irreducible

(redirected from irreducibly)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Encyclopedia.

irreducible

 [ir″rĕ-doo´sĭ-b'l]
not susceptible to reduction, as a fracture, hernia, or chemical substance.
Miller-Keane Encyclopedia and Dictionary of Medicine, Nursing, and Allied Health, Seventh Edition. © 2003 by Saunders, an imprint of Elsevier, Inc. All rights reserved.

ir·re·duc·i·ble

(ir'rē-dū'si-bĕl, i-rē-),
1. Not reducible; incapable of being made smaller.
2. In chemistry, incapable of being made simpler, or of being replaced, hydrogenated, or reduced in positive charge.
Farlex Partner Medical Dictionary © Farlex 2012

ir·re·duc·i·ble

(ir'rĕ-dū'si-bĕl)
1. Not reducible; incapable of being made smaller.
2. chemistry Incapable of being made simpler, or of being replaced, hydrogenated, or reduced in positive charge.
Medical Dictionary for the Health Professions and Nursing © Farlex 2012

irreducible

Incapable of being replaced or restored to a former state, as in the case of a HERNIA or a fracture. Irreversible.
Collins Dictionary of Medicine © Robert M. Youngson 2004, 2005
References in periodicals archive ?
To understand their work, to be fully transparent with the stakeholders they endeavor to involve, and to realize their potential, they will need new theories and systems that describe without bias the spectrum of influence and the specific and irreducibly unique organizing units that underlie it, from the ill-gotten to the high-minded.
Most important is the fact that his insistence that there is in Stevens "something irreducibly ambivalent, double, or undecidable" is an acknowledged and central facet of the poet's work that has been discussed, at length, before (from the early 1965 essay by Helen Vendler, "The Qualified Assertions of Wallace Stevens," to my own 1986 book, Stevens and Simile: A Theory of Language, among others--none of which Woodland cites).
For instance, intelligent design adherents often describe the mammalian eye and the bacterial flagellum as so "irreducibly complex" that they couldn't have resulted from evolution, but Collins offers clear and accessible explanations of how step-by-step evolution could indeed produce such structures.
By constant recurrence to the irreducibly somatic character of ancient slavery, Glancy constructs a challenging agenda for the New Testament scholar and for the historian of early Christianity who would argue either that the rise of Christianity obviated the distinction between slave and free within Christian communities, or that it gradually undermined the system of slavery in society at large.
In his book, he discussed the implications for neo-Darwinism of what he calls "irreducibly complex" biochemical systems.
While Kant, Hegel, and Schopenhauer argued for art as sac red, spiritual, and transcendent, Carey insists simply that "anything can be a work of art" and that standards of taste and beauty are irreducibly subjective.
At his best moments, Sheldon Wolin acknowledges the irreducibly personal dimensions of power, yet his genealogy of the transition from modern to postmodern forms of power still presents power as something that is constituted primarily externally (one might say, echoing Foucault, that it isn't microcapillary in anything but its effects).
They single out organs, like the human eye, or even highly complex molecules and show that they are "irreducibly complex"--that is, the supposed transitional forms leading to but falling well short of them wouldn't have been any more fit to survive than their starting point.
In his role as an ID proponent, he claims that biological structures such as bacterial flagella are "irreducibly complex," meaning that their parts could not have been assembled over time by natural selection and that the absence of one part would by definition make the entire structure nonfunctional.
For Percy, as for Peirce, meaning does not and cannot emerge from dyadic relationships; what sets human experience apart, and makes a human being a self in a world rather than an organism in an environment (as Percy has it), is the irreducibly triadic nature of meaning, and, most fundamentally, language.
We try to explicate that irreducibly social self that Smith and Chalmers have in mind by drawing on the philosophy of the act that characterises the work of the social psychologist, G.H.