is depicted as an entity that capriciously decides when to strike, irrespective of what previous state the reactants were in. Shakespeare understood the metaphysical isopmorphisms that exist between the small and the large, and he demonstrated his comprehension through his plays.

“If, then, the observer of the electron or the audience of the play is allowed to call all interactions ‘random,’ what is free will?” If the Bohr model is accurate, every interaction that takes place would affect another one and everything would be decided based on something else. This would not allow for the idea of free will, but hence we have the wave nature of matter. It is odd that in some ways Shakespeare adopts the Bohr model in his plays by showing the plot as simply a chain of events. The argument then arises over whether or not one event forcibly occurs based on the events that came before it. “Does Romeo choose to love Juliet or is it forced by his chemical composition and the events that influenced him leading up to their first meeting?” Shakespeare takes a dualistic and evenhanded approach by adopting both; he portrays love as both capricious and forced, he shows that the universe is both random and ordered.

In closing, it seems that Shakespeare’s works are appreciable from both a literary and a scientific standpoint. Through his incorporations of contemporary and developing scientific theories, Shakespeare was able to ring in a broader understanding of reactions as a whole. The great monistic feel that his works delegate might be seen as a commentary on free will and determinism, on love and hate, and on God and man. The metaphysical isomorphisms which exist within the works of William Shakespeare are proof that an interdisciplinary broadening of the mind leads to greatness and that the connections between mysteries of different fields induce meaning in the universe.